Opticallimits

<p style="margin:0cm;">So I’m in the situation of having my Canon equipment stolen a little while back, so the only camera I have is an X100T. I like to take pictures of windsurfing, so require a longish lens. I tried with the x100, waterproof case and strobes, but it really isn't suited.<span> </span>


<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">I was previously using a 5d with 70-200f4 plus a 1.4X converter. This wasn't really long enough, so at the time I was considering a swap to a crop body and either a 70-300l or 55-250stm.


<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">Now I’m not really stuck with canon (I only have a 85mm 1.8 left) I’m considering other options:


<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">D7200 + 300 F4 pf (plus maybe a converter)


<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">X-t1 + 100-400


<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">mft body and Panasonic 100-400.

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">The 300mm Nikon looks very attractive with its compact size and low weight.


<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">The D7200 would be good for wedding receptions too with the -3ev autofocus and strobes (see here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/intmoth/al...9028185158) I worry the xt1 wouldn't be great here, the x100t sure isn't and the old 5d would not autofocus either. I zoned focused in that album.


<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">I miss not having an ultra wide, so the x-t1 with 12 2.0 would be a nice compact package, good for astro.


<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">I also considered Sony. The a7s with voigtlander lenses looks interesting, but there are no native e mount telephoto options over 200mm.

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">


<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">I worry that the fuji and panasonic long lenses won't be great compared to say the canon 100-400 ii.

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">One particular aspect that is of great importance is the rendering of specular highlights as breaking water causes lots of this.

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">Anybody got any thoughts?


Chris

if you are happy with a canon rebel and 50-250 IS quality for for it, I don't think you will find  better compromise, otherwise you said it yourself: canon 100-400 is ideal for such a job, especially its fast focus for such action photos

It's difficult to argue against the 55-250 stm unless you need a faster lens. A bit more reach could be useful

Quote: 

<p style="margin:0cm;">So I’m in the situation of having my Canon equipment stolen a little while back, so the only camera I have is an X100T. I like to take pictures of windsurfing, so require a longish lens. I tried with the x100, waterproof case and strobes, but it really isn't suited. 

 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">I was previously using a 5d with 70-200f4 plus a 1.4X converter. This wasn't really long enough, so at the time I was considering a swap to a crop body and either a 70-300l or 55-250stm.

 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">Now I’m not really stuck with canon (I only have a 85mm 1.8 left) I’m considering other options:

 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">D7200 + 300 F4 pf (plus maybe a converter)

 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">X-t1 + 100-400

 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">mft body and Panasonic 100-400.

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">The 300mm Nikon looks very attractive with its compact size and low weight.

 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">The D7200 would be good for wedding receptions too with the -3ev autofocus and strobes (see here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/intmoth/al...9028185158) I worry the xt1 wouldn't be great here, the x100t sure isn't and the old 5d would not autofocus either. I zoned focused in that album.

 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">I miss not having an ultra wide, so the x-t1 with 12 2.0 would be a nice compact package, good for astro.

 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">I also considered Sony. The a7s with voigtlander lenses looks interesting, but there are no native e mount telephoto options over 200mm.

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">I worry that the fuji and panasonic long lenses won't be great compared to say the canon 100-400 ii.

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">One particular aspect that is of great importance is the rendering of specular highlights as breaking water causes lots of this.

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;"> 

<p style="margin:0cm 0cm .0001pt;">Anybody got any thoughts?

 

Chris

 

 

Difficult.

 

My first thought was MFT because the GX8 + Leica 100-400 combines in-body IS with in-lens IS.

Then I stumbled across your statement about the breaking water. MFT has a shallower dynamic range and breaking water requires lots of it to be rendered nicely.

 

The X-T1 with 120-400mm should be better although I can't really comment on the quality of that lens. Sorry. 

 

The Nikkor 300mm PF seems to be superb from what Markus is telling me. However, I am slightly wondering whether a prime lens is the right lens for windsurfing (unless you got two bodies with different lenses).

 

If it's long enough the Canon 100-400L II is great - no doubts here.

 

Sony - well, as you mentioned probably not the best option. In theory you could use the Sony 70-400G on the A7x via adapter but that sort of destroys the mirrorless concept there.

it will be interesting to see the results of testing of the fuji and panaleica 100-400 tests. 

 

With regards the 300mm focal length for windsurf photography, I think this would be fine. I find typically I'm up the beach so am always at the long end of zooms.

 

thanks for your reply,

 

Chris

Quote:it will be interesting to see the results of testing of the fuji and panaleica 100-400 tests. 

 

With regards the 300mm focal length for windsurf photography, I think this would be fine. I find typically I'm up the beach so am always at the long end of zooms.

 

thanks for your reply,

 

Chris

 

I'm not sure about a test of the Leica 100-400mm.

The tests of the the Tamron/Sigma 150-600mm is already a pain (full format) and the Leica is even more extreme.


Maybe I will do a "believe the tester's judgement" review rather than something in the lab.

The Tamron 70-300 VC is a nice and cheap option. I'm using one and I like it a lot. I haven't put it to the harsher tests like shooting sports though.

yes, the tamron is on my radar too. Shame they don't make it with a pentax mount

You were gonna use Canon 50-250 IS on pentax ??

if you don't mind using adapters why not get the oldy tokina 80-400 ? you exercise wright lifting and take pictures at the same time 

ha ha, no - i'm currently bodyless. The pentax bodies are appealing though on a number of fronts (IBIS, sony sensor, build quality) but I was hoping for a lighter weight system. My old 5D + 70-200 was unappealing to cart about, especially on holiday.