October 15, 2016

70-300 is a Winner to Me

The longer I wait for something in the mail, the more nervous I get that I ordered the wrong thing. After purchasing the new lens, I began to worry if 300mm wasn’t enough reach for me. Online calculators weren’t helping assuage that fear.

The first available daylight after the new 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 lens arrived last Saturday, I was outside experimenting with it. That happens to be shortly after dawn on a Saturday (kids generally get us up these days a bit before dawn). Shortly after dawn is not a very good time to try anything photography related. There just isn’t much light. Once I realized I wasn’t shooting with VR (vibration reduction) on, things got much better. When there was more light they were better still. I got the lens mostly for wildlife so I really wanted to test with wildlife. Wouldn’t you know that the mornings I got up with the kids we had no furry visitors but when Domingo got up with the kids there was a return of the deer, and a fox got trapped in the back yard? Twice?

When weekend rolled around again, I was pretty anxious to go to the zoo. It had been a while since our last trip, and the kids always seem to have a better weekend when we spend at least a little time out of the house. It was chilly and overcast as rain was expected thanks to the Typhone Songda, which meant the animals would be out.

Let me tell you the 70-300 did not disappoint!

I think the biggest advantage of the lens was it’s vibration reduction. The lens is a beast, easily my heaviest lens at 1.6 pounds. It’s 6 inches long when using the lowest focal length, and 8 when extended. That makes it’s center of gravity a bit out from you when you hold the camera to your face. I was shooting one handed, while balancing Alexis in my other arm. I was having a devil of a time keeping the camera level enough to get the framing the way I wanted it. The below photo was shot at 300mm, 1/250 a second with a very shaky hand, yet there’s no camera shake visible.

chimpanzee

I was a little nervous about the depth of field, since the aperture of the 70-300 doesn’t open as wide as the 55-200 lens which was being replaced. While the difference in focal length to 300mm to 200mm might not translate to much in a photograph, it makes a big difference in terms of depth of field thanks to the distance to subject minus focal length (s-f) part of the depth of field equation.

parrot

And, of course, the lens is very sharp. It’s sharper than I ever remember the 55-200mm being. However, I am wondering if maybe I’m comparing apples to oranges. I had that lens for seven years. It’s possible the great fall wasn’t it’s first fall and the elements may have been slightly knocked out of alignment previously.

Regardless, I’m very happy with the new lens. Now I just need that fox to come back.

Related posts:

Posted in Photography | Tags:


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.