If you're doing sports photojournalism you generally require reach, and
outside at venues like race tracks a lot of reach unless you're shooting
for halftones, in which case you can blow that stuff up considerably with
no noticeable falloff in its real-world application. Hell, I even did a
horse race once in Chicago with my little 200 for one of Time's newspaper
groups out in the western suburbs. Most demanding was when I found myself
inside of dark gymnasiums. While I could "reach" out okay with my 200
(sometimes I had access to a 300) speed was a very real consideration. As a
rule I shot Tri-X for papers so I'd just take my light readings and then
end up pushing the entire batch three stops or so--and it generally worked
out okay. Had I been shooting color the results would not have been as
satisfactory. And forget it for critical glossy work like what SI
publishes. But then those people had the very best gear to work with and
cost was never an issue.
It helps to be rich!
Tris
At 10:36 PM 7/26/01 -0700, you wrote:
on 7/26/01 7:05 PM, DBellamy2k@xxxxxxx at DBellamy2k@xxxxxxx wrote:
> I have wondered about trying a 300 or 350mm CAT/mirror lens - anybody have
> any experiences to share or recommendations?
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Dave Bellamy.
I have a Celestron 300/5.6 mirror, and its a very nice lens. Very small and
light. I don't think its as sharp as the 300/4.5 Zuiko, and you only have
f5.6 aperture, but its about 1/2 the size of a can of soda, actually about
the same size of my 100/2.0 Zuiko, and lighter. Very easily hand held at
1/250 or above.
I used ISO100 and ISO200 speed film on a sunny day at the motorcycle races I
was almost always at or above those speeds. However, as I was back from the
track 300mm was only good for about 1/3 frame for motorcycle and rider. It
worked very well at Sears Point where I found places to be about 50-75 feet
off the track, but a Laguna Seca I was typically about 100 feet off the
track to avoid fences in the view and the images aren't as big as I want.
Next time I'm trying my 600 with a monopod. For what these 300 mirrors cost
(~$150 or so on e*ay) I think it was a good lens to buy.
--
Jim Brokaw
OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney...
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|