Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I wouldnt worry about that. Some mates were trying to convince me I didnt need a 70-200 2.8 IS, so leant me a non IS. Brilliant bit of glass. My next purchase for sure.

Seen those, look nice. Although considering how small and light it is Id ditch the lenses and get a nice flexible zoom lens.

Youre a sick man Craig... Go talk to your wife then!

fkn lol ryan you havnt been around long enough me thinks hahahahah

I wouldnt worry about that. Some mates were trying to convince me I didnt need a 70-200 2.8 IS, so leant me a non IS. Brilliant bit of glass. My next purchase for sure.

Yeah, I'm getting by without the IS - the only shaky shots I've shot so far were indoors at a Uni graduation where I didn't think it would be curteous to use a flash and I was a long way away at the back of the hall, and there were too many people around to set up a tripod.

nick you should get the 70-200 F4, its lighter, and smaller too.

Nah, I'm liking this lens more and more as I use it, and I like the extra stop of light, as well as the DoF. Can't afford another lens for a while, anyway. I'm just going to put up with the weight.

Seen those, look nice. Although considering how small and light it is Id ditch the lenses and get a nice flexible zoom lens.

whats that LOL and how does it differ ?

you wouldnt be using it at such a large aperture anyway?

i run mine around F7.1 anyway. so wouldnt matter anyway.

Yeah, but sometimes I like to shoot wide open. And it's about options - it's always good to have options, right?

Yeah, I'm getting by without the IS - the only shaky shots I've shot so far were indoors at a Uni graduation where I didn't think it would be curteous to use a flash and I was a long way away at the back of the hall, and there were too many people around to set up a tripod.

To be fair, chances are your flash wouldnt have been able to throw sufficient light to assist you here any how :P

Maxed out your usable ISO range already? Very much a rock and a hard place situation if you had :(

To be fair, chances are your flash wouldnt have been able to throw sufficient light to assist you here any how :P

Maxed out your usable ISO range already? Very much a rock and a hard place situation if you had :(

Yeah, no doubt.

Yep, ISO was maxed out, I should see how much I can recover it - it was mega-grainy.

just use a noise reduction program. sometimes they work well. i guess it comes down to how noisy your camera is at whatever ISO youre using.

get a 580ex speedlite, its got 200mm zoom (i think)

Ive seen Noise Ninja do some fairly amazing things. Smart software.

If Nick has a crop body & his lens was at 200mm then even the 580 wouldnt help - as he'd technically be at 320mm. Ive never shot with a monopod, but under those sort of circumstances it might work well..?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • They are what I will be installing. 640s for me.
    • Hmm... From my experience you get about 0.25° camber change per mm of RUCA length change. So, to correct from -2.5 up to less than -1° (or, more than -1° if you look at the world as a mathematician does) then you'd be making 6-8mm of length change on the RUCA. From a stock length of 308mm, that's 2-2.5% difference in RUCA length. My RUCAs are currently very close to stock length - certainly only 2-3mm different from stock. I had to adjust my tension arms by 6mm to minimise the bump steer. That's 6mm out of 210, which is 2.8%. That's a 2.8% change on those, compared to a <1% change on the RUCAs. So the stock geometry already has worse bump steer than is possible - you can improve it even if you don't change the RUCA length. If you lengthen the RUCAs at all, then you will definitely be adding bump steer. Again, with my car, I recently had an unpleasant amount of bump steer, stemming from a number of things that happened one after another without me having an opportunity to correct for them. I only had to change the tension arm lengths by 1mm to minimise the resulting bump steer. (Granted, I also had to dial out a lot of extra toe-in in the rear, and excessive rear toe-in will make bump steer behaviour worse). Relatively tiny little adjustments having been made - the car is now completely different. Was horrifying how much it wanted to steer from the rear on any significant single wheel bump/dip. And it was even bad on expansion joints on long sweepers on freeway entry/exits, which are notionally hitting both rear wheels at the same time. My point is, the crappy Nissan multilink is quite sensitive to these things (unlike the very nice Toyota suspension!). And I think 99.75% of Skyline owners are blissfully ignorant of what they are driving around on. Sadly, it is a non-trivial exercise to set up to measure and correct bump steer. I am happy to show my rig, which involves nasty chunks of wood bolted to the hub, mirrors, lasers, graph paper targets and other horrors. Just in case anyone wants to see how it is done. I'll just have to set it up to take the photos.
    • What do you have in that bad boy ? Ill go with the 725cc since I'll be going with Nistune ( would definitely like more engine protection but Haltech is too far out of reach at the moment... plus, Ill probably have a pretty safe tune as its a daily, not gonna be chasing peak power 24/7 ahahah ). Are Xspurt a safe choice?  Pete's great. He didnt mention anything about traction arm length so I reckon it may be good. When I get some new wheels/tire later down the road I'll ask him about it and get his opinion on em. I heard from Gary that you've got the bilsteins too, are you running the sway bars too? and what other suspension goodies do you have installed or would recommend?
    • In true Gregging style...  
×
×
  • Create New...