First shot is the one I have had canvas printed and hanging on the wall.




Next a few of galapagos seals.

Hey everyone.

I'm looking for some feedback on the first real test of my camera. Bought a dslr about 3 months before a trip to South America with the hope I could get to grips with it before it found some serious use. I was happy with the results (better than the old superzoom or point and shoot) but I know I have a lot to learn, so who better to ask than the experts on here.

The pictures were all jpg straight from the camera (needed to save space and correctly assumed I'd never find the time to process the 1000s of shots from a 2 month trip). They've had some minor processing in GIMP.

Please be honest and critical - I really want to know what people think about my exposure, framing, subject choice etc, and what I should do to improve. Be brutal.

Pictures to follow in the next posts...

Thanks Paul. He has been in touch but the price wasn't very tempting for me given the current new price of the lens. Still looking...

Hi Pwynnej - you've got my interest so sent you a pm.

Cheers
WG

Im lucky enough to have a fiance who works for Fullers. As a result I get to help her through her beer allowance from the brewery shop. Golden pride is a good strong one of theirs, as is 1845 (if you prefer one that has more body). I've got a few bottles of the vintage ale on the shelf as well - some of which are a good few years old now. they come out on special occassions and are good with Christmas pudding.

Personally I really like their Porter and 1845 for a strong heavy beer, and Discovery for a lighter one.

Cheers Mike. I'll look into the ffordes one.

In the market for a Sigma 100-300mm f4. The plan is to match it to a Sigma 1.4 tele so if you have one of those I'd also be interested.

Keeping my eye on the classifieds here, SRS and fleabay but thought it was worth a shout out too.

Cheers,

WG

Bit too late Thoughton (for you and me both). I was umm-ing and ah-ing about it as it didn't come with a hood or case and someone snapped it up. Oh well, you win some you lose some.

WG

I know what he's getting at - i mentioned seeing lots of other advice for the 100-300 f4 and one of them was indeed the thread about the sports shooter.

I think if I can get the 100-300 for a reasonable price I'll go for it. The advice seems almost unanimous from my research and my question about the teleconverter quality seems to be answered.

Cheers guys

Cheers people. Sounds like my view of teleconverters is tainted by using a cheap one on a cheap lens (the 50-200mm kit lens). With that combo I got noticably poorer contrast and increased softness. Focus speed was still suprisingly reasonable but I wasn't using it in low light very often.

Looks like the 100-300mm with a 1.4 tele would be a good choice. It also means that when I don't need monster reach I will have a superb lens to 300mm.

Size-wise it is somewhere between the two Sigmas I mentioned above, and slightly narrower but longer than the Bigma. One of the main advantages is it is far lighter than all of them (which may be handy inside a jeep, I'm told, if I need to handhold or use a monpod).

Considering I am looking for a zoom lens (as I want to avoid changing too much in dusty conditions) does that seem like the best option to people? As I see it:

PROS
Image quality
Superb at 300mm
Weight

CONS
Not HSM
A little less range than the two 500s
Doesn't have the range of the Bigma so if an animal jumps into the jeep with us I will have to change lens