Extenders question for BM
BM...do you use or have you ever used an extender on your camera. Watching the SEOs the other day every person, no matter how big their lens, had an extender on.
I am a bit puzzled.
Comments
-
Greylag, I just think that's a modern version of the old saying " Much Wants More " The drop in quality is so much less with modern digital cameras since they give high quality any way. Its not quite the problem now that it was when I was using Kodachrome 25 slide film I can assure you.
{From a rather Different cameraman ABM !! not BlueMalaga !! }
0 -
Hi GL
Yes is the quick answer, but it needs clarification. Firstly, not all lenses can accept the use of a converter due to fit as the rear elements need to be recessed to accept the protruding front element of the converter.
I have both a 1.4 and 2x converters used over many years with differing results, although both give very good results when used within capability. It depends entirely on the quality of the lens being used and the the converter.
Firstly the 2x converter is ok when used with fast prime lenses (300/500 F2.8)where the loss of 2 stops still gives a max aperture of F5.6 the viewfinder is much less bright and the auto focus is noticeably slower. The quality is still good, Several years ago I had a double page magazine spread from a surfing shot that was heavily cropped from a 10megapixel camera. I have not had a great deal of success using zoom lenses with the 2x
The 1.4 I use almost permanently on my 500 F4 giving a giving a 700mm F5.6 effectively, quality is excellent but again the auto focus is marginally slower. The converter also works well with my 80-400mm but needs good light as the focus is much slower.
I am now using Nikon, but the same applies to my previous Canon kit.Hope this is helpful, but if not ask further.
0 -
Hi GL
I recall you posting previously that you preferred not to look at others work, but I find it very informative and challenging to check images posted on Flickr. I aspire to do my best to learn and if possible to emulate the standard set by better photographers.
With this in mind, may I suggest you visit Flickr and by searching for SEO’s you may find some taken at the same spot and time to yours.
You will also be able to see what camera lens and converter were used. My guess is that you will find a very high percentage will be taken with a converter.
Long F4 lenses will be with a 1.4 while 300 F2.8 will be used with 2x converters.We are hoping to make our east coast trip again this year starting in May at Minsmere then meandering up to Bempton.
0 -
Thanks for the replies.......
I went to see the owls, only to discover they might have gone, will check again later this week. People stood there for 5 hours and not a bird to be seen.
Got chatting to a man with a lens the length of a football pitch and he said he used an extender, but only on bright days, which made sense.
BM....I will check out flickr later today. Always helpful.
OP did you have a look?
0 -
I had a look after I posted yesterday and mainly owls on a post came that must have been close to the camera. I posted a link to my page previously on page 2 of this thread. The info on camera is at the bottom of the comments, it shows lens camera exposure settings and if the lens shows 700 it is with a 1.4 converter. I used it a Slimbridge yesterday in really bad light and high iso but still had good result considering conditions
0 -
Go
the jackdaw was a long way off and heavily cropped with fairly low shutter speed and high iso so wings are moving to fast to freeze, but there is pretty good detail on claws and head. Good light would have improved things considerably, but as I was stir crazy, needed to get out.
0 -
Following our discussion, I re-viewed a utube post called “all about TC’s” by a guy called Steve Perry.
google “Steve Perry photography u-tube”
a bit long winded, but should answer all your questions.
0 -
You are welcome GL. Steve's videos are pretty good I think and although Nikon biased, can be applied generally.
I have attached 3 pics taken today with a 1.4 converter in good light. I am pretty happy that they show that the converter does deliver good results.
0 -
BM
I would be happy with those results....like the goose.
I think I will try and pick up a secondhand 1.4......once we are over the financial shock of replacing our car. Bank account has a large hole in it, must be more frugal.
Evidently owl's are still there, only not showing in strong winds.
0 -
GL
Please please take a look on Flickr search for Cosper Wosper under people real name Graham Hall.
You will be as envious as I am of the close up image of theShortie, but it was taken using a 2c converter. However it was an F2.8 lens but shows what is possible with converters.
0 -
BM ......I wish..................
Cosper wosper silly name, but what photo's.
Just seen that someone saw SEO at Hardley again.
0 -
Some nickname pulled out of a hat for his skittles team I have been told. They could call me anything they wanted if I got shots like that.
Most are taken with a 2x TC and mainly Somerset Levels. Still no Owls in my area, nearest about 40 miles away. Heading down to the levels on Thursday for a stroll and retail therapy for the boss at Clarks village after the Starling murmuration.
Nice shot of the SEO.
0 -
BM
Can you explain in simple terms, the benefits or not of a cropped sensor against a full frame sensor.
Chatting to my wife and she is happy for me to upgrade my 70D....problem is to what.
I used to be indecisive...now I just can't make my mind up.
0 -
If I can answer, I'm sure BM will give a better answer but a full frame sensor is exactly as the dimensions of a 35mm film. A crop sensor is cropped and smaller than that (sorry if you knew that already). A full frame has more area to capture the light on it and therefore gives more detail when enlarged.
Also a full frame will give better low light pictures at low ISO with much less 'grain' and better dynamic range, but they are bigger and heavier cameras and more expensive.
However would you notice, or rather how much you would notice is the question. BM might be more helpful here.
One last last point your current lenses might not 'work' correctly on a full frame camera. It depends on your lenses. They will produce an image but it won't fill the entire full frame. If you have (Canon) EF mount then they will work on both but EF-S will only work on crop frame like your 70D.
I'm more than happy with my 760D and 70D and might be tempted to get an 80D. There is a 7D which might be a good step up.
0 -
Wow...Corner.....
Good reply...........
Am I right in thinking that a cropped sensor is what you need if you always shoot through a larger lens ie 400 etc, at small objects like birds?
I think I am proving here that I know very little about photography.
I stood for 2 hours yesterday watching an owl sitting on a post 200 yards away and the lazy little beggar never moved.
0 -
Hi GL
Firstly, check out the news on cameras as new models will spring up this year due to, world games (coronavirus permitting). Also check out the Sony range as the sensors of most cameras are now provided by Sony, and you can get an adaptor to fit canon lenses to some Sony bodies.
As Cornersteady has commented above a full frame sensor is the same size as the old film format of 35mm.
A cropped sensor has a smaller sensor of various sizes depending on manufacturer. Canon being from memory either 1.3 crop or 1.6, so if we apply that to your set up of 70D which has a crop factor of 1.6 and your 100 to 400 lens. The crop factor makes your lens become a virtual 160mm to 640. on a camera with a crop of 1.6 or 130/520mm with a camera with a factor of 1.3. (100/400 x 1.3 or 1.6
When used on a full frame, the lens remains a 100/400
So using this logic with the pics we take, the crop factor works in our favour.
The advantage of a full frame with many more pixels allows a greater crop post processing while loosing less quality, but where the advantage evens out is dependent on the quality of the elements of camera sensor and lens etc.
I will stop there and answer anything further if I can.
0 -
Gaviscon might help.
Take a look on u-tube again, they might be a bit clearer I think Steve Parry has done something on this topic.
0 -
GL
Having re-read my earlier post, perhaps a clearer way to explain would be as follows
If you changed to a full frame camera and kept your 100-400mm F4.5-F5.6, you lens would give exactly that magnification.
Your 70D with the 1.6 crop and 100-400 lens, this combination would give you an effective 160-640mm F4.5-F5.6 lens. This is in effect the same magnification as using a 1.6 converter on a full frame without loosing a stop and a half.
As we tend to rarely fill the frame, the crop factor works in our favour when photographing small objects.
Hope this is a clearer example.
0 -
Glad to help GL
Please also consider that the other consideration, and that is beyond my expertise, is pixel count/size
With the full frame sensor in general there are more pixels and the size and quality of those pixels make a difference.
The more pixel cameras these days are between 40mp and 60 odd with the latest range of sony sensors.
So there is a trade off at some point in the quality of the post camera processing cropping the small image in the original image taken by the camera.
So using an image taken from the same distance of your Owl sat on the post for 2 hours, using your 100/400 lens set at 400mm
Without post camera processing, a full frame sensor camera will give you a smaller image of the Owl than a cropped sensor camera.
When we come to post camera processing the full frame with say 40megapixels will allow greater cropping than the lower pixel count cropped sensor of 20mp without loosing quality. But as the original image of the Owl on the sensor in the cropped sensor camera is larger, it requires less post camera cropping than the full frame image.
Where the quality crossover point of these two examples are is not possible for me to advise.
All I can say is that reverting to the images posted on Flickr. there are exceptional shots taken with crop sensored cameras such as Canon 7D 20pixel cameras Nikon D500 20 pixel cameras that I know were large crops from original as many were taken stood next to me. They are as good a final image as those taken with Canon 5D 47mp or Nikon D850 42mp that required a larger crop for the same image given the same length lens. ( pixel counts are from memory, so approximate)
For the pics we take, probably the most important camera requirement is fast and accurate focussing, frames /second to my mind is less important and just creates so much more time spent sorting the good/average/rubbish.
Spent many hours listening to togs taking 10 or more frame a second in bursts of 20 or 30 of the same bird sat on a branch and often wondered how many go straight in the bin and the extended time to process rubbish.
Again, if this is a bit garbles, ask again for clearer waffle.
0
