Going medieval

Medieval festival Sheffield (Tasmania). An ideal chance to try out the tracking focus of the Mk2.

The other thing to put to the test is the focussing speed on the budget 75-300. Can this lens cut it, or will it give me an excuse to re buy the 40-150 f2.8?

 Frame after frame after frame perfectly in focus.

Frame after frame after frame perfectly in focus.

It is quite a change going from no focus tracking at all to very good performance. The only real issue was over use. 16gb card filled in an hour!

Separation is the big issue with the riding images. The f2.8 lens would have blurred out some of the messy background, but not all. The 75mm f1.8 (if I had it with me) would have done even better, even cropped.

 The combo even kept up with the Light Horse, and they were really moving. Turns out I set the AF lock to “+1 Tight” in anticipation of shooting down the line, rather than left to right. Even so, the camera and lens coped.

The combo even kept up with the Light Horse, and they were really moving. Turns out I set the AF lock to “+1 Tight” in anticipation of shooting down the line, rather than left to right. Even so, the camera and lens coped.

The Em1’s tracking was impressive, but not as impressive as the riding. He repeated this with a sabre straight after. Looks like the photographer has issues with straight horizons though.

 The tightness a 600mm equivalent allows.

The tightness a 600mm equivalent allows.

 Wide open at the long end.

Wide open at the long end.

 Same as above. This bird was small (pigeon sized). The f2.8 lens would have required even more  cropping.

Same as above. This bird was small (pigeon sized). The f2.8 lens would have required even more cropping.

 And again. The shallower DOF of the f2.8 lens would have been at the expense of half as much magnification and I like the balance as is.

And again. The shallower DOF of the f2.8 lens would have been at the expense of half as much magnification and I like the balance as is.

Not forgetting that the lens is better both stopped down a little and at shorter focal lengths. The above is about 170mm (340mm equiv), and it has pleasant Bokeh. The 150 f2.8 would have blurred the background more, but I doubt the sharpness would be noticeably better.

Excuse to spend more money? Probably, just to get the added separation the f2.8 offers to help clean up backgrounds.

ed.

After looking at the equation logically, I will not be repeating the exercise with the 40-150mm. All of it’s focal lengths except for 150mm are covered by either faster aperture primes (45/75) or a similar performing pro zoom (1 stop slower but better IS up to 100mm) and those that are not (150) are covered by the capable, cheap and proven zoom working in it’s best range.

My ideal would be a 200 f2.8 or similar (patents have been lodged for a 200mm 3.2 which would do). This would give me more speed and reach rather than effectively a 150 f2.8 prime with some added versatility.