Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: dylee8
Page: <<prev 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 next>>
Jan 22, 2016 16:48:29   #
Thank you MT. D7000 does provide more pixels than equivalent cropped D750. So in some instances it still makes sense to use D7000 for long zoom, as you described.

MT Shooter wrote:
The D7000 does still give you more pixels on target than the cropped D750 image when using the same lens. In excellent lighting conditions the D7000 image will be slightly better. However, in less than optimal light, the vastly better sensor and processor of the D750 will perform better.
I use the D800E as my workhorse, but still carry a D7200 for those times when I need more pixels on target with a long lens (Soon to be replaced by the D500).
The field of view (angle of view) is indeed what actually changes due to the smaller area of the crop sensor. When the "crop factor" of that sensor is applied, the 35mm "EQUIVALENT" field of view is attained, i.e. 600mm x 1.5X = 900mm. All this is telling you is that a FF camera would have to be using a 900mm lens to get the same field of view as you are getting on your crop sensor body. So no, it is not misleading so long as you understand the math and principal involved.
The D7000 does still give you more pixels on targe... (show quote)
Go to
Jan 22, 2016 16:46:18   #
You are right!!! Crop sensor is 24x16mm, FF is 36x24mm. So it is 1.5X for each dimension. Total FF area is 2.25 that of Crop. So Crop Megapixel density is much higher than FF.

dsmeltz wrote:
Your math is wrong. An APS-C is about .485 the size of a FF. So the MP left on the FF after you crop to get the same field of view would yield around 11.643 MP, not 16.
Go to
Jan 22, 2016 16:42:39   #
From discussions in this thread it appears crop sensor is preferred over full frame for wild life.

oldtigger wrote:
if crop sensor gave equal or better results there would be no market for full frame
Go to
Jan 22, 2016 16:39:50   #
There are a few suggestions to do that. I will try that out over the weekend.

Math78 wrote:
Since you own both cameras, take an identical picture (same focal length) and compare. Is the cropped D750 the same as the D7000 uncropped picture?
Go to
Jan 22, 2016 10:48:29   #
I have a Nikon D750 and D7000, and a sigma 150-600 lens that I use for wild life photography.

For a long time my understanding was that for the same lens, a cropped sensor camera has a longer reach compared to full frame. There is an "equivalent focal length", in this case 225-900mm. Taking wild life pictures with the DX camera is preferred because of this.

But then I read that lens focal lengths don't change. The term equivalent focal length is misleading. It really is angle of view. Because full frame camera has a bigger sensor (in this case 1.5X). It captures more picture compared to cropped frame, and gives the illusion of less reach.

Also the D750 is 24 megapixels, compared to 16 on the D7000. Even considering the sensor size differences, the "Megapixel Density" are identical. This means that if I start cropping the pictures from both cameras, I should get the exact same resolution - even though I am cropping more on the D750.

Therefore I should not be using the D7000 at all - wild life or otherwise. For lens reach/picture resolution there is no difference, and D750 offers so much more.

Is this a valid? I like to get opinions from fellow UHHs.
Go to
Nov 8, 2015 10:45:25   #
Thanks for checking out Meives. That was my issue. I had the camera a long time so I have no concern. I only recently purchased the lens and found it hard to maneuvre - size, weight and focus. The Keeper rate had gone down.

I was hoping the issue is my skills with long lens, rather than the lens itself. So far all suggestions seem to confirm that.

Meives wrote:
I like to look at all the data to check things out. I don't know the quality of the Sigma 150-600 mm, but some lens have problems. I think your camera settings look OK. David
Go to
Nov 6, 2015 04:03:27   #
Wakodahatchee wetland in Delray Beach. It's a great place to photograph birds, specially early morning and late afternoon. It's about 40 minutes from Davie.
Go to
Nov 2, 2015 04:33:36   #
boberic wrote:
Subject movement,also there is no feather detail. Was this shot hand held? If so there might be a little camera shake as well. I see tha this shot was taken at a 35mm equivilent of about 500 focal length. So a speed of 1/800 just was not fast enough.


It was shot with tripod. Maybe it was the sunlight on white feathers - I hope its not the lens. I will need to increase the speed for future shots. Thanks.
Go to
Nov 2, 2015 04:29:24   #
davyboy wrote:
if you shoot in high speed burst you may get a goood one


Thanks yes should have done that. I normally don't shoot in continuous mode.
Go to
Nov 2, 2015 04:26:06   #
Jackdoor wrote:
And any reason not to open up to f7.1? It all helps, and when shooting one bird, DOF isn't likely to be a problem.


Thats a good suggestion. f7.1 should be a good enough DOF for this.
Go to
Oct 31, 2015 18:20:06   #
Thanks all. I had my camera preset to ISO 1000, f8, and aperture priority. When I saw this in the backyard I just grab the camera and shoot. I am now setting the ISO to 2000. Hopefully no motion blur next time when fast action occurs.
Go to
Oct 30, 2015 18:26:57   #
Thank you all. Makes sense. I was hoping this is the answer, as opposed to depth of field of my lens at 600mm.
Go to
Oct 30, 2015 16:00:41   #
This is taken with Nikon D7000 and Sigma 150-600mm C on a tripod. As indicated in EXIF, f 8.0 and 1/800 sec. Any idea why it is sharp around the eye and blurry at the beak? Thanks.


(Download)
Go to
Sep 4, 2015 14:04:14   #
Have them ship to a UPS store close by and you can pick it up. Typically a $5 UPS charge.
Go to
Aug 23, 2015 16:45:50   #
150-600


(Download)
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.