Hey Ted, another great shot, and I have to say, I’m always a bit surprised when I open your images. The resolution is high, which looks fantastic, but they’re also quite large. Do you do that deliberately?
The reason I’m asking is that I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately. I usually publish at around 1920 on the long edge, but I’m starting to question why I stick to that. Larger uploads, like yours, simply look better, even if they take more space, though that’s something everyone can decide for themselves.
This really stood out to me after seeing someone else posting full frame images resized down to 1024 on the long edge. Honestly, I’m starting to find that a bit pointless. If you’re shooting full frame, why reduce your images to the point where they fall apart when viewed larger?
That’s why I find your approach interesting. If you have the time, I’d be curious to hear how you think about it. Have a great day, Marc.
P.S. I’m saving up for the little white 50-200mm 🙂 I just missed a deal with 20% off, waiting for the next one !
I pulled the trigger on the Little White when it came on the scene. Not disappointed. Works well with the 1.4 and 2X as well, although the 2X struggles sometimes with focus depending on the situation and lighting conditions.
Loading...
Hey! Well, I have the 40–150, and to be honest I haven’t used it that much, mainly because it’s just a bit too short for me, even though it’s a great lens.
The reason I’m now considering the 50–200 is that I’ve been using the 12–200 for quite a while when I’m out, alongside the 100–400 or the 300 Pro, and that 200mm range fits really well. So I’m thinking the 50–200 could be a good match, maybe even paired with the MC-14 from time to time.
I also have the MC-20, but you’re right, even on the 100–400 it slows things down quite a bit and makes focusing a bit less reliable.
Do you use it for birds and similar subjects? Are you happy with the sharpness?
Hey Ted, another great shot, and I have to say, I’m always a bit surprised when I open your images. The resolution is high, which looks fantastic, but they’re also quite large. Do you do that deliberately?
The reason I’m asking is that I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately. I usually publish at around 1920 on the long edge, but I’m starting to question why I stick to that. Larger uploads, like yours, simply look better, even if they take more space, though that’s something everyone can decide for themselves.
This really stood out to me after seeing someone else posting full frame images resized down to 1024 on the long edge. Honestly, I’m starting to find that a bit pointless. If you’re shooting full frame, why reduce your images to the point where they fall apart when viewed larger?
That’s why I find your approach interesting. If you have the time, I’d be curious to hear how you think about it. Have a great day, Marc.
P.S. I’m saving up for the little white 50-200mm 🙂 I just missed a deal with 20% off, waiting for the next one !
I pulled the trigger on the Little White when it came on the scene. Not disappointed. Works well with the 1.4 and 2X as well, although the 2X struggles sometimes with focus depending on the situation and lighting conditions.
Hey! Well, I have the 40–150, and to be honest I haven’t used it that much, mainly because it’s just a bit too short for me, even though it’s a great lens.
The reason I’m now considering the 50–200 is that I’ve been using the 12–200 for quite a while when I’m out, alongside the 100–400 or the 300 Pro, and that 200mm range fits really well. So I’m thinking the 50–200 could be a good match, maybe even paired with the MC-14 from time to time.
I also have the MC-20, but you’re right, even on the 100–400 it slows things down quite a bit and makes focusing a bit less reliable.
Do you use it for birds and similar subjects? Are you happy with the sharpness?