<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Is artie Nuts?  Why Would He Spend $11,499 (plus 7% sales tax and shipping) On a Lens He Has Preached Against for More Than Two Decades?	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2011/12/26/is-artie-nuts-why-would-he-spend-11499-plus-7-sales-tax-and-shipping-on-a-lens-he-has-preached-against-for-more-than-two-decades-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2011/12/26/is-artie-nuts-why-would-he-spend-11499-plus-7-sales-tax-and-shipping-on-a-lens-he-has-preached-against-for-more-than-two-decades-2/</link>
	<description>The blog of bird photographer Arthur Morris</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2012 12:06:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Elliotte Rusty Harold		</title>
		<link>https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2011/12/26/is-artie-nuts-why-would-he-spend-11499-plus-7-sales-tax-and-shipping-on-a-lens-he-has-preached-against-for-more-than-two-decades-2/comment-page-1/#comment-155637</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Elliotte Rusty Harold]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2012 12:06:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/?p=7877#comment-155637</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I&#039;ve never used the old or new 400 f/2.8 myself. Too heavy, too expensive, and too short for me. When I want 400mm there are cheaper, lighter lenses I can use (I own three in that range) and when I want more than 400mm there are longer lenses that give higher quality for less cost and weight (or at least no more cost and weight). If I want 500mm or more, then I&#039;d rather start with a 500mm or 600mm lens rather than a 400mm + TC.

Still I&#039;ll be curious to see how the new lens performs. While the old 400mm f/2.8 wasn&#039;t the majority choice for bird photographers, the photographers I know who did use it seemed to do just as well as the ones who used the 500-800mm supertelephotos. I can certainly agree with you about not wanting to drag a 12 pound lens around the field; but otherwise I could never square your preference against the old lens with the incredible shots I saw other photographers making with it.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve never used the old or new 400 f/2.8 myself. Too heavy, too expensive, and too short for me. When I want 400mm there are cheaper, lighter lenses I can use (I own three in that range) and when I want more than 400mm there are longer lenses that give higher quality for less cost and weight (or at least no more cost and weight). If I want 500mm or more, then I&#8217;d rather start with a 500mm or 600mm lens rather than a 400mm + TC.</p>
<p>Still I&#8217;ll be curious to see how the new lens performs. While the old 400mm f/2.8 wasn&#8217;t the majority choice for bird photographers, the photographers I know who did use it seemed to do just as well as the ones who used the 500-800mm supertelephotos. I can certainly agree with you about not wanting to drag a 12 pound lens around the field; but otherwise I could never square your preference against the old lens with the incredible shots I saw other photographers making with it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Elliotte Rusty Harold		</title>
		<link>https://www.birdsasart-blog.com/baa/2011/12/26/is-artie-nuts-why-would-he-spend-11499-plus-7-sales-tax-and-shipping-on-a-lens-he-has-preached-against-for-more-than-two-decades-2/comment-page-1/#comment-155634</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Elliotte Rusty Harold]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2012 11:55:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/?p=7877#comment-155634</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[With this combo you won&#039;t need to autofocus at f/8, an ability I&#039;ve noticed you&#039;ve used heavily over the years. I&#039;ll be curious to see how that works out for you, and how that affects your analysis of the 1D Mark IV vis-a-vis non f/8 cameras like the 7D and the EOS-1D X.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With this combo you won&#8217;t need to autofocus at f/8, an ability I&#8217;ve noticed you&#8217;ve used heavily over the years. I&#8217;ll be curious to see how that works out for you, and how that affects your analysis of the 1D Mark IV vis-a-vis non f/8 cameras like the 7D and the EOS-1D X.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
