What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
New review items
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Reviews
New items
Latest content
Latest reviews
Latest questions
Brands
Search reviews
Opus
Birds & Bird Song
Locations
Resources
Contribute
Recent changes
Blogs
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
ZEISS
ZEISS Nature Observation
The Most Important Optical Parameters
Innovative Technologies
Conservation Projects
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is
absolutely FREE
!
Register for an account
to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Forums
Photography, Digiscoping & Art
Cameras And Photography
Sigma & Other Third Party Lenses
Cheaper and compatibility
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="mrsbell" data-source="post: 1431696" data-attributes="member: 74467"><p>So an normal non anti shake lense would probably do me fine? </p><p></p><p>The worse thing I could have done i done, looked on the net and of course there were examples with and without (anti shake) and they made the without ones to be rubbish so i thought well no point in getting one without the anti shake! but they've obviouslt done that to sell them. </p><p></p><p>I am getting there, slowly but surely <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>Next question, whats the difference between a say 75-300mm and a 100-300mm lense? I know the 300 is the zoom well the whole thing is but I am struggling eith what the beginning means? Is it the higher the number the more it zooms? So on that one the 100-300mm would be better?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="mrsbell, post: 1431696, member: 74467"] So an normal non anti shake lense would probably do me fine? The worse thing I could have done i done, looked on the net and of course there were examples with and without (anti shake) and they made the without ones to be rubbish so i thought well no point in getting one without the anti shake! but they've obviouslt done that to sell them. I am getting there, slowly but surely :) Next question, whats the difference between a say 75-300mm and a 100-300mm lense? I know the 300 is the zoom well the whole thing is but I am struggling eith what the beginning means? Is it the higher the number the more it zooms? So on that one the 100-300mm would be better? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes...
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Photography, Digiscoping & Art
Cameras And Photography
Sigma & Other Third Party Lenses
Cheaper and compatibility
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more...
Top