Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by DrJohn

  1. The reviews on the Sigma 14-24 f/2.8 Art Lens were excellent. So, I ordered it for $1399. I will use the Sony 16-35 f/4 for travel because it is lighter in weight. John
  2. I have the Sony 16-35 mm f/4 lens that I use for landscape photography. The rule of thumb for astrophotography is f/2.8 or faster. I can't test the 16-35 mm from home because there is almost always clouds or a mist blocking the stars. Has anyone tried it? I'm also considering the Sigma 14-24 mm f/2.8 lens. I have the Sony A7RIV camera. John
  3. The Swans are still in the Northeast. Soon, they will fly south for the winter. Sony A7RM4, 70-300 mm lens
  4. Now they are putting on a show for me.
  5. Ok. I will stick with the 70-300 and the 28-70. I also have the 100-400 with 1.4x and 2x TC, which is too heavy for hiking up and down hills at my age. I use that lens when I'm not hiking. John
  6. I'm currently carrying the FE 70-300 and the FE 28-70 mm lenses on the A7RM4 for wildlife and nature photos. The other day, I was out hiking in the woods and found myself changing between the two lenses several times. And, I missed some shots while changing lenses. I'm considering the FE 24-240, which is supposedly an inferior lens to the FE 70-300. I'm a stickler for resolution. So, I'm not sure what to do. Some reviews say the 24-240 is just ok. Others say it is sharp. What are your opinions? John
  7. I tested it today and got: Uncompressed Raw: 123.4 mb Compressed Raw: 62.2 mb Extra Fine Jpeg: 48.5 mb John
  8. I just got the camera and need to do some testing. Compressed raw is the default, which translated to a file size of 62 mb. I need to find out what the file size is for uncompressed. John
  9. I'm not sure which to choose, compressed or uncompressed raw. The default is compressed raw. Any thoughts on the subject? John
  10. Attached is a test photo I did with my 100-400 and 2x at 50 feet away handheld. I didn't have any problems with focus or exposure. No post processing. Only file size reduction for the internet. F/11, 1/160 sec, ISO 3200 John
  11. For wildlife, I sometimes use the 100-400 mm lens and sometimes with 1.4x or 2x. But, if I don't want to carry that much weight while hiking, I will use the 70-300. If it helps attached is a photo taken with the 70-300. No post processing. Only file size reduction for the internet. John
  12. There are signs posted to not feed them. They run away to their nest when they see someone else coming by. Here's the nest. John
  13. I never feed them. There is plenty of food in the pond. John
  14. I made the decision to go with the 100-400 mm lens with 1.4x and 2.0x teleconverters. The photos are razor sharp and the lens is much lighter in weight.The photo below was taken at 40 feet handheld at 400 mm with 2x teleconverter. No post processing. Only file size reduction for the internet. John
  15. I shoot with the 100-400 GM and 2X teleconverter on the A7RIII. The images are very sharp. I didn't opt for the 200-600 mm because of the weight. John
  16. Personally, I have a small fortune of E-Mount lenses, which I don't think will work with the A99. Correct me if I'm wrong about the lenses. John
  17. I just pre-ordered it from Hunt's Photo John
  • Create New...