1,936
Loading...
Uploader Comments (nerdishcouk)
see all
All Comments (5)
-
You don't need to use 2.8 if the light is good. Your images look like they were taken in perfect light for f/4. If it had been darker I'm sure f/2.8 would have coped well enough, i've seen many samples from this lens at 2.8, inc sports shots.
looking forward to getting mine [the newer HSM II version] maybe the 2.8 IQ on that is a little better.
-
why cant you use it at f2.8? or in you can, why didnt you ?
-
Looks quite respectable with just a hint of the rear focus issue you mentioned yesterday but overall the images look very usable
Loading...
Thanks for the update.. but if you pay for a f2.8 i would expect to use it at 2.8 not at f4 or f5.
I have the non-OS version. i paid around $500 USD (I know this is a steal). I had to calibrate mine to eliminate the focus issue. but the images are still soft at f2.8.. I am not that pissed because for how much i paid, i am pretty happy. but for a $800 (non OS) or $1300 (OS) i will be pissed if i can not use it at f2.8.
AsHxxxxAsH 6 months ago
@AsHxxxxAsH I paid £210 for this lens which is $342 with today's exchange rate, it was listed wrong on eBay and I spotted it, got lucky really - so I am in the same mind, not too bothered about it being soft at f/2.8 as it was a bargain.
nerdishcouk 6 months ago