tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5826231802859523569.post2087999620450477498..comments2024-02-12T03:21:03.402-08:00Comments on Ron Martinsen's Photography Blog: My Turn Sitting in the Best Seat in the House (Shooting the Seahawks with Rod Mar)ronmartblog.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06815090271742112506noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5826231802859523569.post-62581709953951178522012-03-06T04:09:22.563-08:002012-03-06T04:09:22.563-08:00Wow, what a great experience. Nice photos caught a...Wow, what a great experience. Nice photos caught as well. <br />cheers,<br />Pa.Patrick Dinneenhttp://www.photoblog.ienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5826231802859523569.post-14306929191122237872012-03-02T13:05:39.931-08:002012-03-02T13:05:39.931-08:00Thanks for supporting the blog David!
The 400 2.8...Thanks for supporting the blog David!<br /><br />The 400 2.8 II is basically a big 70-200 II. IS and sharpeness perfomance are on par with each other, but the 400 has a sweeter bokeh and AF stop button.<br /><br />The 200-400 with built-in tele should be worth the wait. I just can't afford it.<br /><br />Stay away from the old glass - you are spoiled with the 70-200 II so you'll be sadly dissapointed.<br /><br />Ronronmartblog.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06815090271742112506noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5826231802859523569.post-52095379980759578322012-03-02T12:55:55.915-08:002012-03-02T12:55:55.915-08:00Thanks Ron, I have followed your blog for several ...Thanks Ron, I have followed your blog for several months. I also have the Canon 1d mk iv with the 70-200 f2.8 mk II. It is a great combination. Thanks Ron.David Makkershttp://www.makkersmedia.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5826231802859523569.post-72653330566846101692012-03-02T12:47:49.614-08:002012-03-02T12:47:49.614-08:00Hi David,
The NEW 400 f/2.8L IS II is an incredib...Hi David,<br /><br />The NEW 400 f/2.8L IS II is an incredible piece of glass. I've had the pleasure of using it and you could easily throw the new 2.x teleconverter on it and get way better images than the previous generation 400 2.8 without a tele. <br /><br />I honestly have no experience with the 600 so I can't comment on it, but if it were my money I'd go for the 400 2.8 II (not the I) with the 1.4 tele as you are considering.<br /><br />Rod was using the 400 2.8 with a 1.4 tele and he said the 70-200 2.8 VR, but it looks like the 200-400 in the photos to me. As I said, I was a terrible assistant so I was doing more shooting than assisting than I should have done. ;-)<br /><br />I hope that helps!<br /><br />Best wishes,<br />Ronronmartblog.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06815090271742112506noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5826231802859523569.post-61054442584058218922012-03-02T12:11:01.185-08:002012-03-02T12:11:01.185-08:00Any thoughts on the canon 600mm vs canon 400 + 1.4...Any thoughts on the canon 600mm vs canon 400 + 1.4tc for shooting football or soccer? Was Rod using the nikon 200-400 f4?David Makkershttp://www.makkersmedia.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5826231802859523569.post-35818241427031467232012-03-01T11:14:09.611-08:002012-03-01T11:14:09.611-08:00Great opportunity and great captures!Great opportunity and great captures!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07964038727036538716noreply@blogger.com