Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Wildlife Photographer of the Year (OT)

Subject: [OM] Re: Wildlife Photographer of the Year (OT)
From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2005 22:55:26 -0500
Forgot to say thanks for the details.

Chuck Norcutt

Jeff Keller wrote:
> The 400/4 looks very similar to the the 300/2.8. The lens is physically 
> longer and a little heavier. (Tamron 400/4 - 2.33kg, Tamron 300/2.8 - 
> 2.15kg, Zuiko 350/2.8 - 3.9kg). Both Tamrons have a 112mm filter ring. The 
> 300/2.8 was first made in white, then green, then in charcoal grey. The 
> white one isn't seen very often. I saw one person claim it isn't as sharp. 
> The dark grey version has interference problems with the Olympus 1.4x 
> teleconverter. If you get the 300/2.8 you want the green one. I've only seen 
> the 400/4 in green. I believe Walt uses a 2x on his 300/2.8 and has been 
> very happy with that.
> 
> The 400/4 works very well with the Olympus 1.4x teleconverter giving a 
> 560/5.6 that is lighter than anything comparable. It is fast enough to 
> easily focus using an E-1 at least in daylight (much easier for me than the 
> Zuiko 500/8 on an OM).
> 
> I had posted a picture and enlarged area of several hundred Monarch 
> butterflies hanging from a Eucalyptus branch several years ago. The 
> butterflies were somewhere between 20 and 30 feet away but the very enlarged 
> portion made it very easy to see the knob on the end of their antenna. The 
> resolution is very impressive.
> 
> A couple list members had emailed me saying the 400/4 was a great lens to 
> get, one even prefered it to the Zuiko 350/2.8. The 400/4 has sporadic 
> availability. When I got mine I had been watching yabe for 6 months and 
> hadn't seen one. I bought a "bargain" rated lens from KEH. Afterwards I 
> probably saw 4-6 sell in a period of about 1 year. I haven't seen one for 
> quite awhile now. The 300/2.8 is pretty easy to find. A good price for a 
> 400/4 is about $800-$950 with several sales having been for $1100+. The 
> 300/2.8 since it is much more commonly sold can be bought for about $600 or 
> even less although they have also sold for $800+. Both the 400/4 and 300/2.8 
> often come with a Tamron 112mm UV filter that does not seem to hurt the 
> picture quality. KEH currently has a Tokina ATX 300/2.8 for $1079. I think 
> that is the second one I've seen in the last five years. I also remember 
> seeing a Sigma 300/2.8 that I had placed a low bid on. Stephen Troy recently 
> mentioned the Sigma 500 4.5 that KEH has for $1479 and has posted great 
> train pictures using one (and other long lenses).
> 
> Although I've got quite a few long tele's to choose from, the Tamron 400/4 
> is the one I use the most.
> 
> -jeff
> 
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Jeff mentions a 400/4 Tamron, a lens I'm not familiar with.  What's the
> best deal in an OM mount 300 or 400mm f/4 or similar fast glass?  2.8 is
> probably too fast meaning expensive and heavy.
> 
> Thanks,
> Chuck Norcutt
> 
> 
> Jeff Keller wrote:
> 
>  > You might be right Andrew about the picture being "posed" but I wouldn't
>  > assume it was. My experience with the herons near where I live is that if 
> I
>  > take a couple hours for them to accept my presence, I can get very good
>  > pictures of them. I use a longer lens, a 400/4 Tamron, often with a 1.4x
>  > teleconverter.
> 
> 
> 
> ==============================================
> List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
> 


==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz