New toy meets deer

Discussion in 'Birds' started by hillrg, Nov 1, 2005.

  1. I just took delivery of a 300VR and TC17 today, so I had to try it out on the neighbourhood deer... all hand held at 510mm.

    51664394.

    51664390.

    Unfortunately he would not move into the sunlight and I did not want to blowout the brilliant leaves behind. I tried to open up the shadows, but it has a cut out artificial look to it. Thought I would include it to show the fall colours...
    original.

    51664388.
     
  2. Obviously you have a winning combo Rory. Nice series of images.
     
  3. bfjr

    bfjr Guest

    You lucky You !!! :biggrin:

    I'll bet it will serve you well if these 1st shots are an example

    congratulations again, very envious :wink:
     
  4. Flew

    Flew

    994
    Jan 25, 2005
    Alabama
    Nice shots Rory. Looks like an excellent combo. If memory serves, you also have a 500 f4, right? How would you compare this combo to that lens? The 300 2.8 VR + 1.7 TC should show up as a 510mm f4.5 or 4.8, right? Is one noticeably better, or are they roughly equivalent (except for the VR of course)? Inquiring minds want to know. :rolleyes:
     
  5. Very nice love the third one, I have been wanting to get the 1.7 for use on my 200-400 anxious to hear your thoughts about the 1.7 tele
     
  6. I have not shot enough to be confident, but I think I would have to give the 500/4 the edge, compared to the 300VR + TC17EII. But the VR sure makes a difference.
     
  7. So far I like it. I will do some tests on the weekend. What I do know is that the 300 by itself is totally incredable, and the VR works very well.
     
  8. I smugly thought "heck, my 300f4 works just fine".....then I realized "uh-oh, wait a minute.....handheld??"
    510mm handheld....nope, mine doesn't do that too well.:redface:

    I am envious.
    Nice combo. I suspect you will find it to be terrific.

    All nice. I like the third one a lot.
     
  9. BTW the EXIF on my 300f4 + 1.7TC reads 500mm.
    Is yours 500 or 510??
     
  10. JeffKohn

    JeffKohn

    Apr 21, 2005
    Houston, TX
    I've noticed that the reported focal length isn't quite right when using the TC-14 with the 200-400 at full zoom also (shows 550 instead of 560). I don't know if it's because the TC's magification factor is slightly less than 1.4x, or if it's just a "reporting" error.
     
  11. JeffKohn

    JeffKohn

    Apr 21, 2005
    Houston, TX
    Nice shots, I like the second and last the best. Looks like a winning combo. And hand-held is even more impressive.
     
  12. I noticed that too. Not sure why the EXIF shows 500 but what's 10mm at that range?
     
  13. That second shot is a wall hanger! Isn't that VR a hoot? Great pics - all of them...
     
  14. Steve S

    Steve S

    Feb 1, 2005
    SE Florida
    Nice job on these being handheld at such low shutters. You a coffee drinker? Wish you would stop feeding my LLD, as this lens is on my very short list. Carrying the thing around my neck is what concerns me. I wonder if this lens/cam could be "holstered" into my padded Kinesis belt w/large pouch like I can do with my 70-200VR? If I knew I could do that, well, I think it's safe to say I'm a goner! :eek:
     
  15. MontyDog

    MontyDog

    Jan 30, 2005
    #1064 - You have an error in your SQL syntax;
     
  16. Steve S

    Steve S

    Feb 1, 2005
    SE Florida
    Question for anyone. I've been able to glean the weight differences between the 300 f4, at just over 2 lb, and a filter size of 77mm, while the 300 f2.8 VR is just over 6 lb, but I was wondering what the physical size of the front element of the 300 f2.8 was? Nikon only lists the size of the rear drop in filter (@52mm).
     
  17. I can't remember (or find) the reference for this, but I seem to recall that the TC-17 is actually a 1.6666666 TC, which might explain the numerical difference. Wish I could remember where I saw this!

    Anyway, that might explain the EXIF numbers.
     
  18. JeffKohn

    JeffKohn

    Apr 21, 2005
    Houston, TX
    According to B&H the max diameter of the lens is 4.9", so front element should be just a bit smaller than that, probably around 120mm or so.
     
  19. How to carry the 300VR is a question I am working on right now. While I am in walk-about mode I anticipate either carrying the camera/lens on a tripod over my shoulder or on a strap for hand-held shooting.

    For the hand-held shooting I do not think the "holstered" approach will work because I want to keep the shade mounted and "ready to go". Even with the shade reversed the camera/lens is a large package - it would take a monster holster to hold them. If you find something that works please let me know.

    I am considering these solutions:

    1) I have attached the strap that comes with the lens to the lens, so that the lens is supporting the weight. The strap is long enough to go over the opposite shoulder and under the armpit. To make this work you need to swivel the tripod mount to the top of the lens, unless you are tougher than me and do not mind it gouging into your rib cage.

    2) The other solution is to carry the camera and lens in a medium size pack. This is fairly fast to deploy and will work better for longer walk-abouts.

    I will probably end up combining 1 + 2, carrying the pack, and having the camera ready to go when I anticipate the need.

    For the tripod shooting I have three scenarios: standard mount on a ballhead, mount on the sidekick and mount on a monopod. I am going to try the monopod, which I think might work well with the VR.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
Meeting of minds Birds Apr 10, 2017
Still testing the new toy Birds Apr 5, 2014
Backyard Birds With New Toys Birds Feb 23, 2013
Trying out the new toy... Birds Nov 27, 2012
Blue Parakeet and my new toy Birds Aug 27, 2010