Baaaaah go ahead C&C it - just you try to!

[Fotografer]

<img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2700/4356702379_c9da1087d2.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></p>
<p><a href="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2700/4356702379_a185d04d15_o.jpg" target="_blank">http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2700/4356702379_a185d04d15_o.jpg</a></p>
<p>1/800sec, ISO 200, f5.6</p>
<p>ok the focus missed the sheep (probably me twiddling the focus after trying to recompose - rather than frontfocusing problems)</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4044/4356703297_e0aa8ac8da.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></p>
<p><a href="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4044/4356703297_9e23cd60c2_o.jpg" target="_blank">http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4044/4356703297_9e23cd60c2_o.jpg</a></p>
<p>1/800sec, ISO 200, f5.6</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>proof that it can do better <img src="http://thephotoforum.com/forum/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif" border="0" alt="" title="smile" smilieid="105" class="inlineimg" /> (when used right)</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>My 150mm macro getting some use as a sheeplens! Used along with the 1.4teleconverter I recall this not being an easy setup in the field - and in looking at the shots in editing I do feel that its not as sharp at 210mm as my 70-200mm but that might partly be my shooting (shutterspeed) than just poor optics. Certainly bare the 150mm can get sharper results.</p>
<p>It might also benefit if I stop down a little more say to f6.3 - as it stands its only stopped down once from f4 (f2.8 lens minus 1 stop for the 1.4TC) to f5.6</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Any comments/crits welcome - thank you</p>
<p>&n