- Messages
- 9,590
- Edit My Images
- Yes
What about the 55-200 m version? And the m macro lens ,is that good?
No experience of it tbh, but I have to say I am considering it, as a lightweight alternative, if the quality of the kit lens is anything to go by.What about the 55-200 m version?
The idea is sound with the rim lights, but I can't help feeling that at 28 mm its rather on the short side, especially for critters.And the m macro lens ,is that good?
What about the 55-200 m version? And the m macro lens ,is that good?
Not too shabby there Mike55-200mm on M5.
Possibly not close enough, or if you are shooting around 2.8 at that distance all the background and only the immediate focus point will be in focus,but for some reason all I am getting is a blur,
FLUFFFY.................... and only 4 days to get here.
Put something interesting on it
I can't see that happening now.
So, first proper image off the M5.
Saw a little speck running round a plantpot so grabbed the M5 and MP-E65mm.
my raw files from M100 are around 38MB ,does that sound about right?
its the same sensor as in the 80d and 750d and M5 24.somethingSeems a bit large to me. What size sensor is the M100?
Lovely detail in the Cormorant @Mike.P
( Or is it a Shag? )
I haven't tried that lens on my M5 but on the strength of your images, I will!M5 and 100-400mm MKII
100-400 mkII, Between my gripped 7DII and the M50 I'd say there was nothing in it TBHI haven't tried that lens on my M5 but on the strength of your images, I will!
I've often wished I had the reach of the 400 when out cycling and spotting red kites, deer and kestrels that seem to elude me when I'm walking. I'll work out a way of carrying securely on the bike, with quick access rather than having it in a backpack.100-400 mkII, Between my gripped 7DII and the M50 I'd say there was nothing in it TBH
( apart from the weight of course )