## SleeperSmith's recent activity

• Hey brightcolours, where are you? I just looked through 70-200mm VRII. WOW that 135mm focus breathing on MFD is the 200mm you talking about. You really opened my eyes. LOLOLOL.People on this forum...
• He's even telling people to look through a focus breathing lens what a 200mm FoV looks like.LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLWhat else have you got? I need some more laugh. Oh does 24mm looks wider...
• This little kid really is so lost in his little dream land. It's so hilarious.Before long, he'll start educating people 350mm looks narrower than 400mm. Oh wait he's already doing that...
• Replied in Just curious
Older than you and your mom, that's for sure.Now run along with your toys.
• Please reply to me soon, I can't get enough of your jokes.250mm with FoV that gets narrower and narrower but hey, it's still a 250mm. Just like extension tubes do not alter focal length. This is...
• Rofl. This clueless dude never gives up. It's hilariousNo it doesn't. 4.45 degree will look 4.45 degree no matter how you want to blow smoke at it. When it stop being 4.45 degree, it STOPS BEING...
• Was typing on phone, can't look back to your post.Ditto.All that does is explain the whole problem behind asymmetrical lens. The article even goes on to add a 21mm extension tube and claim the...
• don't get what you on about.field of view is given in degrees.u just said 400mm = 4degrees.533mm=3degrees.........?field of view sure as hell isn't subject size.
• Replied in Lame
Focal length (f) and field of view (FOV) of a lens are inversely proportional. For a rectilinear lens, FOV = 2 arctan (x / (2 f)), where x is the diagonal of the...
• 350mm have narrower FOV than 400mm. Lolol eh ya ok....Stopped reading right there. Another guy who has nfi wtf he's on about.
• Do you see anyone b1tching Canon's 100-400 is only 350 at long end?Any one b1tching Nikon 200-400 is only 350?Or 70-200mm VRI = 180 something mm?Or old 80-400mm AF-D VR = 380mm??The lens is FOURTY...
• Rofl, you asking too much. That guy doesn't even have a camera, let alone know wtf's shutter speed.
• You don't even shoot photos, go pipe your bull crap some where else.NO. SH*T. SHERLOCK.
• YES ABSOLUTELY. Because 80-400mm will ACTUALLY GET TO 200mm, unlike the 70-200mm.Ofcourse, to get to 400mm, you'll need to wait for nikon to make a 300-800mm lens.That's just how Nikon lens work....
• Right. 80-400mm isn't primarily a wildlife lens...Guess what? Next time you go buy 2L of milk from the super market there's only 1.4L of milk in there. I wouldn't lose too much sleep over that...
• Replied in Get a clue.
Sigma 120-300mm is actually only around 180mm or something at MFD too.
• Educate him enough about FoV and he might stop suffering from:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
• no one who's a REAL photographer ;-)Seriously tho, 70-200mm is more a utility lens. The 80-400mm is more a wildlife/birding lens, the focus breathing on this hurt a lot more than the 70-200mm one.
• I guess you are right. It needs to have at least higher mag ratio than 300/4. a 400mm lens having lower mag. ratio than 300/4 is retarded.
• Seriously, this thread is going a bit ridiculous.I'm still pondering if that OP is mathematically correct to make that assumption and everyone's jumping on board. I know jack crap about optics...
Activity older than 12 months is not displayed.
SleeperSmith has not added any gear yet.
 Total messages 67 Threads started 10 Last post 9 months ago
 Total comments 3 Total likes 0 Last post 11 months ago
 Total reviews 0
 Total articles 0