 |
| |
| 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 | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
blackfox
|
as some will know I use the popular sigma 150-600 C lens coupled with a Nikon D7200 crop body its one of the best rigs I have used over the years . this week I spotted a sigma tc-1401 teleconvertor for sale at a bite your hand off price so I went for it . we went for a spin on thurs to Colwyn Bay one to test out our new car and two to try out the t.c . first conclusions are it works well with no MA issues however a much increased shutter speed is needed the simple maths are camera and tc = 840mm plus 1.5 crop factor =1260mm so my 1/1000th shutter speed was to low imho it needs at least 1/2000th sec to work hand held . below a couple of test shots I will persevere with this till I get it right. all shots hand held    |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Good luck with that Jeff. I had the 1.4tc with my Sigma 500 prime and although it gave me the extra reach, I found the contrast dropped and the surety of focus wasn't as good as without the TC. With a zoom, you may face the dilemma of ....do you keep the TC in place when you want the 200-400mm region or take it off ( if you have time) because I suspect the bare lens will always be better . |
|||||||||
blackfox
|
Early days yet Eric and it looks like only one decent day this coming week ,what a change in the weather |
|||||||||
blackfox
|
still persevering with the t.c ,I have realised two things auto iso is a no no and a high shutter speed is needed . might try it in shutter priority but heres a couple from this afternoon in heavy overcast after the storm . cant seem to post using the blue cross |
|||||||||
jk
|
blackfox wrote:still persevering with the t.c ,I have realised two things auto iso is a no no and a high shutter speed is needed . might try it in shutter priority but heres a couple from this afternoon in heavy overcast after the storm .This might be contentious but I have always regarded the P mode as a lazy photographer's way of shooting. Likewise for AutoISO but to a lesser extent as sometimes you need some automated help when working in difficult conditions. I will admit to having used it but when reviewing results afterwards always thought that I could have adjusted better. I think that up till recently that ISO6400 was the max I would push to but with the Z7, D850 and D500 maybe one stop (ISO12800) more is acceptable. I would always try to use one stop down e.g. ISO3200 and shoot in Manual mode with adjustments of aperture or shutter speed, as and when. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Was reading a post on another forum where someone made the blindingly obvious observation...that I had overlooked...relating to the use of TC for wildlife. Using (some cameras) internal crop feature (eg D500/D850 and other FX bodies) means you keep the fstop/shutterspeed/iso advantage that's lost with a TC. Of course that may only be a stop, but that could be significant when exposure parameters are being pushed by lighting and subject movement. The same applies to a post process crop, I assume. Of course there's the question of whether the cropped image, with reduced mp and enlarged noise, is acceptable quality. But the perceived wisdom is that using a TC not only loses exposure latitude but image quality. Until I got the Nikon 1.4 III, I had tried and finally discarded every TC I owned That includes, the Sigma, KenkoPro3000, Nikon earlier versions...and a few Canon versions back in the day. It's not that they weren't good, more that they all created images that needed more post processing to attempt to bring out the detail seen in the bare lens images. In addition the responsiveness of the focusing suffered, albeit only a tad. The Nikon 1.4 III is something different ....image IQ seems to be uncompromised. But the above exposure loss discussion still applies and to some extent there is some loss of focus responsiveness. I've yet to personally evaluate the perceived advantage of in camera cropping as opposed to using the TC, but looking back, I've often preferred a photoshop crop of a bare lens photo over the TC straight image. Similarly, cropping an FX photo compared to a DX photo. The final point on TCs is they are best used on prime lenses. Maybe it was the quality of my zooms (there is inherent variability in zoom lenses) but I always found that a TC seemed to find out the limitations in my zooms...invariably at the long end where it was needed. Just my 2 cents |
|||||||||
blackfox
|
Wise words there Eric , I have used the same t.c on a previous lens the sigma sport (canon fit) and using it on a 1D3 and 1D4 which are both canons H sensor so near to full frame size . And with good results . This is my first attempt at using it on a aps.c sensor and I'm finding noise is a major issue . I will be checking on MA as well later today . Making some progress with it but in mulling things over my own initial testing is flawed by trying to find targets , at this time of year a lot of wildlife is very wary and basically I'm not getting close enough which then dictates cropping the image. Got a rainy day today to play around and do further testing . Your findings re.tc quality is also useful as I'm considering getting rid of the big sigma and going back to a 300mm F4 which will then need at least a 1.4 tc .having used one before I know they are superb , this all depends on my health recovery as equipment weight is now a issue |
|||||||||
blackfox
|
the pics from yesterday that wouldn't upload    |
|||||||||
blackfox
|
After further testing I have decided to return the tc ,the noise issue is to problematic . I will be looking for a 300mm f4 shortly |
|||||||||
jk
|
blackfox wrote:After further testing I have decided to return the tc ,the noise issue is to problematic . I will be looking for a 300mm f4 shortly Will the 300mm f4 replace your Sigma 150-600? |
|||||||||
Eric
|
blackfox wrote:After further testing I have decided to return the tc ,the noise issue is to problematic . I will be looking for a 300mm f4 shortlyIs that the new PF fresnel version you are after? It's half the weight of the original 300 f4. |
|||||||||
Robert
|
Eric wrote:Is that the new PF fresnel version you are after? It's half the weight of the original 300 f4.That would be the ideal but I suspect Jeff will be meaning the conventional version. Having visited fast Nikkor 400mm + matched X2 TC on DX, I found the loss of light and difficulty of stabilising the setup wasn't a rewarding experience, everything is a compromise and long lenses with small sensors are less than ideal, OK, it CAN be done but requires much higher input with much lower returns. Some years ago I decided to stop at 300mm, if it needs more than that, I look for another subject. |
|||||||||
blackfox
|
as Robert suspects I will be looking for the slightly older 300mm f4 , I have had one before and used it to very good effect with both the 1.4 and 1.7 tc giving focal lengths of 420 and 500 mm respectively with no or very little effect on iq ... im fortunate in having lots of old files to go through so basing my choice on those .. most pics as well will have been from d300s /d7000/d7100 bodies so I should see a improvement with the 7200 . also having just last week changed my 4x4 for a up to date Mondeo I don't think swmbo would be to happy about me spending large sums on a PF lens . as for the sigma the juries out on that one its got the range ,fairly good iq and 30 months warranty left on it .. but I also have to factor in age and health which is also part of the equation |
|||||||||
blackfox
|
some old shots from my files Slavonian grebe .D300s/300mm f4//1.4tc kestrel D7000 300mmf4/1.7tc red kite D7000/300mm f4/1.7tc gannet D7000/300MM F4 these shots are obviously swaying my way of thinking ,plus the ability the lens has to close focus ... so do you think this is a good move ?     |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Jeff, I understand your reticence to spend even more money on photography equipment ...but you can't take it with you! If weight versus age/incapacity is the main issue here, then there is no question in my mind. You should be gathering up all your surplus and heavy equipment that you realistically know you won't use again and swopping it for the new 300PF lens. It's only 770g...the same weight as your D7200 body. It's clear from your bird results that your skill, experience and location can make up for any shortfall in mm that others may need. I wouldn't hesitate in making the move. It's never irreversible. Look at me....I sold ALL my Nikon gear to commit to Fuji. They sold all my Fuji gear to come back to Nikon. Yes I may be a head case. 😆 |
|||||||||
blackfox
|
Not a case of taking it with you Eric ,it's having it in the first place  |
|||||||||
jk
|
Eric wrote:Jeff,I am lucky in that I have my Nikon and Fuji systems. I enjoy using both systems. The Fuji XT3 is the 'best camera' I have ever used. That is from a pure handling perspective and the question of "does it work well in my hands?" The Fuji lenses are very good but dont have the same feel of my older AiS Nikkors or the delightful familiarity in all new Nikon lenses. I am still deciding if the D850 is better than the Z7 or vice versa as each seems to have distinct strengths and weaknesses. What I will say is that my D500 is streets ahead of the D850 for birding. I dont shoot with the D500 except when birding but it is instinctively just right. I could probably shoot with the D500 instead of the D850 but I would miss the extra MPs for some images. Certainly in my landscapes the 45MP really does shine out and the same with the Z7. I still cant decide whether the D850 features are better than the Z7 which is lighter but with different specification but mirrorless does give me more in some ways but for me there is one fly in the ointment. The change to the Z mount over the F mount is hugely annoying if you have a big set of lenses. What I will say is that all these things are not solely about specifications but also very much about "How does it feel in your hands". |
|||||||||
blackfox
|
That is so true and probably why I have held on to my Panasonic MFT gear it's super light with a 2x crop factor and in all honesty hard to tell which camera is taking which photo . It's not quiet fast enough for wildlife but just about do.able with fore thought . And luckily there are plenty of adaptors about enabling use of Nikon/canon/ and legacy glass lenses and the ibis really does work . I'm in no rush to get a 300 and for some reason prices have rocketed since Xmas so I'll hang on till I spot a bargain |
|||||||||
Eric
|
blackfox wrote:That is so true and probably why I have held on to my Panasonic MFT gear it's super light with a 2x crop factor and in all honesty hard to tell which camera is taking which photo .Brexit profiteering. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
jk wrote:I am lucky in that I have my Nikon and Fuji systems.Yes the feel is very important. That's why I like the D850. It's grip fits my hand perfectly without a booster battery pack lump on the base. I don't notice the difference in performance between it and the D500 when birding. Admittedly I haven't tried it for bif yet. I find the noise on the DX sensor lets the D500 down. For me, the only advantage the Z camera (or any mirrorless body) has over the D850 is the wysiwyg exp comp. I would like to see how the Z6 handles noise. Compared to the D850 and D500 it should be better given it's bigger pixels. |
|||||||||
jk
|
Yes that is the D500 achilles heel. It seems more noisy under similar conditions when compared with D850 and even D600. Cant afford a Z6 without a thin down of my other Nikon bodies which I am very happy with. But in truth I would rather go for a second Z7 but I dont need it. |
|||||||||
blackfox
|
It shows how things have moved on over the last few years , what we now class as bad noise would have been considered more than acceptable 5 or 6 years ago .. the latest advent of full frame mega pixel sensors have really changed the ball park ,hopefully the resolving power of the lenses will keep up with it .. and that's another reason I'm considering changing lenses I'm searching for that enigmatic “look/feel “ just getting a sharp image is no longer the goal |
|||||||||
Eric
|
blackfox wrote:It shows how things have moved on over the last few years , what we now class as bad noise would have been considered more than acceptable 5 or 6 years ago .. the latest advent of full frame mega pixel sensors have really changed the ball park ,hopefully the resolving power of the lenses will keep up with it .. and that's another reason I'm considering changing lenses I'm searching for that enigmatic “look/feel “ just getting a sharp image is no longer the goalI wonder if the sharpness of modern lenses is in fact emphasising noise? You may find using a 'softer' older lens loses some of the noise issues? In truth it's never JUST been about getting a pin sharp full frame image of a bird. The traditional 1/3 bird 2/3 habitat arguably gives a more pleasing photograph when compared to the full frame technical record shot. Or maybe that's an excuse for not having a long enough lens. 😆 |
|||||||||
Eric
|
jk wrote:Yes that is the D500 achilles heel. It seems more noisy under similar conditions when compared with D850 and even D600.I thought you were the advocate of the 25mp sweet spot ? „ |
|||||||||
jk
|
Eric wrote:I thought you were the advocate of the 25mp sweet spot ? „Yes, but actually the 45MP does give me headroom. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
jk wrote:Yes, but actually the 45MP does give me headroom.Do you find your D850 underexposes by half a stop on matrix metering? My histos all need to be lifted to get the white end right. It's as if Nikon, knowing you can recover shadows so well on this sensor, have been overcautious in protecting the top end. I've ended up dialing in +0.3 and still not stacking up the right side of the histo. Lovely camera to use though....probably best since my D3. I haven't seen the disadvantage over the D500 for birding you mention. But haven't used it much for that purpose yet. I've tended to use the D500 for its DX factor but noticed the noise level creeping in at quite low iso on it. |
|||||||||
jk
|
Eric wrote:Do you find your D850 underexposes by half a stop on matrix metering?I tend to use EV compensation of -0.3 and -0.7 (bright sunny) in Spain, in UK it is 0 and -0.3EV for shooting. With the D850 this tends to be more at 0 but I also tend to use an S curve in my post processing. But yes it tends to be a little underexposed in the highlights. I use CaptureOnePro for my images these days. There is a lot of talk about camera calibration using software that allows you to put a curve into the camera but I have never followed this up. |
|||||||||
amazing50
|
To me the D850 feels comfortable in my hands but found the Z7 too small when I looked at it at the dealers. Besides it his missing a GPS and fully articulating LCD that the D5300 has. To top it off it has less social media capabilities than a $200 smartphone.  |
|||||||||
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. |