Recent content by Uxon

Don't think you can really go wrong with the 17-40mm, usual canon L quality and as always if you pick up a decent condition 2nd hand copy it'll hold it's value forever if you decide to resell at some point.

Will agree with the above really, don't have that lens in particular but I have the Canon 300mm F4 IS and I can get decent handheld shots with that at much slower shutter speeds than I'd normally expect for a 300mm lens.

Thanks for the feedback guys, was obviously going to check for fungus etc as I always look for that when buying SLR lenses anyway. It's actually one of the cameras mentioned above (Oly 35 SP) and I have a feeling even if there was something wrong I could probably break even selling it on ebay if...

So I have a quick question, I'm thinking about picking up an old Olympus rangefinder camera which is advertised in a local classified ad for quite a lot cheaper than the going rate on ebay (as is often the case with local ads for photography kit). I'm wondering what I should look out for if I...

It seems to be a lens for people who want to go around saying "Hey look, I can afford this lens!" rather than those who actually want a technically better lens.

There's a long topic in the general talk photography section which talks about what people actually learn on photography degrees. As above most of it seems to be 'arty farty'. If you want to go for that then great, just keep in mind that as a profession to make a living from photography is very...

As usual with photography it depends somewhat how much you want/can afford to spend, for some people splashing out £200+ on a dedicated macro lens isn't a big deal, for others extension tubes are probably the best/most cost effective option. Keep in mind some macro lenses can be dual purpose (as...

Not sure if I'm allowed to link to other forums here but this is from another owner of both combinations: "I have the 70-200 f/2.8L II and the 2x III and AF speed takes a big hit with that TC. Sharpness is supposed to be fairly similar with the 100-400 with good copies."

As above, the previous version of the Sigma (Macro non-HSM version) actually got better reviews than the HSM version if I remember correctly. The 24-105mm is a nice lens particularly if you're likely to go full frame sometime soon and it'll leave you more cash to put towards your body upgrade.

From what I've seen/read you might just about get away with a 1.4x extender on the 100-400 (and I think still have AF on the 5D III) but the image quality won't be too great, with a 2x extender you'll have an equivalent manual focus 200-800mm f9-11 lens which will give you nice soft images and...

What're you using the Sigma 150-500mm for mostly where you're finding it's not quick enough? Most long telephoto zooms will have issues in low light, if you really want lower F stops and quicker lenses you'll have to consider primes IMO.

People changing to using primes or as above don't like the weight? Same for the Canon 24-70mm lens, always loads of those being sold on and I don't think there's much wrong with them.

Not bad, quite impressed given the light conditions and glad to hear the focus speed is good. I just picked up a Canon 300mm f/4 IS (with 1.4x) for my bird watching but it looks like a competitive option as a super telephoto.

Shooting RAW I tend to prefer relatively large cards as I find a 8GB or 16GB I can fill up relatively quickly (even on my 7D), not sure I'd go as large as 128GB though unless I was shooting a lot of HD video...

Completely depends what you're shooting and how much you need/want the extra reach? Also what your total upgrade budget is, I've generally heard good things about the 120-300 from Sigma but sadly can't speak from experience when it comes to that lens.