CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

If the question is distant wildlife vs cropping pictures of trees and the universe of options is limited to a 24-105 vs a 75-300, your longer focal length is the better solution in this universe. I'd be surprised the 3rd party extender would be acceptable to the native 300, but your samples did seem to show an acceptable result. I'd like to see a better controlled test to confirm.

bleirer

How would you set up such a test?

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Your anticipated bear is going to be more distant like the fence in the test picture. For size and shape, you might try a mailbox at the approximate distance, or the license plate of a car. Assuming your doubler will take the aperture to f/11, use a tripod and the same exposure based on f/11. Capture 5- to 10- frames with each configuration. On your computer, pick the best of each config, crop the selected shots to the same size and compare at 100% view.

Practice too using the EVF, not a focus confirmation beep. Use the EFV to zoom to 100% and focus there. Although your test is a static subject, practice using SERVO for your moving subjects, see page 185 for some discussion in your EOS RP manual.

foathog Loc: Greensboro, NC

What do I think? HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE AND HORRIBLE. Get your eyes checked.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

inconclusive.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Yes, extenders can get the job done. Not many of us have to crop an image so extremely that tiny defects become visible.

Blair Shaw Jr Loc: Dunnellon,Florida

Wow....is it just me or does someone need to see an Eye Doctor.......??????

AKWARD !

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

From the images posted, I'd say that the 75-300 image is more clear than the others. From the posted image, I'd NOT want the RF lens. So that's good to know.

Bill_de Loc: US

There is on Nikon Z's

"To summarise what’s below: it’s an excellent camera! The autofocus is very consistent with both native and adapted lenses, but we have shown that calibration will still give you improvements so it’s great that Nikon offers AF Fine Tune capability."

https://blog.reikanfocal.com/2018/10/the-new-nikon-z7-investigating-with-reikan-focal/


---

agillot

next time use a more colorfull subject .i use a can or bottle with a nice sharp label / proper light , use a tripod , higher speed , 2 f stops from full open , lower iso .then compare . now , extreme crop does destroy the pictures , there is a limit .

bleirer

Thank you to those with constructive replies, I am not thin skinned and not a beginner, just trying to get used to a new camera, so I learned something. One thing I learned was how to turn on the focus peaking. Even in autofocus you can turn the focus ring to fine tune and the in focus area glows red more strongly as the focus improves. Another thing I learned is how to use the ignore list for those choosing to demean or insult others. Isn't life too short to use your time for that?

Harry0 Loc: Gardena, Cal

If your 2X extender is like mine, it's really just a piece of glass in a mount.
If every thing betwixt the subject and the sensor is clean, clear and parallel, there shouldn't be any cause for errors. It looks like the camera compensated for the f-stop differential admirably.
AND as long as you have a good, clean, parallel extender it wouldn't create noise, blur or distortion- but it definitely would exaggerate it.

AND do you want to check your filters? Got a projector, or have access to one? A kid's friend dropped off his mini projector for the weekend- if he sells me his (2 year) old one he can (afford) justify getting a new one. ANYway, we tried it out (I like 'em), and I was showing (off) to SWMBO why I have funny (B&W film) filters. Put my very pale (contrast) yellow filter in front- it sucketh so badly! I cleaned cleaned cleaned- and there was a small distortion that I could rotate around. My CHEAP green and 2 purple ones were clear, 1 of my 3 piece set of NDs was blurry, as was 2 UVs. I tossed 6 out of 15.

SO: in this chain of assemblage, check each item individually. Tripod, remote or timer, decent practice target, 1 nekkid clean lens at a time. THEN again with the extender. Remove the extender and add your filter(s). Then with everything. This may sound like a lot, but if you're setup it's maybe a half hour's work. Then you'll know.

foathog Loc: Greensboro, NC

did you want me to tell you that they were all beautiful? There are people on here that will do that for you. I'm not one of them. When you ask for an opinion I simply assume you are looking for an honest answer. they were all overeposed AND out of focus. But I AM sorry if I hurt your feelings. Next time tell us that you are just looking for POSITIVE responses.

gessman Loc: Colorado

I wasn't going to respond to this wee bit o' snark but have reconsidered and feel I should now that we know that both Sony and Nikon have provided for microadjust in their mirrorless cameras. That article you cite is nearly four years old and in the trailing comments the author was challenged and seemed to have no response, admitting that his only experience with mirrorless was with Fuji, not perhaps the mirrorless leader of the free world as of yet.

I'm not doing this to challenge your position as the consummate uhh resident expert on all things photographic but rather to say that perhaps you are the one who needs to "bone up" some in this instance and maybe be careful about making definitive comments that aren't definitive, like this: "There is no such thing as microadjust on mirrorless cameras." I try not to talk about stuff I don't know at least a little something about and if I should hazard a guess on something, I usually add a caveat to that effect. Perhaps if you... well, you know. You could have saved yourself all that time you spent googling up some authoritative source to make me look like an idiot, your motive for which is as of yet not understood.

What are the chances that Sony would include "microadjust" into their cameras just to cover their own arse with their "a" mount lens and their "a to e" mount adapters. About the same time that article was written, the Sony a6000 was just hitting the street, and a lot has happened since then. For instance, the Sigma mc-11 adapter, which is a game changer, had not been released but Sony, obviously trying to be everything for everybody, evidently knew that if their own lens and adapters would need microadjusting that surely any 3rd party stuff that might appear in the future might also need that although we shouldn't expect to find any mention of that in a Sony manual specific to one camera. I have microadjusted my a6500, mc-11, and a couple of my Canon lens quite effectively, notwithstanding that blurb you quoted from the a6500 manual.

bleirer

So I tried the experiment again, based on the feedback. Remember the goal was to decide what to pull out of the limited camera bag if there is something small in the distance that I can't get close to. Right now my choices are an extreme crop of the RF24-105, or the EF 75-300 with a big crop, or the 75-300 with a cheap 2x doubler and so less cropping. I put the camera on a tripod, made sure I was at f11, set the shutter to auto which is 1/focal length in this camera, auto ISO with a limit. Got a colorful package out of the trash and hung it way back on the fence, tried to focus carefully, set it to 2 seconds of timer to help with camera shake, and here's what I got.

EF 75-300 cropped

(Download)

EF 75-300 with 2x Promaster extender cropped

(Download)

original scene rf 24-105 at 105

(Download)

original scene rf 24-105 extreme crop

(Download)