70-400G in Atlanta

[aster]

Have a good trip Winston.

We hope to see your eventual photos of Egypt and have you back in good health. The weather should be mild making it easier to get around for visitors and the light will probably be good for photographic opportunities.

Yildiz

[Winston]

And you'll post some of your shot when you return, I hope?

I don't know which parts you're going to, but you can spend a week in the Valley of the Kings and not have enough time!

Dusty

I'll post some if they good enough. I'm taking my RSS pano gear.

I'll be there for two weeks so I'll see almost all. After exploring around Cairo and the delta, we fly to Luxor and then cruise up the Nile to Aswan. From there we'll drive to the new Abu Simbel.

[calpon]

1. I used a level of 2 on Focus magic (the same level I use for the 70-200G...I use a 4 or 5 for my Tamron 200-500). I'd say it is as sharp at these apertures as the 70-200G (mind you that i have used this lens for all of 15 min.)

I didn't know that Focus Magic could be used for routine sharpening. I thought it was just a tool to try to correct a bit for photos that are out of focus and motion blur. Are you saying you use it routinely for normal, in focus shots too? Is it better than using USM or Smart Sharpen?

I read an article about the best sharpening (sorry I don't remember where it was) by a couple of photographers. They compared several 3rd party sharpeners, plugins and standard USM. The consensus was that Focus Magic was the best. Looking over the images, I agreed with them, so I purchased it. I think even on the Focus Magic website they say it was originally intended for motion blug and out of focus correction, but others have found it useful for capture/print sharpening.

I use a very low level depending on the lens I am using. 2 for the Sony 70-200G, Tamron 90, Zeiss 16-80 and now the 70-400G. I use a 3 for my Sony 50 1.4 and a 4 for my KM28-75 and Tamron 200-500.

They have a free trial...so try it your self and see if you think it is better than what you currently use. I was never good at USM, so this is perfect for me and much better than any other sharpening I have tried.

[kingfisher]

great picture`s calpon

the birds are really sharp
i now those birds are very small ,, i think , when i see those picture`s , and i have seen more of this lens , that the 70-400 are a very good lens
when you used it whit a SONY 1,4 you get a 840 mm

spacially for wildlife .

and i hope , we also get a 400 F4 500 F4 and a 600 F4

gustav

[Dr. Harout]

Winston, I join Yildiz wishing you a very nice trip and as I really like your shots, am eagerly waiting.
Happy shooting.

Calpon, thanks for the info. Will definitely give the Focus Magic a try.

[bakubo]

I read an article about the best sharpening (sorry I don't remember where it was) by a couple of photographers. They compared several 3rd party sharpeners, plugins and standard USM. The consensus was that Focus Magic was the best. Looking over the images, I agreed with them, so I purchased it. I think even on the Focus Magic website they say it was originally intended for motion blug and out of focus correction, but others have found it useful for capture/print sharpening.

I use a very low level depending on the lens I am using. 2 for the Sony 70-200G, Tamron 90, Zeiss 16-80 and now the 70-400G. I use a 3 for my Sony 50 1.4 and a 4 for my KM28-75 and Tamron 200-500.

Thanks for the info! I will check out the website for more info. By the way, do you use a 2 or 3 or 4 independent of image size? For example, do you use 4 for your KM28-75 photos no matter whether they are full-size are reduced in size for the web? In other words, do you use 4 (or 2 or 3) for an 800x600 image and also for a 4000x3000 image?

[calpon]

I read an article about the best sharpening (sorry I don't remember where it was) by a couple of photographers. They compared several 3rd party sharpeners, plugins and standard USM. The consensus was that Focus Magic was the best. Looking over the images, I agreed with them, so I purchased it. I think even on the Focus Magic website they say it was originally intended for motion blug and out of focus correction, but others have found it useful for capture/print sharpening.

I use a very low level depending on the lens I am using. 2 for the Sony 70-200G, Tamron 90, Zeiss 16-80 and now the 70-400G. I use a 3 for my Sony 50 1.4 and a 4 for my KM28-75 and Tamron 200-500.

Thanks for the info! I will check out the website for more info. By the way, do you use a 2 or 3 or 4 independent of image size? For example, do you use 4 for your KM28-75 photos no matter whether they are full-size are reduced in size for the web? In other words, do you use 4 (or 2 or 3) for an 800x600 image and also for a 4000x3000 image?

I don't reduce for the web because Zenfolio does a pretty good job of that already. I just upload the full size image (sort of a last line storage of a jpg) and than Zenfolio handles the resize depending on the size image I want to use. I do use other settings on occasion depending on the image and the crop, but I start with my "default" settings and than I can undo the sharpening if it looks too strong or not strong enough. I'd say about 10% of my images fall out of my default so far. I really have only used the program a few weeks and I am sure more experimentation will change my sharpening flow a little. All I can say is I get better results than I ever did with any other sharpening and with less work.

[mikeriach]

Had a call this morning from CameraWorld to say my 70-400 is on its way today at the pre-increase price.
Hoping for a sunny weekend!
Batteries on charge now.

Mike (in the UK)

[David Kilpatrick]

I may just sign you up for a report in the Spring issue of Photoworld Mike...

David

[Philip]

Mike, hope that you get yours today, mine is scheduled for delivery tomorrow. Apparently they are a real rarity as less then 20 have been made available to UK stores. Look forward to comparing results.

Philip

[mikeriach]

Gutted, low cloud and rain this morning, hoping it will brighten up in an hour or so.
Might have to dig out the monopod as it is so dull.

The initial impression is "what a beast". Similar in length to my old Sigma 70-210 f2.8 but bigger in diameter at the camera end.
Seems very solid (and heavy) but has the feel of a real quality product.
Focusing is silky smooth and quiet. You don't always realise that it is actually working but thins just pop into focus as you look.
The zoom ring is a little stiff but I hope it will free up a little (no zoom creep when up or down yet).
I like the zoom ring at the far end as I find it better for steadying the long lens.
Also you can support on the trombone end or lens hood but I won't make a habit of that just in case it damags the zoom mechanism.

Shot a few targets around the room using flash and they seemed to be spot on focuswise.

Wife has me decorating this afternoon so not much scope to play but I'll see what I can do in the dull late winter.

Mike

[David Kilpatrick]

Glorious clear spring sunshine in the Borders Mike - spent an hour gardening this morning, T-shirt weather. Few more clouds coming over now but generally not looking bad. You may get some of this light later on, not sure - or we could be getting your cloud.

I now know three new owners of the 70-400mm which is a high proportion if there really were only 20 released. I am going down a different route and getting the Sigma 70-200mm HSM, having tried the Tamron. One of my contacts, Ian, went into a store and tested this with the 2X Teleplus DG converter which I already own and it doesn't work (annoying). Sigma's own teleconverters also do not work, despite them giving away free 2X converters with the lens through several dealers - they are old teleconverters which will not transfer the HSM info, manual focus only. But Sigma's teleconverter is due for a revised version to allow HSM to work, just the same way Sony's 2X works with the SAL 70-200mm.

David

[Philip]

Mike, similar story here in Cornwall - started misty and now just grey! Had a 15 minute play yesterday afternoon in a little sun and initial impression is that it is much better then the 300 f4 G with Minolta 1.4x TC- no CA at 400mm and wide open whereas the 300 shows some CA even stopped down to f11. Focused accurately on both the A700 and A900. Looking for some better weather before I do any more comparison work. Enjoy the decorating .

Philip

[Dr. Harout]

Congratulations guys, for your new toys.

[mikeriach]

Well, as predicted by DK we exported the cloud later in the day (don't know where to though) just when "she who must be obeyed" had me decorating.
Anyway I made it up to the airport (my main subject matter) for a few shots in the morning.
Shot mostly on ISO400 and some with a monpod (also did some at 800).
As you might imagine quite a few with camera shake (even SSS can't cope with me shivering and 400mm at 1/250th).
Anyway one take off shot of a 737 at 1/250th, f6.3, 110mm, ISO400. This is the out of camera JPEG which accompanies the RAW file. Full image is reduced to 800 wide and quality 12, the crop is full size no editing. Note I'm not familiar with techniques for doing "proper test images" so please bear with me, and my Photobucket store won't allow images greater than 1MB. I can email full size JPEG to anyone interested, approx 3.4MB.

(above - 800x533 103kb)

The second is a Puma at 1/320th, f8, 400mm, ISO400 images as above.


The potential is clear to see, I can't wait for some sunshine.
And yes I concur that CA is virtually non existant.

Cheers,
Mike

PS I tried posting these yesterday but for some reason the end gets cropped. Any suggestions DK?