compare 3 shots
Mar 27, 2019 11:19:27 #
Running some test shots with my new
Canon EOS RP. I wondered if I had a small subject in the distance, would it would be better to use the presumably better RF 24-105L lens and crop it to the extreme or use the 75-300 USM with less cropping, or use the cheapo 2x extender with the 75-300 with even less cropping. I cropped all the reveal about the same portion of this birch tree, which was about 25 feet from me in each case. The results surprised me, because I thought the cheap extender would kill the image, but to my eye it didn't.
Canon EOS RP. I wondered if I had a small subject in the distance, would it would be better to use the presumably better RF 24-105L lens and crop it to the extreme or use the 75-300 USM with less cropping, or use the cheapo 2x extender with the 75-300 with even less cropping. I cropped all the reveal about the same portion of this birch tree, which was about 25 feet from me in each case. The results surprised me, because I thought the cheap extender would kill the image, but to my eye it didn't.
RF 24-105L
(Download)
EF 75-300 USM
(Download)
EF 75-300 with 2x Promaster extender
(Download)
original scene rf 24-105 at 105
(Download)
Mar 27, 2019 11:39:26 #
Interesting, and informative. Mirrorless seems to hold a clear advantage with extenders.
Mar 27, 2019 12:34:12 #
bleirer wrote:
Running some test shots with my new br Canon EOS ... (show quote)
You should only use shots for comparism, that are in proper focus to begin with!
Mar 27, 2019 12:39:10 #
bleirer wrote:
Running some test shots with my new br Canon EOS ... (show quote)
Did you use good testing technique, i.e., sturdy tripod, remote trigger, all to reduce shake? Given the failure to use a target with very distinct lines that can be magnified for comparison, I would suspect these were handheld shots that fail to lead to a valid comparison. If you used good technique then I would suspect that the 24-105 may need microadjustment. There's no way a 75-300 should outperform a 24-105 especially with a 2x on it unless you cropped the 24-105 to such a ridiculous degree that it just fell apart, a potential solution to which would be upsizing the 24-105 image with software like Topaz Gigapixel and the crop it.
Mar 27, 2019 13:33:07 #
gessman wrote:
Did you use good testing technique, i.e., sturdy t... (show quote)
There's no such thing as micro adjust on mirrorless cameras ...
But, you've hit on the right item: the image from the 24-105 isn't in sharp focus, period, so why our OP has presented that image as a choice / comparison is somewhat beyond logic ... It would seem the zoom made the process of focusing on the target tree easier, but not for creating a valid comparison. Posting TIFs simply made the discussion more difficult. Were the crops even taken from images all shot at 105mm? As a general practice, the larger the image you can place on the sensor, the better the results will be. So, if you want one small distant point, 300 or 600 could be better than cropping from 105, but I'd start with 105 in sharp focus first if trying to compare.
Mar 27, 2019 15:28:52 #
I'm happy you pointed out that the tree is not in focus. I guess I just relied upon the beep of the autofocus when it must have been targeting something else and assumed the blur was from the extreme cropping. Though the light is different, I reshot using manual focus until the red outlines of the focus attentuator appeared, and then recropped the small area out of the larger image, presented here.
The practical question is simply what to do if the cute bear cub is in the distance: put on the not as good but longer tele, with or without an extender, or use the better shorter range lens and pull a crop from that? Don't say get a better tele, but I could possibly manage a better extender, if that would make a difference.
The practical question is simply what to do if the cute bear cub is in the distance: put on the not as good but longer tele, with or without an extender, or use the better shorter range lens and pull a crop from that? Don't say get a better tele, but I could possibly manage a better extender, if that would make a difference.
Mar 27, 2019 15:35:33 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
There's no such thing as micro adjust on mirrorles... (show quote)
Dang, I wish you hadn't told me that. Here I've been collecting all your astute advisory comments thinking there might be a chance of having them added as another book in the "New Testament" but all that's out the window now, dammit.
Below are two pics, one is of the top of my Sony a6500 mirrorless camera, which is all I really know about mirrorless cameras, just for identification purposes, and the other, a shot of a menu selection that should interest you some. 
Mar 27, 2019 15:40:24 #
bleirer wrote:
I'm happy you pointed out that the tree is not in focus. I guess I just relied upon the beep of the autofocus when it must have been targeting something else. Though the light is different, I reshot using manual focus until the red outlines of the focus attentuator appeared, and then recropped the small area out of the larger image, presented here.
On my monitor, this latest pic is even worse than the first one.
Mar 27, 2019 15:43:50 #
Well! That'll teach you to share information, eh! Thanks for posting. Some of the comments that followed seem to be attempts to inflate the poster's importance rather than to educate you or us. Facts taste best without dripping superiority.
Mar 27, 2019 16:19:46 #
gessman wrote:
On my monitor, this latest pic is even worse than the first one.
Do you mean to say that the tree is out of focus in the most recent one?
Mar 27, 2019 16:25:52 #
speters wrote:
You should only use shots for comparism, that are in proper focus to begin with!
Mar 27, 2019 16:28:11 #
I think the OP needs better glasses. Also cropping an image that much does not actually help. If you look at a billboard at a distance it is 'focused' if you crop it so that you are 'looking closely' you will discover that it looks blurry.
Mar 27, 2019 16:31:56 #
bleirer wrote:
Do you mean to say that the tree is out of focus in the most recent one?
It doesn't look like it's in focus to me and the light is different which may be playing a part also. It would be good if you could get another target and put it on a vertical wall out of either dark shadow or bright sunlight, something like this one that you can download and print, or google for one you like better: http://default.secure.media.ipcdigital.co.uk/11134/0000028b0/393a/FocusCardDownload.jpg
The download link for that target is down the page at:
https://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/latest/latest-announcements/take-better-photos-with-aps-free-camera-targets-2-10076
There are other charts on down the page below...
Mar 27, 2019 16:48:30 #
Mar 27, 2019 17:03:13 #
gessman wrote:
Dang, I wish you hadn't told me that. Here I've b... (show quote)
This might help, as well as being applicable to our OP's EOS RP rather then your equipment ..
https://digital-photography-school.com/3-reasons-why-mirrorless-cameras-are-better-than-digital-slrs-for-focusing/
A little bit more time in your a6500 user manual should help as well ...
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.