Jump to content

kentw

PhotoNet Pro
  • Posts

    317
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by kentw

  1. <p>I agree with Diana. I too own both the 100-400 and the 400 f/5.6 prime, and I believe that the 400 prime is sharper. (This is not to say, obviously, that the 100-400 is not sharp.) I also believe that the 400 prime is faster in attaining focus and holding focus (important for photographing birds). But I still like my 100 - 400 for its versatility: for example, its minimum focusing distance is 5.9 ft as compared to the 400 prime's 11.5 ft.<br>

    I also agree with Eric and Manuel: for birds, 400 mm is not long enough. This is the bird photographer's lament. Yes, I expect you will want the 500 or 600 whether or not you can afford to drop $5K or more on a lens for your hobby. But I predict that these won't be long enough either. Go for the 800 mm IS lens! Hey, it's only a little more than $10.6K. I plan to trade in my car for one. Of course, when I do that, I'll need an even longer lens, since I won't have transportation to get to where the birds are! Until I get the 800, I'll work on my stalking skills, exercise patience in just sitting and waiting for the birds to come closer, or invest in a blind (over $10K cheaper than the 800).<br>

    Good luck.</p>

  2. <p>Actually, "Critique" on this list seems to mean "Say something (mostly good) about an image" rather than offer commentary on what might make the image better. Of course, we all like to receive positive feedback, but the other kind of comment can more often lead to improvement. Comments don't have to be nasty to be honest appraisals. I recognize that there are contributors who have generously given detailed and helpful critiques.<br>

    On the other hand, it takes time to construct a detailed critique, even of a few sentences, and I suppose most people do not have time to do that.<br>

    As for ratings, they don't provide very much information. I am not suggesting that they be abandoned, since I have nothing better to offer. <br>

    What is the purpose of TRP? It seems simply to provide an ego boost to someone who's image ranks highest. Does it do anything to contribute to making better photographers? Those who aren't interested in the competition can just ignore it.<br>

    As I re-read my remarks, I seem to be agreeing with Gordon, but his views are more knowledgeable than mine.</p>

×
×
  • Create New...