 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / March 2005My kingdom for a 1200mm f/5.6!
The first time the fox has come around in months, and it's in the field hunting mice and doing other fox-like activities. Maybe I can settle for the 600mm f/4 IS and a 2x teleconverter. > The first time the fox has come around in months, and it's in the field > hunting mice and doing other fox-like activities. > > Maybe I can settle for the 600mm f/4 IS and a 2x teleconverter. If I knew fox shooting paid so well enough to justify either of those... :-) > > The first time the fox has come around in months, and it's in the field > > hunting mice and doing other fox-like activities. > > > > Maybe I can settle for the 600mm f/4 IS and a 2x teleconverter. > > If I knew fox shooting paid so well enough to justify either of those... :-) It doesn't. I just want pictures. This hobby is worse than heroin when it comes to big glass. >>>The first time the fox has come around in months, and it's in the field >>>hunting mice and doing other fox-like activities. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > This hobby is worse than heroin when it comes to big glass. I may be later to the comment party here but you can get an APO telescope for a lot less than that lens costs. I don't like the defocused image from a catadioptric system otherwise a Meade or Celestron would work well too with reducing adapters. Here is a link for a TMB 203 mm f/7 (fl 1421 mm) APO refractor at "only $22900 (free login required): http://www.astromart.com/classifieds/details.asp?classified_id=337029 other very good manufacturers exist too but this is the closest quick match I found. Tally ho -Guy > Maybe I can settle for the 600mm f/4 IS and a 2x teleconverter. You probably should, since the EF 1200/5.6 is reported to be a not-so-hot piece of glass anyways. [Sounds of frantic googling.] http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=canon+EF+1200/5.6+sharpness&hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1& selm=33D1388E.B6E22C4B%40perscom.nl&rnum=1 >>Maybe I can settle for the 600mm f/4 IS and a 2x teleconverter. > > You probably should, since the EF 1200/5.6 is reported to be a > not-so-hot piece of glass anyways. [Sounds of frantic googling.] > > http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=canon+EF+1200/5.6+sharpness&hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1& selm=33D1388E.B6E22C4B%40perscom.nl&rnum=1 Regardless of that result (which is not at all bad) it is much better than a 600 f/4 would get with a 2X TC on it...and at that it would be an f/8, so wouldn't see peak sharpness until about f/16... That lens was going last year 2004 for about US$118K. If you buy three, you get a free roll of film. Cheers, Alan.  Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. ONLY $118,000 ... what kind of delivery? [S-CNR] > Regardless of that result (which is not at all bad) it is much better > than a 600 f/4 would get with a 2X TC on it...and at that it would be an [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin > -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. > ONLY $118,000 ... what kind of delivery? Buyer pays as always. Insurance mmight be a good consideration. Please don't top post. Cheers, Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. > That lens was going last year 2004 for about US$118K. > > If you buy three, you get a free roll of film. For that price, I should get an extra lens cap, too. >> That lens was going last year 2004 for about US$118K. >> >> If you buy three, you get a free roll of film. > > For that price, I should get an extra lens cap, too. Kind of makes the $22K Hasselblad wants for the H1D almost seem appropriate, doesn't it? No. It's still too damn much! Man, who affords these prices? Walt > No. It's still too damn much! > > Man, who affords these prices? > > Walt Scrooge McDuck? >>> That lens was going last year 2004 for about US$118K. >>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Man, who affords these prices? Same people who buy used cars at seven-figure prices, I guess. > Man, who affords these prices? Mostly businesses that pass the cost on to the customer. Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. >The first time the fox has come around in months, and it's in the field >hunting mice and doing other fox-like activities. > >Maybe I can settle for the 600mm f/4 IS and a 2x teleconverter. Sounds like you need a good jumper and pack of hounds... ******************************************************** "To sum up, one does not hunt in order to kill; on the contrary, one kills in order to have hunted." "The Ethics of Hunting" from "Meditations on Hunting" by José Ortega y Gasset >The first time the fox has come around in months, and it's in the field >hunting mice and doing other fox-like activities. > >Maybe I can settle for the 600mm f/4 IS and a 2x teleconverter. A Meade or Celestron 8" SCT telescope coupled to a reducer/corrector (field flattener) will give you f6.3 at 1260mm. You can buy them mounted or optical tube assembly only, starting at about $800.00 and $140.00 for the reducer corrector. The Celestrons (some of them) are also equipped with the "Fastar" system for speeds around f2 at 400mm. Or, if you want to go mad, at $17,000 you can buy a 671mm lens at f2.2. from Meade. www.meade.com www.celestron.com Hey, you can build a blind for a few bucks. Forget the 1200mm. >>The first time the fox has come around in months, and it's in the field >>hunting mice and doing other fox-like activities. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > www.meade.com > www.celestron.com >Hey, you can build a blind for a few bucks. Forget the 1200mm. From those companies you can also get a mirror-lens (SCT) scope that is 3900mm f.l. at f10 or drop that (using a reducer/compressor) to 2450mm at f6.3. The lens itself is 14" across. Problem with large, fast lenses is they are susceptable to "seeing" heat waves. Much as a naked eye can see ripples above a BBQ, the larger the diameter of the lens, the greater it's ability to see heat waves. Air looks steady and clear to the naked eye becomes wavering and shimmering through a large lens. On a hot day, or in cases where you are shooting over things that radiate heat (buildings, etc) large lenses can become nearly useless. -Rich <top-posting corrected> >>>The first time the fox has come around in months, and it's in the field >>>hunting mice and doing other fox-like activities. <snip> > Hey, you can build a blind for a few bucks. Forget the 1200mm. Yes, that works, as long as he's willing to sit in the blind for a few months waiting for the fox to arrive. Austin Signature.order reverse in things puts posting Top (Top posting puts things in reverse order.) There are no X characters in my address >Yes, that works, as long as he's willing to sit in the blind for a few >months waiting for the fox to arrive. I lost a potential clear fox shot last year, not because of the length of the lens (it almost filled the frame with a 300mm lens), but because my 10D had gone to sleep, and took too long to wake up. It paused for about 2 second out in the open grass, and then made off like a bullet. Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< > >Yes, that works, as long as he's willing to sit in the blind for a few > >months waiting for the fox to arrive. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > my 10D had gone to sleep, and took too long to wake up. It paused for > about 2 second out in the open grass, and then made off like a bullet. That's the biggest reason I want to upgrade. The 10D is nice, but the start-up time has bit me in the a.s more than one time. > Yes, that works, as long as he's willing to sit in the blind for a few > months waiting for the fox to arrive. It's no different with a 1200mm. It's not miraculous, it does not cause hitherto unseen animals to magically appear. Nature photographers can spend days at a site to get a few good shots of their quarry ever with a 1200. (Pretty rare, 300, 400, 500 and 600mm, occasionally with TC's is more the norm). Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. > Yes, that works, as long as he's willing to sit in the blind for a few > months waiting for the fox to arrive. I've already got this $250,000 blind... it's called my house. Out here in California a $250,000 structure is called a "2 car garage". Brian > > Yes, that works, as long as he's willing to sit in the blind for a few > > months waiting for the fox to arrive. > > I've already got this $250,000 blind... it's called my house. > Out here in California a $250,000 structure is called a "2 car garage". Here in NYC it'll get you 600 square feet if you're lucky. SignatureBen Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215 Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing. --Josh Micah Marshall Ben Rosengart notes: >>> Out here in California a $250,000 structure is called a "2 car garage". Here in NYC it'll get you 600 square feet if you're lucky. << Ah, country life. A quarter mil in rural southwestern VA will get you about 3000 SF on at least two acres if you're selective as to area. >Ben Rosengart notes: >>>> Out here in California a $250,000 structure is called a "2 car [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Ah, country life. A quarter mil in rural southwestern VA will get you >about 3000 SF on at least two acres if you're selective as to area. I agree, ah country life. Here in the Metro DC area 250,000 will get you... um, nothing. We've got TINY little post WWII housing that is falling apart and it's going for $700k to 1.2 mil. HAH! not this buyer! My wife and I are getting the hell out of this area before the kids come! Drifter "I've been here, I've been there..." > We've got TINY little post WWII housing that is falling apart and it's > going for $700k to 1.2 mil. HAH! not this buyer! My wife and I are > getting the hell out of this area before the kids come! This market (DC) can't last for ever. I expect it to crash within the next one to two years. >>We've got TINY little post WWII housing that is falling apart and it's >>going for $700k to 1.2 mil. HAH! not this buyer! My wife and I are >>getting the hell out of this area before the kids come! > > This market (DC) can't last for ever. I expect it to crash within the > next one to two years. Over time, real estate only goes one way... But, consider all the boomers and their big houses, and consider the affluent baby boomers with their huge houses. Many of these are going to go on the market as these folks age and want to downsize to make things easier. They will want smaller ranch style homes (1 floor) that require less maintenance. Prices of the large homes on smaller plots will fail to hold, even erode for a while (from artificially high 'values'). Prices of modest sized homes on a good piece of property will rise steadilly. Cheers, Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. Your premise that Real Estate prices will eventually decline depends on three things ... as does *all* Real Estate pricing. They are ... in order of importance ... (1) Location; (2) Location; (3) Location; There *are* locations where prices will probably *never* decline ... such as the Beverly Hills - Bel Air - Brentwood - Pacific Palisades - Malibu area(s) of Southern California. > >>We've got TINY little post WWII housing that is falling apart and it's > >>going for $700k to 1.2 mil. HAH! not this buyer! My wife and I are [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin > -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch. > Your premise that Real Estate prices will eventually decline depends on > three things ... as does *all* Real Estate pricing. They are ... in order [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > as the Beverly Hills - Bel Air - Brentwood - Pacific Palisades - Malibu > area(s) of Southern California. And the DC metroplex. Money's my business guys, and Balto/DC is my market. Unless we suddenly stop being the capitol of the free world, these prices are here to stay. Even the east side is booming. My wife is a professor at Gallaudet, which is in the middle of one of the worst areas in DC. The row homes around Gally are all being rehabbed and sold for incredible prices. And for every aging boomer ready to downsize there are 3 up-and-coming youngsters ready to pay whatever it takes to be where the action is. I live at the northern edge of the metroplex, almost to Pennsylvania, and even here 20% annual inflation in housing prices is common. Walt Are wages increasing even 10% annually? > Are wages increasing even 10% annually? No. Nationally, it's more like 2.5%. Household debt, however, is rising much more rapidly, as are personal bankruptcies. The single wage earner household can't even begin to make ends meet unless that one wage earner makes major money. My wife and I both work full-time, and we both have part-time incomes as well. Still, we can't afford to buy a house in the neighborhood we live in. Many of my friends are moving over the border to Pennsylvania, where housing and taxes are more reasonable (if you can call 180K for a small townhouse reasonable). Many people commute to DC from southern Penn. The good news is that, if you can keep consumer debt under control, you can build a lot of wealth very quickly by purchasing a home. Just don't fall into the refi trap to make ends meet. Walt > And the DC metroplex. > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Walt It can't last. A lot of areas took a dive in the mid-80s due to a housing bubble. I don't think things are going to take a big nosedive in this area, but they will have to decrease. Once first-time buyers are priced out of the market (we're almost there) you'll see a big change. If interest rates rise too quickly, you'll see a big change. Too many ifs ands and buts. It's cheaper to rent during the interim. "Brian C. Baird" <nospam@please.no> wrote in message > It can't last. A lot of areas took a dive in the mid-80s due to a > housing bubble. I was in Arizona during the S&L crisis. Commercial property values nose-dived, and housing prices declined significantly. But within 3 years everything was back to normal. The rate of increase was slowed, but the trend remained upward. Over time, and taken as a whole, real estate in the U.S. has never declined in value. > I don't think things are going to take a big nosedive in this area, but > they will have to decrease. Once first-time buyers are priced out of > the market (we're almost there) you'll see a big change. If interest > rates rise too quickly, you'll see a big change. Those factors typically slow the rise in prices, but don't cause a decline. Corrections may occur in specific neighborhoods, but I wouldn't expect wide-spread roll-backs. I was in Nevada during the Carter years and started in the mortgage business selling hard money seconds at 24%. There were plenty of takers. It took months to sell a house back then, but prices did not go down. > Too many ifs ands and buts. It's cheaper to rent during the interim. For many, that's true. Just make sure you are doing something productive with the money you are saving. Walt Highend home prices are starting to flatten here in SoCal but mid and low priced homes are still on the upswing. My old 2 br, 1 1/2 ba 1250 sq ft house on a 4000 sq ft lot just resold for $850,000 last month. Unfortunately we sold it due to divorce 3 years ago and I haven't bought anything since. I don't know where all this money is coming from but wages haven't increased 25% annually. Drifter responds: >> Drifter Mar 13, 5:42 pm show options Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems From: Drifter <zespec...@askme.com> - Find messages by this author Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 20:42:07 -0500 Local: Sun, Mar 13 2005 5:42 pm Subject: Re: My kingdom for a 1200mm f/5.6! Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse On 13 Mar 2005 17:01:15 -0800, "Charlie Self" <charlie...@aol.com> wrote: >Ben Rosengart notes: >>>> Out here in California a $250,000 structure is called a "2 car >garage". >Here in NYC it'll get you 600 square feet if you're lucky. << >Ah, country life. A quarter mil in rural southwestern VA will get you >about 3000 SF on at least two acres if you're selective as to area. I agree, ah country life. Here in the Metro DC area 250,000 will get you... um, nothing. We've got TINY little post WWII housing that is falling apart and it's going for $700k to 1.2 mil. HAH! not this buyer! My wife and I are getting the hell out of this area before the kids come! << You're barely 200 miles from here. Of course, there's a "gotcha" as always. What work there is in this area pays poorly. > Out here in California a $250,000 structure is called a "2 car garage". > > Brian Too true. >Out here in California a $250,000 structure is called a "2 car garage". In Manhattan, $250K will get you a 400 sf studio Co-op (no bedroom). Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.