Wildlife lenses

In article , Ken Hart
wrote:


Perhaps it's my understanding of "Wildlife". To me, wildlife is moving;
perhaps a narrow view on my part. And this lens is not good for objects
that are in motion (notwithstanding the rotation of the Earth).

the lens doesn't care if the subject in in motion. the issue is using a
fast enough shutter speed. with a digital camera, that's not an issue.

I have
used it quite a bit for scenic photos. The biggest problem (other than
weight and size) is the fact that you can't really see plainly/clearly
with the naked eye what the lens will see.

also not an issue with a digital camera.

In article , Ken Hart says...

Perhaps it's my understanding of "Wildlife". To me, wildlife is moving;
perhaps a narrow view on my part. And this lens is not good for objects
that are in motion

Why - because at F11 it's not bright enough?

Or is the problem that it's not easy to frame moving animals?
FYI, there are accessories which you mount on the camera and
assist you in framing with supertele lenses (such as the Olympus
EE-1 Dot Sight for instance).

I have
used it quite a bit for scenic photos. The biggest problem (other than
weight and size) is the fact that you can't really see plainly/clearly
with the naked eye what the lens will see.

Can't you just look through the viewfinder?

A full moon will nearly fill the 35mm frame.

And it's good for telling time. From the top of the Tuscarora Mountain
off of PA74, this lens will see the courthouse clock in Mifflintown six
miles away.

The way you describe things, seems this lens is not very useful.
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus 4/3 and micro 4/3 cameras forum at
https://groups.io/g/myolympus
https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

The lens does care if the subject is in motion because the higher the magnification, the smaller the aperture.
So you need either a lot of light, or a still subject.



In article , nospam wrote:

the lens doesn't care if the subject in in motion. the issue is using a
fast enough shutter speed. with a digital camera, that's not an issue.

--
m-m
www.mhmyers.com

I use a spotting scope with a camera mount. 1500mm and easy to carry.

Here's the setup:

http://www.mhmyers.com/camera/DSCN3280.jpg




In article , Alfred Molon wrote:

If you look he
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFFNZYNYxFQ

these lenses have absurd sizes. It's not something you would
carry around for hours/the full day while walking in a tropical
rainforest.

--
m-m
www.mhmyers.com

In article , m-m
wrote:



In article , nospam
wrote:

the lens doesn't care if the subject in in motion. the issue is using a
fast enough shutter speed. with a digital camera, that's not an issue.

top posting fixed.

The lens does care if the subject is in motion because the higher the
magnification, the smaller the aperture.

the lens does not know nor care what it's aimed at.

higher magnification does not necessarily mean smaller aperture. that
depends on the lens (and budget). there are lenses longer than what ken
has that have a larger f/stop, except they won't work with his camera.

subjects in motion require a higher shutter speed to freeze the motion,
which is not an issue with a digital camera because *much* higher isos
can be used than with film, thereby allowing the much higher shutter
speeds.

So you need either a lot of light, or a still subject.

or high iso.