FF Equivalent lens :-)

ac12

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
2,806
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
I would not want to deal with this monster.
Soooo BIG that it NEEDS a monopod to shoot with.

1594498432041.png
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

The original pic was very dark.
I lightened the image so I could see more details of the lens and the monopod.

I wonder if it is the $16,000, 800mm lens.
Correction: it is the $10,300, 500/4 lens.
 
Last edited:

Reflector

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 31, 2013
Messages
2,261
Let's go bigger with the Sigma crew served lens or the 200-500mm f/2.8:
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

stevedo

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
May 12, 2012
Messages
440
Location
UK
Real Name
Steve Douglas
I would not want to deal with this monster.
Soooo BIG that it NEEDS a monopod to shoot with.

View attachment 834835
The original pic was very dark.
I lightened the image so I could see more details of the lens and the monopod.

I wonder if it is the $16,000, 800mm lens.
I like how they made the lens hood out of what looks like carbon fibre. Obviously a futile attempt to keep the weight to a manageable level. :)
 

Reflector

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 31, 2013
Messages
2,261
And I thought the 1000/11 mirror was big. :eek:
1000mm? Let's go bigger and hit 1200mm. Here we actually have a lens being used like a crew served weapon, complete with a sitting position and an assistant gunner to help carry the thing around:
EF1200.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6 for anyone wondering.

There's an even bigger sort of obscure Zeiss thing that was built for some Middle Eastern client with really deep pockets:
8ce43e8f0c3fcb3bcb6b7ca9c94db56d.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Yes that's a 1700mm f/4.
 

Reflector

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 31, 2013
Messages
2,261
I wouldn’t want to take one of these near an airbase. They may drop a bomb on you!
You're not wrong for a good reason...
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

ac12

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
2,806
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #16
I wonder what his results are compared to yours though. Be nice to see some examples at night time sports by the looks.

Danny.
Different tools, can't compare.

With my 70-200 (or Olympus 40-150), I shoot plays, not snipe individual players.
That 500 would be great for sniping.

Shooting free-hand and on the sideline, with the 70-200 (or the Olympus 40-150), I can pan as fast as the players move, over a 120 degrees horizontal arc.
On a monopod, my horizontal panning angle is reduced to maybe 30 degrees, before the monopod is tilting too much.
This is why I do not like using a monopod on the sidelines.​
The 500 would work great for shooting down the length of the field, which is way too far for my 70-200.
The 70-200 on a DX camera or the Oly 40-150, both max out at about half field.​
Maybe next season (if there is a season in the fall), I will try the Olympus 75-300 on a late afternoon game, when the sun is still out.​
 

RichardC

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
2,578
Location
The Royal Town of Sutton Coldfield, UK.
Real Name
Richard
I was stood next to this bloke a couple of years ago at RIAT. Someone made him famous on Alamy.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

jhawk1000

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jun 30, 2013
Messages
571
Location
Kansas
Real Name
Mel
Quite a few years ago, my wife was a photographer for a newspaper and AP. She used Canon. She continued to shoot Canon until it became too expensive to have two systems (hers-Canon and mine-Nikon). Since I had sold Nikon equipment while in law school, I had a bunch over the years and she decided to change to Nikon. On one of our trips to Rocky Mountain National Park, she was granted the use of this lens. It belonged to a wonderful photographer for wildlife magazines, tour guide all over the world, and a good friend, Jess Lee, who is standing behind her. She was not able to handle this without a tripod. With m43, she has about the same reach with the much smaller and less heavy 50-200mm 2.8/3.5 and would equal or surpass the range with a 300mm f4. One of the big reasons we use m43.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom