1. Cheap telescopes have much lower quality than cheap photographic lenses.
2. High quality lenses cost more than photographic lenses.
3. You have no aperture control.
4. You must get hold of a mount that doesn't confuse the 350D's metering system.
5. At high magnifications beyond about 300mm, you need a VERY sturdy tripod, mirror lock-up and a remote release.
I personally think you should go for the 70 - 300.
herschel
rush rouge <pixelrouge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
rush rouge <pixelrouge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
hi..
I love Bird watching.But have been unable to photograph them for the lack of equipment.
Now i want to buy some stuff for the purpose but only temperorily say for 6 months. Budget limit $150 - $200.
I had 2 choices :
1. sigma 70-300 mm f/4.0 lense.
2. Tokina 400mm f/5.6 lense [reseller's]
But i just came to know about Digiscoping.
And now i think it would b a better investment as i can use the telescope for other purposes later on.
My query is R results with 350D satisfactory.It seem that sutter speed will b slowed down drastically. Also if i decide to buy the equipment what would U suggest ? Can U help me with this pls .
What r ur views on this topic..
regards
dakoo
Herschel Mair
Head of the Department of Photography,
Head of the Department of Photography,
Higher College of Technology
Muscat
Sultanate of Oman
Muscat
Sultanate of Oman
Adobe Certified instructor
+ (986) 99899 673
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
