 |
| |
| This site requires new users to accept that a small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk after requesting a new account. Thank you. |
| Moderated by: chrisbet, | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Graham Whistler
|
I am getting to grips with the D850 now and testing it against my D500 for bird photography. I may soon soon say perhaps the D500 can go. This shot hand held out of top window of our house with D850 and my big Nikon 500mm F4 lens produced a pin sharp A3+ print. 1/1000 sec f9 at ISO 1000 single spot AF-C auto focus and matrix meter this is blow up from shot I will load below. Attachment: 03 Blackbird.jpg (Downloaded 61 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
This is whole shot as taken at 35 feet with the 500mm lens. I hope to post pix soon next time a blackbird lands there at similar lighting. I have the D500 loaded at same settings with the same 500mm lens Attachment: Blackbird.jpg (Downloaded 60 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
jk
|
I think that the D500 will be a winner for Birds in Flight and fast moving subjects as the AF points cover the whole screen better. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Keep saying it Jonathan....you know we believe you.  |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
Yes I think you are rightbut the advantage is small as is the 7 frames against 9 with the D500. I should also have included the size of images above uncropped was 8256x5504 and cropped 3576x2744 an uncropped D500 image is 5568x3712. So the Blackbird pix is quite impressive. I hope to get another similar bird in the same place in same light in next few days the D500 with big lens is in place in our spare bedroom. We have 5 male Blackbirds in garden at present take bets on me getting a matching pix? I will not get rid of the D500 in a hurry as I like both cameras. Just tring to help Eric with some info. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Robert
|
There is quite a debate about this generally. The consensus I see is that the D850 is excellent for IQ, no question but for birds in flight the it seems to be D500 wins on several counts. There are big costs involved with D850 ownership, huge files with the consequent issues of offloading, storing and processing them, an iPad or even a Mac Book Pro won't cut it, by all accounts. The D850 also has a much greater initial cost £1800 v £3500, almost half and haggling with the D500 might produce an even better price I doubt one could haggle much off a D850, given they are often out of stock. Processing the D850 files will require an up to date version of whatever software is chosen. As a 'hobby want' item, as opposed to a 'professional need' tool it becomes expensive, which for most needs is overkill. At the Nikon Roadshow I visited last week even Nikon stated that the D500 was considered superior for BIF, while exhorting the virtues of the D850. One interesting feature of the D850 is the silent electronic shutter which at 30 frames a second I understand is very useful in all sorts of situations, should be possible to capture the defining moment with that, maybe some sporting events like cricket? I understand the images in this thread are taken with a D500 and AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/4E VR. http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1346257/39 They would do me and most hobbyists, even most nitpicking pixel peepers. I think it comes down to personal preferences and how much cash one wants to sink into a hobby. Another factor is how enthusiastic one is to hide for hours 'out there in the marshes' to grab the shot of a lifetime. This thread which is actually a lens thread but touches on real world experiences of competent photographers with the D500 and D850. http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,7118.50.html |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Robert wrote:There is quite a debate about this generally. You raise a number of issues here, Robert. Leaving aside cost of the body there is the cost of the lens to consider. From what I've read elsewhere, there are a limited number of lenses that TRULY capitalise on the resolving capabilities of the D850. No surprise they are all the top end lenses and have 4figures in the price. Dropping down to the second quality tier of lenses will give, for most people, almost indiscernible lesser quality ....which has prompted some reviewers to say "get a D810 and save some cash, if you aren't going to use the top 10-12 best quality lenses." Or get a D500 and save more! In fact there is a strong arguement that for wildlife, where you never seem to be able to fill the frame with the subject, having perfect lenses right to the edges or when using a DX body with Fx lens, absolute quality may be unnecessary. When you refer to those getting perfectly acceptable results from a 300mm E f4 lens (which is actually a good new lens worthy of the 850 anyway) I would make an observation. The shooting of those images was engineered. By that I mean the photographer didn't just turn up to a spot and capture those images on the fly. Natural foliage, twigs and shrubbery are far too invasive to allow such clarity of scene. I know this from bitter experience. To get such perfectly executed shots, especially with a mere 300mm attached, the landing location and photography 'set', for the bird has to be controlled by prior gardening and pre organised flight path. Nothing wrong with that I would add, if your desire is to capture a perfect example of the critter, with no distracting background, foreground or sides! I was reading that a local RSPB reserve has set up a photographers hide ( actually a wicker screen with holes) so that photographers shutter noise doesn't annoy the birdwatchers in the hides, AND they have 'positioned branches strategically close to feeding areas to make photography of birds easier'. Again....nothing wrong with that....you still have to stand or sit for hours for that moment! But I have to say that although I will get out and do my share of shooting in the great outdoors soon, while it's subzero, the wildlife in the garden, from an armchair has a strong pull. I KNOW the images won't be as good through double glazed windows, and will have to put up with ungardened photosets. So there's little point in buying an D850 and £5k worth of glass while such lassitude prevails...I will make do with the Fuji for now. Here what I mean about pre gardening.....if I had only known it was going to perch on that branch! Attachment: 15E76427-D05E-44D3-81C3-90E64BBBFE2E.jpeg (Downloaded 55 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
On the other hand some critters are more predictable. Attachment: 047FFC00-CCF2-423B-ADF7-7810D1E4FDB9.jpeg (Downloaded 57 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Had a surprise visit of a Stock Dove yesterday... Attachment: 898C591D-1F56-4CD8-BF8B-838BCE7CB416.jpeg (Downloaded 55 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
...and our 'resident' crow. Attachment: 0814374F-AA8B-46EE-B6F2-FF43E37632A0.jpeg (Downloaded 55 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
jk
|
I think there is also a lot of 'boxed in thinking'. That is to say if you have a f2.8 lens then you need to stop down to f5.6 to get best results and likewise if you have an f4 lens then it will need to be f8 to get most out of it. Get over it. Yes old lenses may behave like this but not necessarily the truth with newer lenses. Of course this is complete BS. The Nikon 400mm f2.8 AFS is as optically good at f2.8 as at f8. There is almost no difference between any of the stops between f2.8 - f8. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
I find the 500mm is producing spot on right up to f16 needless to say depth of field is a major problem with long lenses.This means good results with high ISO is a major advantagemeven in good light I wind up ISO to stop down as much as possible. Sory today not able to get Blackbird with 500mm lens and D500 I may have just set one too far!! We had bit of snow top temp + 1.4 cent and the birds were low all day on the ground feeders. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Robert
|
Apart from bokeh and DoF. My excuse for fast lenses of both of these. A long while ago I went on a photography 'course' The trainer asked what aperture I was using with my Nikkor 300mm f2.8, he was a bit taken aback when I told him I hadn't paid a small fortune for it to shoot at f8. Why have a fast lens then stop down except if the DoF requires it. My whole aim in photography is to separate the subject from the background. Mind you, it also helps me keep the shutter speed up... To help with my doddery hands!!! |
|||||||||||||||||||
jk
|
Robert wrote:Apart from bokeh and DoF. My excuse for fast lenses of both of these. Yes indeed. I shoot my Nikon 200-500 f5.6 at f5.6-8. My 400mm f2.8 I use at no smaller than f4 unless I am already at 1/8000 already, so I need to stop down to get correct exposure. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
jk wrote:I think there is also a lot of 'boxed in thinking'. That is to say if you have a f2.8 lens then you need to stop down to f5.6 to get best results and likewise if you have an f4 lens then it will need to be f8 to get most out of it. But there is more than double the dof between f2.8 and f8 and shooting moving birds at 30-40 feet you need all the lattitiude you can get. That's why many people use f8 or smaller. Anyway...the Fuji 100-400 and teleconverter prevent me from using anything wider.  |
|||||||||||||||||||
jk
|
Who needs medium format when you can get this from a Fuji. Reduced for better viewing on smaller devices! |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
HOW COME ITS SO BIG? |
|||||||||||||||||||
jk
|
Eric wrote:HOW COME ITS SO BIG? Changed it down to 1600pixels rather than full size. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Robert
|
jk wrote:Eric wrote: LOL, I couldn't get it on my 28" screen, no chance with an iPad! Very sharp JK, good picture. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
jk wrote:Eric wrote: There was a serious question in that .... I have to sample down my files considerably for the forum software to allow me to attach them....as a result they always look inferior to originals. Is there a secret to posting bigger files?  |
|||||||||||||||||||
Robert
|
Another facet of the D850... Slide and negative copy, the D850 inverts the negative and saves as a JPEG, Magic! edit: Silly old sod! I forgot to add the url https://www.dpreview.com/news/6668188440/nikon-s-es-2-film-digitizing-adapter-for-the-d850-will-finally-ship-in-march |
|||||||||||||||||||
jk
|
Eric wrote:jk wrote: Yes host the files on a server that allows large files and use the
|
Well the Fuji can deliver! Even with UK smallest bird...Goldcrest. But the viewfinder freeze is still a pain. Fortunately this little fella was very understanding and didn't move far in his movements ...enabling me to catch up with him. Attachment: 0D222D8C-4706-4C46-B61E-00A194791E95.jpeg (Downloaded 38 times) |
||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
Well done super pix! |
|||||||||||||||||||
Robert
|
Lovely photo, nice when the sitter is cooperative! |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Robert wrote:Lovely photo, nice when the sitter is cooperative! There is a slight irony / coincidental twist to 'the sitter being cooperative', Robert. I can reveal that the best place for covert photography in our house is the bathroom. The frosted glass and vertical blinds make it easy to poke a lens out through the blinds and open window without the birds being disturbed. It's also convenient that one of our feeding areas is opposite that window. What is not so convenient is the bathroom being monopolised by me....with a window open and a cold east wind blowing. There were several complaints about having to trudge to the bedroom ensuite or the need for a heated toilet seat while I was off uploading images, from a certain lady. Yes the sitterS did have to cooperate....albeit grudgingly in the case of one.  |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Lady Blackcap from same location...( note to self ..prune the amelanchier harder this year!) Attachment: 80DA7583-7D25-4865-888C-BE4EF78FE5AF.jpeg (Downloaded 34 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Eric wrote:Robert wrote: Just reread that and 'covert photography' in the bathroom sounds a bit pervy! I meant covert photography OUT OF THE BATHROOM WINDOW. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Robert
|
Eric wrote:Just reread that and 'covert photography' in the bathroom sounds a bit pervy! I meant covert photography OUT OF THE BATHROOM WINDOW. Exactly what I thought! Heated toilet seat? You don't spend all day in there do you??? Very nice pix! |
|||||||||||||||||||
jk
|
I was going to suggest that Eric got out more but then again he might monopolise the toilet in the caravan!   |
|||||||||||||||||||
jk
|
I was going to suggest that Eric got out more but then again he might monopolise the toilet in the caravan! |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
jk wrote:I was going to suggest that Eric got out more but then again he might monopolise the toilet in the caravan! Well it wasn't me that suggested a heated toilet seat....it was a certain sarcastic lady. But you reminded me that some years ago I DID use the caravan as a hide in my back garden. Wasn't necessary to use its bathroom...plenty of windows with seats already in place.  |
|||||||||||||||||||
Iain
|
Eric wrote:Well the Fuji can deliver! Even with UK smallest bird...Goldcrest. You must have found the only goldcrest that stays still. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Iain wrote:Eric wrote: Superglue on the branches and diazepam impregnated fat balls. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Iain
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
We have plenty birds in our gargen but bird on a feeder is not very interesting! Attachment: Chaffinch Mr & MrsS.jpg (Downloaded 20 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Robert
|
Don't know Graham, the birds look pretty interested... |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Robert wrote:Don't know Graham, the birds look pretty interested... We put some more feeders up in the garden on Saturday. They seem to have scared all the birds away!  Not sure if I mentioned this already on the forum...can't find it posted.... During the snow period, I looked out on the lawn and saw what I thought was a rabbit lumbering around in the snow covered lawn. Went to get the binoculars....and it had gone. I noted the place where it was last stood and went out to look. It was 1am. I saw this peculiar trail around the lawn....but it ended in untouched snow??? The 'rabbit' had evaporated. Attachment: A967A268-4244-4E1B-8597-D6D9B874E897.jpeg (Downloaded 18 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
The wife's curiosity was roused, so she got up and had a peep through the curtains at 2am ....then dragged me from bed half asleep to take a look. For the next hour or more I struggled to acquire focus and capture a photo in near pitch darkness. The culprit was a Wood**** foraging for worms under the snow, but it's movements were too much for my 1sec@f5.6 and 12800iso. The wife was clearly more awake than me because she flicked on the security floodlights The Wood**** froze ( well it was -8] long enough for 1sec... Attachment: 70A72719-BF36-4FB5-9477-14EFA7A4F8A9.jpeg (Downloaded 17 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
We switched off the lights and he continued to forage. Yes he did have success...but wouldn't stay still...shaking with his excitement, or maybe the cold. I went back to bed ...well it was 3:45. Attachment: C1C175A7-9CFF-4569-B3AF-05D8E521AE35.jpeg (Downloaded 17 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Iain
|
Nice to have one of them in the garden. I need to get down to Norfolk as there is not much up here. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Iain wrote:Nice to have one of them in the garden. I need to get down to Norfolk as there is not much up here. There were lots of reports of Wood**** coming into gardens during the bad weather and he was seen on two evenings. In hindsight, he had probably been hiding up in our 'woodland' border area during the day as it's very quiet. As soon as the temperature started to rise and the snow melted...we never saw him again. At the moment we are trying to track down where the Snowy owl ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-norfolk-43377572/harry-potter-arctic-snowy-owl-makes-rare-norfolk-visit ) has gone. Although it hit the headlines at Titchwell and Snettisham it was actually seen on the marsh areas just north of Kings Lynn some days earlier We are hoping it back tracked.  |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Edit ...Snowie is in Nether Poppleton, NYorks now But on a positive note it's heading your way Iain |
|||||||||||||||||||
jk
|
Quick Iain, get out there! |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
Bit suprised at grain in this at only 1000ISO with D850 but light was poor and it needed pulling up post +1.5 stops? I hate to say it but think D500 may cope better with a shooting error of underxposure? Attachment: Jackdaw155ND+S.jpg (Downloaded 37 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
Original pix as shot not one of my better ones but it was getting dark! Attachment: _DSC0155.jpg (Downloaded 36 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Graham Whistler wrote:Bit suprised at grain in this at only 1000ISO with D850 but light was poor and it needed pulling up post +1.5 stops? I hate to say it but think D500 may cope better with a shooting error of underxposure? Lovely image despite the exposure issue! Was that the 400mm? |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
It was the 80-400mm plus the x1.4= 560mm Still very happy of this lens setup it is light enough to carry in to places that need a walk in and I can not fault sharpness.My 500mm F4 needs tripod and is not easy to use for flight pixs, so tend to use it if in a fixed hide. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
This is another with the 80-400mm AF-S with x1.4 this with the D500 in S France on the Rhone Delta. Attachment: Herons3124.jpg (Downloaded 30 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
This morning in snow at last got a bird in same place as Blackbird at start of this topic: Nikon D500 with 500mm AF-S f4 lens This pix is about 30% of total fram so reasonable blow up 1600 ISO 1/1600sec f11 hand held out of window. Attachment: Starling79.jpg (Downloaded 29 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
Taken at same time but this Goldfinch was further away and smaller bird so this is about 20% of total frame size. Ligt slightly less. Still D500 with same 500mm lens 1600 ISO 1/1600 sec at f7.1 Attachment: Goldfinch94.jpg (Downloaded 29 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Iain
|
Graham Whistler wrote:Bit suprised at grain in this at only 1000ISO with D850 but light was poor and it needed pulling up post +1.5 stops? I hate to say it but think D500 may cope better with a shooting error of underxposure?I'll keep my eyes and ears open. As it's heading north I might be lucky. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Iain
|
jk wrote:Quick Iain, get out there! It's heading north I might be lucky. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Iain
|
3 posts!! Don't know how the first two happened. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Graham Whistler wrote:This morning in snow at last got a bird in same place as Blackbird at start of this topic: Nikon D500 with 500mm AF-S f4 lens Super image, Graham.  |
|||||||||||||||||||
jk
|
The 500m f4 wins. The 80-400 is a tad behind. BTW the 80-400 is apparently about to be discontinued in UK according to NikonRumours website. However it is still on Nikon Europe website. |
|||||||||||||||||||
amazing50
|
You can post a sampled down version here and link to a high res version on some other site. This will give those trolls that steal our work higher quality material to resell. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
You are so right but I've long given up bothering about people steling my images. How can you ever hope to control pirates in this high tec media world? Let alone get paid for the damage they do, most do not even think they are breaking the copyright laws. |
|||||||||||||||||||
jk
|
Graham Whistler wrote: You are so right but I've long given up bothering about people steling my images. How can you ever hope to control pirates in this high tec media world?I agree Graham. What I do is to make sure the images are limited in size 75kb-250kb, 1024pixels. Content is difficult though. |
|||||||||||||||||||
amazing50
|
Just won an auction for a 58mm Helios-44-2-for-M42-Zenit-Pentax-Praktica for $32 US. Another $5 for a 42mm to Nikon adapter with corrective optic. Nothing like some fine old Soviet glass for the D850 |
|||||||||||||||||||
amazing50
|
Just won an auction for a 58mm Helios-44-2-for-M42-Zenit-Pentax-Praktica for $32 US. Another $5 for a 42mm to Nikon adapter with corrective optic. Nothing like some fine old Soviet glass for the D850 |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
This is D850 with the 80-400 mm plus x1.4 at 550mm today on Farlington Marsh flock of over 200 Brent this at 1000 ISO 1/500 sec f10. Plenty of good detail in quite overcast light. Attachment: Brent 0223.jpg (Downloaded 44 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
amazing50
|
They look like Canada Geese that landed in the Tar Sands. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
No they are Brent and smaller than Canada. Here is a family of Canada Geese in Tichfield Haven another of our local bird Reserves. Tech bit: Nikon D500 with Nikon VR 500mm F4 AF-S lens, 1/1600 sec at f9 500 ISO. Attachment: Canada Geese 0166.jpg (Downloaded 38 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Robert
|
Nice family snap! No obvious difference between the goose and the gander? Do I count seven gosling heads? Obliging of them to stay in line to have their picture taken, certainly helps with the DoF. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Robert wrote:Nice family snap! No obvious difference between the goose and the gander? Do I count seven gosling heads? Size |
|||||||||||||||||||
Robert
|
Really? I thought plumage was the indicator! One learns something every day. Just as long as the Geese know then I guess it don't matter! |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Robert wrote:Really? I thought plumage was the indicator! Quite a few species of birds have the two sexes identical to all but the trained eye. For example the Goldfinch has red face markings that extend beyond the eye in males but stop at the eye in females. There may be such a tweak of nature in Canada geese that I am not aware of...but always thought the female was smaller. Most of the corvids are the same for both sexes with size being the only, or most obvious, differentiator. And don't get me started on goosanders, mergansers and immature of each species, not to mention eclipse phases or individual bird variations .....a right buggers muddle. Attachment: D8506012-81C2-434F-8A1A-CD0157856E7D.jpeg (Downloaded 32 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
We all learn from each other, we have Goldfinches in garden but I have never noticed those difewrences! You must have been quite close to get that good detail, perhaps you shoulsd stick with you Fuji Camera! Happy Easter!! |
|||||||||||||||||||
jk
|
This is for Eric. https://www.fujix-forum.com/threads/grand-slalom.79220/ It is all about the technique. All images shot on XT2 with 100-400. If you got the camera set up right and you know your stuff then it is easy. It is about getting the AF settings right. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
jk wrote:This is for Eric. No disrespect, as the images are very good, but shooting moving objects as big as a person are one thing....2" birds are another thing. THATS what I have found challenging the Fuji. But in fairness it was with the 1.4x tc on, as well. I had similar success in horse eventing and motor racing with Nikon and would be happy to use the Fuji kit for that. I am sure the focus tracking modes will cope with that sort of movement ..and anticipating movement is much easier when the approximate course of the subject is known in advance. Sadly, not so predictable with small birds. I've actually purchased a D500 and added a couple of lenses, one being the new 300mm. Although a little shorter than the Fuji 400mm, the Nikon combo is 800g lighter than the Fuji combo. Which sort of blows out of the water the lightweight benefit of mirrorless. Have still got all the Fuji gear. Will be interesting to see if I miss any of its advantages... or disadvantages. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Graham Whistler wrote:We all learn from each other, we have Goldfinches in garden but I have never noticed those difewrences! You must have been quite close to get that good detail, perhaps you shoulsd stick with you Fuji Camera! Happy Easter!! Not my photos, Graham. Birds in the hand by ringer.  |
|||||||||||||||||||
jk
|
Well I am very happy with my D500 and 200-500 it is heavier than the Fuji XT2 and 100-400 but better for birds in flight. |
|||||||||||||||||||
amazing50
|
The 200-500 on a DX sensor is great for birds. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
Not my photos, Graham. Birds in the hand by ringer. Eric thanks for that. I too find small bird photography very hard to get focus perfect. I think the D500 is slightly better than the D850 at small moving birds, but both camreas have very good auto focus compared with all earlier Nikon DSLRs I have owned over the years. The D500 with my big Nikon 500mm AF-S f4 lens works very well but needs to be on a good tripod with video fluid head tripod for best results. On the Kingfisher shoot with this set up in a hide for a day and taking nearly 500 pictures I had hardly any focus problems. Malcolm at same time was also using D500 but with Nikon 80-400 lens on tripod and also had very good ressults with auto focus. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
This morning Eric a male Goldfince (showing off my new gained info!!) Very poor light raining it is 30 feet away from our window. D850 with 80-400 Nikon lens at 400mm plus x1.4. Single point focus, 1/500 sec f8 3200 ISO. Attachment: _DSC0263Goldfinch All.jpg (Downloaded 17 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
Here is blow up bit grainy but not bad. No winner at camera club but proves how good D850 work in very poor conditions. Yes it is male!! Attachment: _DSC0263 Goldfinch.jpg (Downloaded 19 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Iain
|
Eric wrote:jk wrote:That lens handles the tc's well Eric. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Iain wrote:Eric wrote: Agreed...got the 1.4x as well I think the point is, that for lightweight walking around, serendipity wildlife photography, DX x 300 x 1.4tc ie 630mm is acceptable with some cropping. (By the way....D500+300+1.4 weighs 1800g.....XT2+400+1.4 weighs 2600g). But for more exacting, sitting in a hide, using a tripod moments I suspect neither will be long enough. Better to reach rather than crop. My previous experience using a 1.4x tc with zoom lenses resulted in a noticeable quality drift. Do we know if the tc is usable on the 200-500? One final question.... is it normal to use 500+mm for bif? Just wondered how many of these type of shots are taken with lesser reach lenses and cropped? Have to say using Fuji + 400 + 1.4tc (ie 840mm) was cumbersome and frustratingly difficult to keep in frame. It exacerbated the issues with the mirrorless format. I ended up taking off the tc (eg =600mm) and had more success. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
In my early postings reporting on tests I did with my then new 80-400mm plus the x1.4 with the D810 and later with D500, there was no loss of sharpness or speed of focus but there is a loss of 1 stop in speed. The x1.4 works just as well with the big 500mm f4 lens. I think most early tele extenders were very poor but Nikon have got it right with this one, no complaints. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Iain
|
I would say the 500mm is not the best for BIF I think your 300mm +tc would be easer to use being lighter Eric. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Robert
|
What about an X2? Loosing two stops compared with one isn't the end of the world with a D500... Or is it? |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
As I said you only lose 1 stop with the new x1.4 Nikon this again today is with it + 80-400 at 400mm with the D850 is 560mm. Sorry only a Dunnock today but better light so this is 2500 ISO. Attachment: _DSC0275 Dunnock.jpg (Downloaded 46 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Graham Whistler wrote:As I said you only lose 1 stop with the new x1.4 Nikon this again today is with it + 80-400 at 400mm with the D850 is 560mm. Sorry only a Dunnock today but better light so this is 2500 ISO. That's what you call a really nice LBJ......(little brown job). Virtually impossible to differentiate between sexes outside of breeding season but the the male has a bit more grey intensity.....and chases the other one. I had two doing exactly that outside my window today....but far too excited to standstill long enough to get camera out.  |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
This was a definitely a male, singing in the orchard, back in....2008 Scarey how time flies. Attachment: A98F7ECA-752D-4051-A02C-36069B75704F.jpeg (Downloaded 39 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
Spent three hours on Farlington Marsh in hope waders may come in with rising tide but all I saw were there Redshanks. D850 with 400-80mm at 400mm plus x1.4, good light. No Brent Geese of two weeks ago must have moved up North as wind has at last moved back to SW. This time next month will be in your part of world Eric so hope more birds on the Wash! In mean time getting in as much practice as I can with the long lenses and local birds. Attachment: DSC0287 Redshanks.jpg (Downloaded 36 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Graham Whistler wrote:Spent three hours on Farlington Marsh in hope waders may come in with rising tide but all I saw were there Redshanks. D850 with 400-80mm at 400mm plus x1.4, good light. No Brent Geese of two weeks ago must have moved up North as wind has at last moved back to SW. Up to our ears in Ring Ouzels here at the moment. These warm southerly are going to speed up migration over next few days....but got busy week next week so not going to be able to get out with camera. Although a day behind, worth monitoring this site.... http://www.norfolkbirds.com/News.aspx |
|||||||||||||||||||
Iain
|
Eric wrote:Graham Whistler wrote: Was it you or the birds that were to excited. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Iain
|
Useful link Eric, thanks. |
|||||||||||||||||||
amazing50
|
If a TC doesn't give a better image than a crop from the lense, it rather a waste. Considering the light loss meaning a slower shutter speed with a longer focal length has put me off using them in most cases. One place I like a 1.4 TC is on my Samyang 8mm fish eye, where it gives a full frame DX image instead of the rounded normal view. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
I have done tests with and with-out the Nikon TC x1.4 and can see no loss of image quality. The turning of a 400mm lens to a 560mm is a major advantage when photographing birds. The size, baulk and weight of the lens is also not changed too much. With modern DSLRs with dramaticly improved ISO at higher settings the need to have an f4 large 500mm lens is no longer needed, when as a 77 yr old, I try to reduce what I carry when out on a walk in a bird reserve. My big 500mm f4 comes out when I spend the day in a fixed location like a hide or can work from my car.There is no doubt that the image quality at wider f nos is better with the big lens. Stop down the 400-80mm a bit more and it also is pin sharp. Than goodness long gone are the days of a Hasselblad and a 500mm f8 lens and 50 ISO transp film. Working like this in Africa in the 1970s bird photography was not easy. Here photographing white rhinos in Rhodesia with a Linhof 6x7 1970!! Attachment: GW Rhinos 1970.jpg (Downloaded 29 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Graham Whistler wrote:I have done tests with and with-out the Nikon TC x1.4 and can see no loss of image quality. The turning of a 400mm lens to a 560mm is a major advantage when photographing birds. The size, baulk and weight of the lens is also not changed too much. I am in admiration of your courage and envious of your flexibility to squat that low, let alone take photos in that position, Graham. Time will only tell whether the convenient portability of the 300 with a 1.4 will be sufficient reach. But I am trying to stop carting large lenses around on the off chance something might pop out of a bush. If my commitment to bird photography gathers momentum and I find myself more frequently sat in hides, then I may well invest in a longer heavier prime. But at the moment it's a peripheral interest for me that doesn't warrant high investment. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
Not that brave I had been photographig them for a week with a game ranger keeping an eye on me. They are not as dangerous as Black Rhinos and they were more than happy with us being down wind. Far more interesting is my progress with the D850 in very dull rain this morning very poor light, 80-400 at 400mm plus x1.4 this is about 1/2 the full frame. 1/650 sec f8 ISO 2600. (Is this all you need!!?) Attachment: Woodpigeon 0333S.jpg (Downloaded 27 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Graham Whistler wrote:Not that brave I had been photographig them for a week with a game ranger keeping an eye on me. They are not as dangerous as Black Rhinos and they were more than happy with us being down wind. Many bird photographers still believe that the bird only needs to be 1/3 of the frame to ensure a good part of the habitat is part of the photograph. The fact you are able to attain such clarity from that crop suggests that, YES, it may well be enough. So FX400 x 1.4 = 560mm, cropped 1/2 full size ....so 1020mm equiv. DX270 x 1.4 = 567mm So the question is....... if you had put the 80-400 with the 1.4x tc on the D500, set it to 270mm and done the same 1/2 crop, would the image have been as good? |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
It was 35 feet from our back bedroom window and sorry ISO should read 2500. This would give a top quality A3+ print not bad with such high ISO and dull light. Exposure was spot on with matrix metering and focus on AF-C single point on head. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
I have just added a lot more Nikon Bird pictures on my website all Nikon images is any body is interested: http://www.gwpmultimedia.com/birds |
|||||||||||||||||||
jk
|
Eric wrote:Graham Whistler wrote: Grasshopper feel the force. The paper in your wallet will not feed you! Get the 200-500 and be done with it. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
jk wrote:Eric wrote:. It's a possibility Jonathan, if I find the 300+1.4tc falls short of my needs. |
|||||||||||||||||||
jk
|
I find that the flexibility of the zoom really wins. 200-500 is cheaper as well at £1150 versus £1170 for the older 300mm f4 or £1500 for the new version. Dont forget that the D5, D850 and D500 have a minimum max aperture of f8 NOT f5.6 as was the case in the past. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Graham Whistler wrote:I have just added a lot more Nikon Bird pictures on my website all Nikon images is any body is interested: Some lovely images there Graham. I particularly like the cormorant...wonderful lighting, colour, composition and detail. May I ask what camera/ lens were used and how much cropping? |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
jk wrote:I find that the flexibility of the zoom really wins. It's not about money Jonathan, it's about weight and probability of use. The D500+300+1.4 weigh 800g less than the Fujixt2+100-400+1.4! The 200-500 weighs 2300g compared to the 300 at 700g. I want to travel light and suspect for most of my situations, the 300 with 1.4 on the D500 will be adequate. If I discover I need more reach on some occasions I may well get the 200-500...or what about an even longer lens for static tripod use....Sigma 800? |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
Eric the Cormorant was shot with Nikon D810 and my Nikon 400-80mm plus x1.4 pix blown up from 1/2 width of full frame. 1/500 sec f10 500 ISO. Tichfield Haven in our local reserve on River Meon. Attachment: Cormorant2398.jpg (Downloaded 55 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
jk
|
Eric wrote:jk wrote: Didnt realise there was such a disparity in weight. I dont find the D500+200-500 is that heavy a combo. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
jk wrote:Eric wrote: No it's not that heavy to use...it's just too heavy to carry around hoping to use it. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Graham Whistler wrote:Eric the Cormorant was shot with Nikon D810 and my Nikon 400-80mm plus x1.4 pix blown up from 1/2 width of full frame. 1/500 sec f10 500 ISO. Tichfield Haven in our local reserve on River Meon. Lovely shot. Amazed you managed to get it with the eye lid up. Every shot I took it had the waterproof cover in place....looked like 'blind bart'. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
Had a good day yesterday at Blashford Lakes near Ringwood with photographer friend John. We saw plenty of small birds in the woods including this Brambling. D850 with 80-400 lens. Attachment: _DSC0397 Brambling.jpg (Downloaded 43 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Graham Whistler wrote:Had a good day yesterday at Blashford Lakes near Ringwood with photographer friend John. We saw plenty of small birds in the woods including this Brambling. D850 with 80-400 lens. Very nice bird. One of our favourite winter garden visitors. Unfortunately they are never in full 'Saracen helmet' plumage like this chap. You were lucky to see one in full 'bleeding prumage' that far south. They should be up north by now! |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
I reviewed yesterdays pix and felt I could inprove my settings still with the cD850 and 80-400 mm lens plus x1.4 I am posting several pixs. I have on average used 1000 ISO 1/800 sec but stopped don to F11 0r better in some so sharpness with better DOF on small birds.All single point focus CF. Most of these are only 30% of the full frame so I ask is the D850 all you need? Attachment: Brambling0606A4+S.jpg (Downloaded 40 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Graham Whistler wrote:I reviewed yesterdays pix and felt I could inprove my settings still with the cD850 and 80-400 mm lens plus x1.4 I am posting several pixs. I have on average used 100 ISO 1/800 sec but stopped don to F11 0r better in some so sharpness with better DOF on small birds. Most of these are only 30% of the full frame so I ask is the D850 all you need? I've read a number of reviews that suggest it is! The bigger question for me is whether a zoom telephoto is necessary? Given that every bird shot I've ever taken has had some degree of cropping it suggests I always have to use the maximum focal length available. I've often used a tc just to try to get close enough. So why lug the dead weight of the zoom around? For me there is balance point between portability, price and reach. The new 300mm is incredibly light and relatively inexpensive. If the proposed 600mm is similarly light and reasonable priced it may be the ideal combo with the D850? |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
Another of todays pixs Attachment: Brambling.jpg (Downloaded 40 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
And another! Attachment: Chaffinch.jpg (Downloaded 43 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
Goldfinch. Attachment: Goldfinch0473.jpg (Downloaded 40 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
6.00am this Dunnock outside bedroom window woke me up so did a quick portrait through glass before it flew off! Tech details D850 again with same 80-400mm at 400mm bird less than 5 feet. Yes Eric this is all you need but D500 not for sale quite jet yet!Eric I will be White Hart Hotel Boston photographing birds on the Wash 13-16 of next month, great if we could meet up for a day of bird photography? Attachment: Dunnock0611.jpg (Downloaded 33 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Eric
|
Graham Whistler wrote:6.00am this Dunnock outside bedroom window woke me up so did a quick portrait through glass before it flew off! Tech details D850 again with same 80-400mm at 400mm bird less than 5 feet. I am very impressed you sleep with the D850 by your side Graham. Very interested at the prospect of a lightweight 600mm coming onto the market. I might well use that as the trigger to get a D850 to pair with it. Could be an ideal combo...provided the birds aren't only 5ft away. My birdwatching friend and I have been planning to visit Frampton ever since you first mentioned it, but sorting out my deceased father's estate got in the way. His passing also somewhat sapped my enthusiasm for most things. I am emptying his house of furniture next week. But It would be an ideal opportunity to combine the two events. I will give you a call nearer the time. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
Eric all sounds good my dates are now firmly booked and Tom my very good birder cousin will be with me (he lives in S Repps) This pix was taken at same session as above and it is I think some sort of Pipit but unable to find it in several bird books any idea? Is a ground feeder and was with the Bramblings and about same size. Shot as above D850 and 80-400mm AF-S. Attachment: DSC0546.jpg (Downloaded 34 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
Sorry it is a Dunnock! |
|||||||||||||||||||
Iain
|
A Tree Sparrow D500 and sigma 150-600mm Attachment: D50_4583-Edit.gif (Downloaded 20 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
No doubt these two cameras are outstanding, good pix! Fast spot on focus and low noise at high settings. I think the D850 has lower noise when pushed above 2600 ISO but there is not much in it. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
Robin D850 big blow up 80-400mm AF-S plus x1.4 560mm ISO 1250 1/800 sec f11 Attachment: Robin522.jpg (Downloaded 19 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Iain
|
For wildlife I think if you have either the D850 or D500 you will be happy. |
|||||||||||||||||||
jk
|
Iain wrote:For wildlife I think if you have either the D850 or D500 you will be happy.I agree. The D500 will give you more 'reach' than the D850, unless you want to use the D850 extra pixels to provide cropping. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
JK I agree but cropping with the same area gives better results with the D850 as I think noise is far better sorted compared with the D500 shot for shot. |
|||||||||||||||||||
jk
|
Graham Whistler wrote:JK I agree but cropping with the same area gives better results with the D850 as I think noise is far better sorted compared with the D500 shot for shot. It makes sense that this would be the case as the D850 costs more than the D500. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Graham Whistler
|
I think this pix I just posted on the new 500mm lens proves just that point here too. D850 with new 500mm plus x1.4 ISO 1600 1/500 sec at f8 (this is the f5.6 lens full open with the x1.4 on as you lose a stop) Attachment: Starling2131.jpg (Downloaded 10 times) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Current theme is Blue
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondsl.uk Thank you. |