- Messages
- 16,798
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Don’t know how much difference it makes but the 100-400mm is a G Master whereas the 200-600mm is ’only’ a G.
Main difference is in speed of focus acquisition which is ever so slightly faster on 100-400mm.
Don’t know how much difference it makes but the 100-400mm is a G Master whereas the 200-600mm is ’only’ a G.
When comparing IQ how are you basing it, are you cropping the 400 mm to give the same fov or are you getting closer with the 400mm so comparing a ‘full frame’ with both?Had 100-400 and now have the 200-600, no difference in IQ
Haven't done side by side. But I don't notice any difference in sharpness between the two in my birds.When comparing IQ how are you basing it, are you cropping the 400 mm to give the same fov or are you getting closer with the 400mm so comparing a ‘full frame’ with both?
Had 100-400 and now have the 200-600, no difference in IQ
Yep 600mm vs. 400mmWhat was your reason for change. Reach I gyess
And that’s on the R4 too so 900mm in crop mode?Yep 600mm vs. 400mm
The Moon by Terence Rees, on Flickr[/URL]Manual, It's the same as this one > https://www.harrisoncameras.co.uk/p...uCj77SmL86MHDy8yVTQbP2Sna7tIJ8W4aAlZ4EALw_wcB
DSC02955-2 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02226 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02261 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02536 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02552 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02695-3 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02738 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02883-3 by Anthony Andrades, on FlickrGreat set, but the last one is an excellent capture.Just back from 3 weeks in Hong Kong and making a start on the photos, here's a few of the early ones.
DSC02955-2 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02226 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02261 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02536 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02552 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02695-3 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02738 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02883-3 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
Great photos. Last one kind of makes a mockery of the maskJust back from 3 weeks in Hong Kong and making a start on the photos, here's a few of the early ones.
DSC02955-2 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02226 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02261 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02536 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02552 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02695-3 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02738 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02883-3 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
A7Rii with T2 adaptor on my Skywatcher 200mm dobsonian telescope.
EFL 1200mm
Through clouds so not as good as it could be.
Well worth the £13.00 for the T2 adaptor.
[url=https://flic.kr/p/2iK5hQ4]The Moon by Terence Rees, on Flickr[/URL]
DSC03303 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC03302 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC03325 by Anthony Andrades, on FlickrLink for the adaptor please [emoji16]
I’ve always fancied having a dabble with a scope so bought a starter skywatcher a couple of years back. Pretty under whelmed with it tbh. Nearly sold it a few months back but thought maybe it was me, so do plan to get my head around it sometime soon. Now could be a good time for it!
Just back from 3 weeks in Hong Kong and making a start on the photos, here's a few of the early ones.
DSC02955-2 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02226 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02261 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02536 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02552 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02695-3 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02738 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
DSC02883-3 by Anthony Andrades, on Flickr
is the last taken with the 70-200? just shows 200mm 2.8 Sam which I couldn't find when googling
Thanks man [emoji16] I need to get my head round this telescope.
Best of luck.
And if you shoot the moon I was getting 1/30th second at 400ISO using spot metering on the brightest part.
Bristol Wedding by Chris Harrison, on FlickrMaybe 50mm to compete with Canikon?My guess is 35mm
Maybe 50mm to compete with Canikon?
I've not got an EQ mount, just a dobsonian.
Here's one like mine to show the sizeView attachment 273488:
View attachment 273488
We never use it to be honest.Blimey, that is a beast! How good is it; very crisp and clear with planets? Do I need to upgrade the kit eye pieces?
We never use it to be honest.
We still have the kit eye pieces and they really should be upgraded for better imaging and eye relief.
We've seen Saturn but it was small even with this thing.
Jupiter is cool with the 4 moons.
Maybe 50mm to compete with Canikon?
Yeah, maybe but the zeiss 50 is pretty great and the zeiss 35 isnt great. So there's no high end 35.
I couldn’t see much detail at all of planets and was left feeling very underwhelmed. My binoculars were nearly as good by comparison. Maybe i was expecting too much for £170?
50mm seems the popular choice...
I can't see it being a 40 or a 65? Surely? But who knows?
- 50mm f/1.2 (33%, 1,080 Votes)
- 85mm f/1.2 (27%, 885 Votes)
- 35mm f/1.2 (26%, 869 Votes)
- 40mm f/1.2 (11%, 370 Votes)
- 65mm f/1.2 (3%, 115 Votes)
I'm not and never will be in he market for these lenses. I was just thinking the other day I'd love it if Voigtlander did a 50mm f1.4 about the size of their 35mm f1.4 classic. I mighty even sell some of my film era lenses if they did.
I'd have thought 50 f1.2 would have the greatest appeal. Makes no sense to do a 35 when Sigma already have that market, but it does make sense to give people a reason not to buy a Nikon.
Canon has the 50 1.2... Ef and rf.