Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Realistic distance for shooting with a long fixed lens.
Page <<first <prev 3 of 5 next> last>>
Apr 6, 2017 09:52:44   #
RRS Loc: Not sure
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
Jolly - having shoot with both the 300 and 500 primes and both the 2x and 1.4x extenders, I looked at the deer images and think the issue is something other than micro adjustment or equipment. I don't see camera movement. I wonder if the was moisture on the lens or filter?

I wonder also about your AF focus method. The animals look stable so it doesn't seem like the animal changed position in single shot AF.

My summary opinion: these images should be much sharper given the equipment involved. You can find numerous examples of photographers using similar or the exact same configuration with results showing extremely sharp results.

I trust Canon's IS, but I trust a fast shutter speed and higher ISO even more. I also find continuous AF and back button focus to be a more responsive configuration when using an extender.
Jolly - having shoot with both the 300 and 500 pri... (show quote)


Where did you find the deer images?

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 10:06:32   #
aberration
 
Dust within lens or whipped up, heat waves, hazy moisture, spindly tripod, altitude, wind shake, any other kind of camera movement,image eyepiece correction, shmutzy lens, smoker home, hand tremor,truck rumbling within unsafe distance, color correction in lens, other aberration correction in lens, lots and lots of even clear air, ad nauseum. Any subject, with perfect lens, on the moon likely to meet most standards. Otherwise, imperfections abound. Some flaws repeated in another form within diatribe. Sorry. Best we can do is please ouselves, then perhaps others.

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 10:18:33   #
Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan
 
Did someone mention how satellite cameras are able to resolve details the size of license plates from space?

Reply
 
 
Apr 6, 2017 10:46:31   #
ballsafire Loc: Lafayette, Louisiana
 
Fotoartist wrote:
Did someone mention how satellite cameras are able to resolve details the size of license plates from space?


Yes! I'd be very interested….

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 10:58:10   #
Bill_de Loc: US
 
ballsafire wrote:
Yes! I'd be very interested….


Have you tried to Google it?

--

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 11:19:49   #
Jolly Roger Loc: Dorset. UK
 
RRS wrote:
Where did you find the deer images?


If you go to another post I did yesterday titled "Leucistic Sika Deer" you will find them.

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 11:27:25   #
RRS Loc: Not sure
 
Jolly Roger wrote:
If you go to another post I did yesterday titled "Leucistic Sika Deer" you will find them.


Thanks, I'll take a look.

Reply
 
 
Apr 6, 2017 11:27:25   #
cfbudd Loc: Atlanta, Georgia
 
TomV wrote:
I agree. I have a similar setup (Minolta 600mm, Sony a99ii and matching 1.4 TC) and at that distance things are not as sharp as when I shoot a subject from 150' away. You need to increase your shutter speed substantially for that setup as well to give yourself a fighting chance. In your photos of the deer you cannot get too much better resolution with the conditions you have. The grasses are slim and any wind movement will cause detail loss. You certainly are too far away for any fur detail. The DOF at that distance is in the order of 10s of yards.

I would try using the same setup and testing at different distances. This will give you an idea of how your photos degrade with distance.
There is also a loss in resolution when using a full-frame lens on a cropped sensor camera.
I agree. I have a similar setup (Minolta 600mm, So... (show quote)


Huh? Loss of resolution using a full frame lens?

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 13:22:09   #
wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado
 
Jolly Roger wrote:
This is primarily directed to members that shoot with long fixed lenses.

Yesterday I was out shooting with the 7DII, 600 f4 plus 1.4TC.
(I have just posted a couple of shots under the post title of "Leucistic Sika Deer").
The shots were at approx. Half a mile. Sky overcast. Temperature approx. 12 Degrees Celcius.
I suspect I need to micro adjust this setup but I can't see that it would result in much better images.
My question is:- Is it realistic or not, to expect sharp images at this distance?
Thanks in anticipation.
This is primarily directed to members that shoot w... (show quote)


f4 seems like it was wide open. You might want to go to SLRGear a see how the lense does without the teleconverter at wide open. I know that the Olympus 300 f4, as sharp as it is, is slightly sharper stopped down from wide open. Add the 1.4X tele and its optical design, and the image quality at wide open may be affect more than if it was stopped down a stop or two.

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 13:24:23   #
amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
 
Jolly Roger wrote:
This is primarily directed to members that shoot with long fixed lenses.

Yesterday I was out shooting with the 7DII, 600 f4 plus 1.4TC.
(I have just posted a couple of shots under the post title of "Leucistic Sika Deer").
The shots were at approx. Half a mile. Sky overcast. Temperature approx. 12 Degrees Celcius.
I suspect I need to micro adjust this setup but I can't see that it would result in much better images.
My question is:- Is it realistic or not, to expect sharp images at this distance?
Thanks in anticipation.
This is primarily directed to members that shoot w... (show quote)


I am not entirely sure of the distance... but the image below was done with Canon 500mm IS lens fitted with both Canon 2X II and 1.4X II teleconverters (1400mm effective focal length...image EXIF is incorrect), on an older, 6MP APS-C camera (so no micro adjustment possible and equivalent to 2240mm on full frame). Everything was mounted a stable tripod and in-lens image stabilization was engaged (its the self-cancelling type, on this lens). I don't recall using mirror lockup, but probably not since 1/160 shutter speed isn't prone to mirror slap. Largely un-cropped here, image was done at ISO 200 and was shot RAW. A bit of sharpening plus some boost of contrast and color saturation were needed in post processing:



Image is more an experiment with the stacked teleconverters than a serious shot. It's okay in small size and at Internet resolutions, but not very printable much larger than 5x7".

The problem with super long telephoto work at great distances is that atmospheric conditions come into play... and you can't do much about them. Above was shot shortly after a rain shower when the air was clearer than usual. It was also lightly overcast, with some late afternoon sun peeking through on the right. Cool, too... so there weren't any heat mirage effects. Little or no wind, either. Even a light breeze can have an effect at such distances. I don't recall if I put a sandbag on top of the lens/camera rig... I do that sometimes when using very long telephotos, to help absorb vibrations.

High density sensors such as 7DII are probably more susceptible to camera shake blur, than older low resolution models such as was used above. Canon issued a white paper about this, around the time they introduced the original, 18MP 7D. They recommended a step or two higher shutter speeds to offset the increased possibility of shake blur.... It's probably even more of a consideration with 20MP 7DII and 70D, the various 24MP APS-C models... even the 5Ds models, whose sensors have virtually the same density as 7DII's.

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 13:57:27   #
robertjerl Loc: Corona, California
 
jerryc41 wrote:
How about 250,000 miles? Members have posted sharp images of the moon.

Those "sharp" details in moon shots are measured in miles.

Reply
 
 
Apr 6, 2017 14:02:24   #
robertjerl Loc: Corona, California
 
Fotoartist wrote:
Did someone mention how satellite cameras are able to resolve details the size of license plates from space?


But those camera and lens combos cost the GNP of some small third world nations.

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 14:13:07   #
bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada
 
Jolly Roger wrote:
This is primarily directed to members that shoot with long fixed lenses.

Yesterday I was out shooting with the 7DII, 600 f4 plus 1.4TC.
(I have just posted a couple of shots under the post title of "Leucistic Sika Deer").
The shots were at approx. Half a mile. Sky overcast. Temperature approx. 12 Degrees Celcius.
I suspect I need to micro adjust this setup but I can't see that it would result in much better images.
My question is:- Is it realistic or not, to expect sharp images at this distance?
Thanks in anticipation.
This is primarily directed to members that shoot w... (show quote)

The last lens in any configuration is the atmosphere! The more moving air, the worse the image quality!! To really see the problem shoot a video with that long lens, then sit back and watch the image roil, pinch, wave, etc...

Of course, one can use the approach astrophotographers use; shoot multiple subs and use software to pick the best one or do it manually. With a 600mm lens I would recommend 40-50 subs in order to pick that really good one.

bwa

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 14:48:52   #
Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan
 
You gave everything but the F stop.

amfoto1 wrote:
I am not entirely sure of the distance... but the image below was done with Canon 500mm IS lens fitted with both Canon 2X II and 1.4X II teleconverters (1400mm effective focal length...image EXIF is incorrect), on an older, 6MP APS-C camera (so no micro adjustment possible and equivalent to 2240mm on full frame). Everything was mounted a stable tripod and in-lens image stabilization was engaged (its the self-cancelling type, on this lens). I don't recall using mirror lockup, but probably not since 1/160 shutter speed isn't prone to mirror slap. Largely un-cropped here, image was done at ISO 200 and was shot RAW. A bit of sharpening plus some boost of contrast and color saturation were needed in post processing:



Image is more an experiment with the stacked teleconverters than a serious shot. It's okay in small size and at Internet resolutions, but not very printable much larger than 5x7".

The problem with super long telephoto work at great distances is that atmospheric conditions come into play... and you can't do much about them. Above was shot shortly after a rain shower when the air was clearer than usual. It was also lightly overcast, with some late afternoon sun peeking through on the right. Cool, too... so there weren't any heat mirage effects. Little or no wind, either. Even a light breeze can have an effect at such distances. I don't recall if I put a sandbag on top of the lens/camera rig... I do that sometimes when using very long telephotos, to help absorb vibrations.

High density sensors such as 7DII are probably more susceptible to camera shake blur, than older low resolution models such as was used above. Canon issued a white paper about this, around the time they introduced the original, 18MP 7D. They recommended a step or two higher shutter speeds to offset the increased possibility of shake blur.... It's probably even more of a consideration with 20MP 7DII and 70D, the various 24MP APS-C models... even the 5Ds models, whose sensors have virtually the same density as 7DII's.
I am not entirely sure of the distance... but the ... (show quote)

Reply
Apr 6, 2017 15:26:47   #
Kissel vonKeister Loc: Georgia
 
Jolly Roger wrote:
I've never seen any Deer roaming about on the surface of the moon.


You might try some psychedelic substances :-)

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 5 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.