scott_fairbairn

the 80-400 VR lens only uses the TC14A which means no electrical

connection, so i imagine the VR doesn't work as well? Also i don't

think it is a silent wave motor. Basically means I need a third 1.4x

TC.........

I found a spec sheet on it. It uses the TC-14A, and I see no mention of silent wave motor.

If I am using AF heavily( with 600AFS) ...as in focus, focus, shoot, etc. where I spend a lot of time focusing waiting for the right shot....I get about 15 rolls per MN-30 charge. This is at "normal" temperatures.(not at or below zero)

At the risk of spreading unsubstantiated rumours, I have heard that Nikon will be introducing a 300f4 AFS soon. Which does make sense as the original 300f4AF has been around for a long time and Nikon is lacking in that focal length. This would likely function well with a 1.4x TC. Supposedly to be released/announced around the upcoming PMA in February.

I have photo'd at Point Pelee every spring now for about ~10 years. I usually spend the first two weeks of May. If you only had 5 days to spend I would choose to go around May 9 or the 10th for the five days. If you are earlier, you will get more sparrows, and usually warblers are not too common. (always a few species about though) It is always a race between hoping the birds appear before the leaves are out. As once they are out, getting a clear shot is quite tough. It is basically impossible to tell when the majority of birds will appear as it is dependent upon weather conditions and their own timetable. If conditions are good, most may fly over. The setup I have personally found successful is at least a 500mm , plus 1.4x. (warblers are very small) Often with extension tubes. Sb25 or 26 using a "Better Beamer" to gain a couple of stops. I will set the flash to underexpose by -1 to -12/3 stops, depending upon lighting conditions. (the amount of fill is a personal decision, you will have to determine this for yourself) Until a couple of years ago, the East beach at the tip was amazing in the early light, but a bad storm literally erased it. Now , for me anyway, the West beach in the afternoon has been the best producer.

There are numerous other trails to explore, but after the tip area , I would spend my time in the "Tilden woods" trail. It can be spectacular, but you are in heavier growth, so flash is often needed.

I don't think you will use the 80-200 much.

As someone else mentioned, warblers are very difficult to photograph.(last year in two weeks I shot 45 rolls, and most of the shots weren't warblers) You have basically a second or two to get focused and fire. (often you must shoot before you are sure of the focus)

Other areas are "Comber Woods" (often good for warblers, but I have not had much success there)a short drive north and "Hillman Marsh".(rails,waterfowl)

I will likely be doing a slide show at the Interpretive center next year. Look me up or email me and I can try to help you out. (though the birds have the final say)

I find it interesting that we end comparing/criticizing our each others equipment, but never each others work? Anyway, back to the weight issue, I weighed my Gitzo 410 + ARca B1 = 11 lbs. add the Quantum Turbo and you get 13.5 lbs. Take the 600f4 AFS + F5 +flash bracket + Sb26 + Better beamer and you get 21 lbs. So your up to 34.5 lbs. Throw in some film, batteries,(lots of those with an F5)etc. and you better be near the car. As an aside, the Kenko extension tubes work fine with an F90x, but not F5/F100.

Being one who just recently picked up a used 600f4 AFS and having used a manual focus 500f4 P, I have the following observations. I weighed mine on my house scales, 600afs +F5 +mounting plate+ lens hood+ homemade flash bracket = 19.5 lbs. I mainly photo birds and I often found the 500 too short even with the 1.4x. Using the 600 +1.4x is working out very well and I can see why it is so popular. The past couple of years I have had some trouble focusing , so the AF has been a great benefit. But , the 600 is a very different animal to use. The size and weight are very different from the 500mm , so if you plan to do much carrying, the 500 might be the better choice.

I shoot mainly birds, so I can say that a 500 or 600 is what you will need for that. With birds you will even be using a TC quite often. If birds are not a priority, go with the 300f2.8 if you will not be using it exclusively on hikes as it is a bit much I think for serious hiking.

About the IS , I have seen a few people mention that it will absorb the vibration from mirror slap. I don't believe this, but maybe someone with first hand experience will refute this. I think the type of vibration and duration is too short for the IS to do anything with it.

I have one of the newer versions. I believe the only difference between old and new is that the "lockup" problem is supposed to be cured and the thumbscrew will not fall out if you unscrew it all the way.

It is a great ballhead and the "lockup" problem has only occurred to me once, but it was relatively easy to fix. It is very smooth, strong, and compact.

I have not used either Kirk or RRS. I made my own out of a couple of steel "L" brackets bolted together to form a "C" shape. One end is bolted to the lens plate , and the other has a hole drilled for attaching the flash shoe. You can easily vary the height by drilling extra holes,etc. I have mine to hold the flash a couple of inches higher than it would be on the camera. This works for most conditions except on owls or when there is little ambient light. The Kirk and RRS arms are pretty nifty, but mine cost about $5 CDN to make, and took about 1/2 hour to make.

Sorry I forgot to mention one thing. You cannot tell if a slide is sharp by projecting via slide projector or scanning into the computer. The best way IMO, is my previous answer.

To tell if a slide is sharp you will need two things. A High magnification loupe,I personally use a 10x. It must have good enough optics to begin with or else it is less than useless. The second thing you need is a sharp slide! Unless you can get a sharp slide it is impossible to know what truly sharp is. To get this you need good optics, tripod,cable release, stationary subject with fine detail,sharp fine grained film like Velvia.(birds, if you can get one that is still , are perfect)Basically what you want to do is eliminate operator error from the equation. Using flash on a subject is a good way to get rid of vibrations,movements. At ten times mag, you should be able to pick out fine details, edges should be sharp, there should be no softness to it. (kinda like looking through a window with binoculars) Macro lenses are good for testing your ability to see sharpness because they have great optics and the use of flash eliminates problems with camera shake. I hope I answered your question!

I realize my conversion of US funds to Cdn was exaggerated, but I just returned from Florida and the conversion factor was 1.54. (US dollars multiplied by 1.54 was what I paid in Canadian) It was an attempt at humor. Although , not too funny from my perspective.

Personally I use Kirk plates and have no complaints. RRS have some specialized plates that are really good, but for the cash and hassle to order, I would go with Kirk. There are some exceptions, but the small difference in size to get a "form-fitted" plate to me is just not worth it. For long lenses I like a plate a little long so I can adjust the balance as it changes with TC'c, cameras, etc. Some of their stuff I think is outrageously priced.(IMO) For example , their big flash arms are over $200 US.(~ $2 million in Canadian dollars!) I made one which does the same job for less than $10 canadian.(~ $0.02 US!) Anyway, the RRS stuff is great, but Kirk's stuff is fine as well>

I am not a Canon user , but I can tell from my own experience to go with your camera makers lense. You may hate the sting of the extra money , but you will never say to yourself, "I wish I had got the Sigma". I have owned third party lenses, (Tamron) and while good for the money, they just are not as good as Nikon glass. I ended up wasting more money in the long run buying and selling than I would have spent if I'd just got the proper lens to begin with. I agree with previous posts that once you stick a TC on , that is where you will really see a difference. Hope this helps

Thanks for the Rutenberg Library location. It is actually a community center as well with ball diamonds , lacrosse , etc. The first burrow is about 60 feet in from the entrance near the yellow speed limit sign. The burrow is right beside the white fence. I got lots of great shots, but it takes a bit of work to eliminate the fence and roadway from your photo. I would suggest checking the burrow first and clearing the garbage from around it. One of the workers there said they have to pull pop cans, etc. out of it periodically due to the kids. The other location is about 70-80 feet behind the tennis courts along a chain link fence. I was amazed at the amount of human activity so close to the burrows. It doesn't seem to bother them much. A person walked within 2 feet of one before it flew when I was there.

Out of curiosity , what is the price of the Sidekick?

The 300mmf4 AF is an excellent lens both with a 1.4x and without. The AF is however quite slow as this lens is an early generation AF lens. I have heard rumors that Nikon will introduce an AFS version. But it will be expensive compared to the existing version.

I also have a 500F4 P lens, and I really think it is the shortest focal length for serious bird photography, I find I am always wishing for more magnification. I almost never use the 300 for bird photography as it is just too short. I would go 300 plus 1.4x before buying a Sigma or Tokina 400 though.(IMO)

I use the 500 P lens with a Gitzo 341 and Arca B1 with QR. The B1 is expensive, but it is rock solid smooth and compact. I use an F5 with and without extenders plus flash and the whole thing is sturdy. Going to the 4xx series of Gitzo would be fine , but I don't think you need to unless you entertain the thought of a larger lense at some point. As per previous comments , do NOT skimp on this purchase, if you get too light a tripod, you will not have enough stability for the lens.(especially with TC's) It is tempting to go cheaper with this purchase, but if you can afford the 500 get a proper foundation for it. As far as quick releases go, I personally vouch for Kirk, they are more convenient to order from, are a lot more personalbe to talk to, and the difference from RRS is small.(my opinion) I have spoken to RRS a couple of times, and they were quite abrupt to the point of rude.(maybe just a bad day??) And they are expensive.

Another problem with the Kenko is that they vignette with some lenses. I use the 500mmf4 P MF lens. They vignette like crazy with this lens. (I have an F5 and I wanted the AF tubes to preserve the metering and other electronic functions) If you compare the bore of the Kenko and Nikon tubes, you will find that the bore on the Kenko tubes is considerably smaller.

I tried out the new 80-200mmf2.8 AFS with the Kenko tubes the other day, the AF either did not work at all, or it hunted back and forth constantly. I want to move up to a 600f4AFS lens, but I am reluctant to do so until Nikon makes some AF tubes. I figure if they don't make them by the time I can afford to move up, I may change systems because I use tubes alot.

Sorry for my earlier question, I hadn't scrolled far enough down the list to see it has been asked and answered already.

Where exactly is the Alligator farm int St. Augustine?

I understand that you can modify the electronic TC's to fit nonAFS and

AFI lenses. I like to hear from someone who has done this. Does it

couple correctly with other lenses? (I realize they will not give

AF) ie. do you get matrix metering with F5 and aperture control,etc. ?

How is the sharpness ?

I plan to use it with the 500mmf4 "P" lense and an F5.

Thanks

As a followup, the difference in bore between Nikon tubes and the

Kenko ones is quite dramatic. That is the problem with the Kenko

tubes. It does not vignette once the TC14b is put on.(of course now

there is no electrical contacts) I have toyed with the idea of

enlarging the bore since the tube is essentially useless to me. Since

I am looking at a 600F4AF , I really want to know if it will work

properly since I may consider switching to Canon as they do not seem

to suffer this problem. I also wondered if Nikon's narrower mount

prevents making AF tubes that will not vignette with some lenses??

I was wondering if anyone has experienced vignetting using the Kenko

Af tubes on the 500mmF4 MF lens? I have the 25mm tube and it vignettes

. Also , has anyone used the Kenko tubes with a 600mmF4 AFS lens? I am

looking to upgrade , but I use extension tubes alot and I really want

the AF ability to function. I was wondering if there are any

complaints about these tubes on the 600mmF4 AFS lens. Thanks