Eagles at 1120 mm??
Feb 26, 2023 09:48:05 #
I took my new R7 with EF 500 mm f/4 and attached my 1.4ext. I handheld it and shot some photos of eagles at Sunset Marina in Rock Island, Illinois. I was surprised how well some came out. Missed some shots because I couldn’t find them in viewfinder.
Feb 26, 2023 09:54:41 #
The eagle look great! But, to be clear, this is a 500mm focal length. Everything from the extender is 'magnification' of the 500mm focal length image to an equivalent focal length of 700mm, when magnified (expanded) over the sensor. Everything from the cropped sensor is an equivalent field of view. If you'd had an actually 1120mm lens, imagine how hard it would be to find and track a moving subject with such a lens. Even with a superior EOS R7 mirrorless wonder.
Feb 26, 2023 10:04:04 #
Feb 26, 2023 10:05:02 #
This happens all the time Paul. A lot of people do not really understand the use of extenders.
WJH
WJH
Feb 26, 2023 10:11:19 #
williejoha wrote:
This happens all the time Paul. A lot of people do not really understand the use of extenders.
WJH
WJH
I'm just doing my part, whether appreciated or not.
Feb 26, 2023 10:16:35 #
Feb 26, 2023 11:42:41 #
Feb 26, 2023 13:05:00 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
The eagle look great! But, to be clear, this is a 500mm focal length. Everything from the extender is 'magnification' of the 500mm focal length image to an equivalent focal length of 700mm, when magnified (expanded) over the sensor. Everything from the cropped sensor is an equivalent field of view. If you'd had an actually 1120mm lens, imagine how hard it would be to find and track a moving subject with such a lens. Even with a superior EOS R7 mirrorless wonder.
I actually meant to say 1120 mm equivalent but in my haste to post I didn’t put that in. So is 1120 mm equivalent correct to say?
Feb 26, 2023 15:54:10 #
Mi630 wrote:
I actually meant to say 1120 mm equivalent but in my haste to post I didn’t put that in. So is 1120 mm equivalent correct to say?
Correct enough. Although, the effective 700mm focal length is more accurate, as the crop factor doesn't change the level magnification, it just gives the same effective 700mm image over a smaller (denser) array of pixels. Within the confines of the cropped sensor's 3:2 aspect 'rectangle', the image is exactly the same as the full-frame version.
Feb 26, 2023 16:13:35 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
Correct enough. Although, the effective 700mm focal length is more accurate, as the crop factor doesn't change the level magnification, it just gives the same effective 700mm image over a smaller (denser) array of pixels. Within the confines of the cropped sensor's 3:2 aspect 'rectangle', the image is exactly the same as the full-frame version.
Thanks
Feb 27, 2023 06:17:29 #
Mi630 wrote:
I took my new R7 with EF 500 mm f/4 and attached my 1.4ext. I handheld it and shot some photos of eagles at Sunset Marina in Rock Island, Illinois. I was surprised how well some came out. Missed some shots because I couldn’t find them in viewfinder.
Feb 27, 2023 07:12:57 #
Mi630 wrote:
I took my new R7 with EF 500 mm f/4 and attached my 1.4ext. I handheld it and shot some photos of eagles at Sunset Marina in Rock Island, Illinois. I was surprised how well some came out. Missed some shots because I couldn’t find them in viewfinder.
Nice shots.
Feb 27, 2023 07:59:34 #
Feb 27, 2023 09:13:00 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
The eagle look great! But, to be clear, this is a 500mm focal length. Everything from the extender is 'magnification' of the 500mm focal length image to an equivalent focal length of 700mm, when magnified (expanded) over the sensor. Everything from the cropped sensor is an equivalent field of view. If you'd had an actually 1120mm lens, imagine how hard it would be to find and track a moving subject with such a lens. Even with a superior EOS R7 mirrorless wonder.
Yep, many just don't understand this!
Feb 27, 2023 09:21:32 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.