finnbay Posted February 22, 2008 Share Posted February 22, 2008 My Mark II and 300mm took a nasty fall the night of the eclipse. I've been desperate to test it out to see how it is working. Seems to be fine, but sometimes I worry that I'm trying to gloss over something that might be there. Can anyone see anything in these photos that would indicate a lens problem? Operator problems go without saying! Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayinMN Posted February 22, 2008 Share Posted February 22, 2008 I don't know what I would be looking for as far as lens damage goes but the pictures are great. I really like the first one, its pose and sitting on the birch tree is really nice. I also like the background on the chickadee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finnbay Posted February 22, 2008 Author Share Posted February 22, 2008 Jay, that's part of the problem. I'm not sure what I should be looking for either. If the fall hadn't been enough to cause the 1.4 that was attached to explode, I probably wouldn't be worrying. Oh, well. It seems to be okay. Thanks for the kind words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dbl Posted February 22, 2008 Share Posted February 22, 2008 Looks like a 300/2.8 shot to me! Seriously I don't see anything amiss here Ken. Your sports shots should certainly will give you any clue on servo tracking and back focus or front focus issues. I have a focus chart I use to check for some of those things as well so if you want it let me know. Have you ordered a 1.4TC yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Foss Posted February 22, 2008 Share Posted February 22, 2008 Ken, these images look sharp and fine. I'd be worried about sharpness, speed of focus, and ability to retain focus on high-speed subjects in Al servo mode, as well as whether the lens' IS makes any new and special noises. Maybe get the dogs outside or take the combo to the nearest snowmobile trail to test it out on sledders coming toward you. You could try to get pics of me running full blast toward you but THAT wouldn't be much of a test of Al servo and the lens/camera, as slow as I run. If it passes those tests, I'd say camera and lens are fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finnbay Posted February 22, 2008 Author Share Posted February 22, 2008 Dan, plan on ordering later tonight. I had a Kenko Pro300 before but plan on going with the Canon this time. Seems to hold focus okay - bounced a little between the chickadees and the background but at 10 to 12 feet some of that can be expected. Had a pretty good number of sharp shots, but these were the only decent poses. My photo opportunities this weekend are inside, slow motion. Won't get a chance to shoot some sports until a basketball game Tuesday. I'm holding my breath. Steve, don't laugh - I may take you up on that. At least I'll have a good sized target to focus on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Foss Posted February 22, 2008 Share Posted February 22, 2008 Originally Posted By: finnbay At least I'll have a good sized target to focus on! Ken, you're a BAD man! Didn't know you were using the Kenko. I used that model TC for awhile and liked it, but I'm pretty sure the Canon has a much better built quality. Guess that Kenko failed the "Hupila Tested Tough" test. You might say it was eclipsed by frigid temps and rough treatment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MN Shutterbug Posted February 22, 2008 Share Posted February 22, 2008 Ken, if my lens had the same distinguishable problem yours is showing, I wouldn't complain. How far do I have to drop it to get the same kinda shots that you do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts