January 29, 2015, 11:39:05 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - AlanF

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 83
31
Lenses / Re: canon 7D2 with 100-400 ii lens with 1.4 Extender for birds
« on: January 15, 2015, 02:48:30 PM »
...............
The Tamron has deteriorated somewhat vs the sharper 300 series.


What a lens - the 300 f/2.8 II!
Still, I see you added the zoom (100-400II) to your collection. Is that because of the zoom? What is the benefit for you in the field?

The intentions was and still is to have a much lighter and smaller telephoto lens of high quality for when I go travelling abroad or want to have a less conspicuous camera/lens. I assumed that I would still use the incredible 300/2.8 + 2xTC for my usual birding near to home. The unexpected bonus has been that my wife has fallen for the 7DII/100-400mm II and we now go out together with my carrying the 5DIII/300x2 and her the zoom. The zoom capability is a bonus. I think taking both cameras and lenses on a safari would be perfect combination.

32
ePhotozine has just posted a review.
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/sigma-150-600mm-f-5-6-3-dg-os-hsm-sports-lens-review-26786

The MTFs are consistent with those reported by lenstip.It beats out the Tamron wide open at 150 and 300mm, but is very similar at the crucial 600mm - see also the review of the Tamron

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/tamron-sp-150-600mm-f-5-6-3-di-vc-usd-lens-review-23866

at f/8, there is nothing between them at any f. Again, the reviewer complains about the weight.

Here are the MTFs from the ePhotozine site, which is doing brilliantly for rapid reviewing (sigma = upper, tamron lower).

33
Lenses / Re: canon 7D2 with 100-400 ii lens with 1.4 Extender for birds
« on: January 15, 2015, 04:12:50 AM »
The choice between the 100-400mm II and the Tamron 150-600mm is not clear cut, but depends on your own preferences and circumstances. The Tamron is a cracking good lens at 400mm and pretty good at 600mm and f/8.  It is less than half the price of the Canon. What decided me to to sell the Tamron was primarily the Canon is a much smaller and slightly lighter package, which suits me for travel (and is now being used by my wife). The Canon on the 5DIII with a 1.4xTC is better than the Tamron at 600mm, and has better IS and AF as well. The 100-400mm without a TC on the 7DII is at least as good as the Tamron at 600mm on the 5DIII. Having said all that, the Tamron on FF is still an excellent and affordable choice for 600mm, but probably better used at 400mm and below on crop.

Regarding BIF and focal length, 400mm on crop and 600mm on FF are good compromises  between reach and field of view. It is difficult to keep up with fast flying birds, and 560-600mm on crop is too narrow a field for me, with my older and slower reflexes.

34
Lenses / Re: canon 7D2 with 100-400 ii lens with 1.4 Extender for birds
« on: January 15, 2015, 03:24:18 AM »
I owned the Tamron 150-600, and my copy only started to approach the image quality of the 100-400 ii if I kept the focal length at or below 500mm, stopped down to f8. The one advantage to the Tammy was, as stated above, the access to all of the focus points from 400-500 fl. But it was pretty slow to focus and hunted in anything but pretty good light. Was a stop or two behind on IS as well. In general, if fast AF is a real need, then the Tamron isn't your bag.

Thanks for the response.  So just so I understand does that mean that you did direct comparisons of the 100-400ii and the Tamron?  You then got rid of the Tamron based on your findings?  Do you have any shots that directly compare?  Sorry if I misunderstood what you said.

Also did you see the shots I posted of the juncos at 552mm?  I don't find them soft, but maybe my screen is no good  :o.  Please let me know what you think and I don't mind criticism.

I want to buy the Canon, have money in hand and am waiting on hard proof that it is better than the Tamron.  I just have not seen it yet.

Here are a few others with the Tamron at 500 or higher for as close to a direct comparison as I can get.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/120553232@N02/15548798790/in/photostream/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/120553232@N02/15611898254/in/photostream/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/120553232@N02/15502558944/

Isaac
Here are some of my tests. I tested the 100-400mm II vs Tamron and 300mm f/2.8 IIonly on the 5DIII. But, I have some comparisons with the 300mm f/2.8 II plus extenders on the 70D. Thee tests are at the limits of resolution on the centre of a badly printed iso12233 chart, fairly close up. They are shown as unsharpened jpegs from RAW and also sharpened at 0.9 px 100% USM.

a, 5DIII
At 400mm, the focus breathing of the 100-400mm II is significant at the shorter distance and the Tamron at 400mm gives an image that is slightly better resolved because of its longer focal length. However, the 100-400 mm at 560mm with 1.4xTC gives very goo resolution, better than the Tamron at f/8 and 600mm. The quality is comparable with the 300mm f/2.8 plus TCs.
b, 70D
The Tamron has deteriorated somewhat vs the sharper 300 series.


35
Lenses / Re: canon 7D2 with 100-400 ii lens with 1.4 Extender for birds
« on: January 14, 2015, 04:41:23 PM »
Lee
I have the camera(s), I have the lens, I have the extender, and I have no axe to grind. To me, it is not worth  using the 1.4xTC on the 100-400mm II and the 7DII. If I was taking a picture of the monochrome moon using a tripod, I would use the extender. But, for general bird photography, no. Though I do use it with the 5DIII.

I am waiting for DxO to do a full test of the lens - whatever anyone says about the site when comparing Nikons with Canons, they do a good job of comparing Canon lenses on different bodies. Here is a comparison of the Tamron 150-600mm on the 5DIII and 70D. Whereas the Tamron is good at f/8 at all focal lengths on the 5DIII, it becomes weak at above 400mm on the 70D (just click on the charts to magnify them). I think similar tests with the 100-400mm II ± extenders will be the same.

http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Tamron-SP-150-600mm-F-5-63-Di-VC-USD-Model-A011-Canon-on-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-versus-Tamron-SP-150-600mm-F-5-63-Di-VC-USD-Model-A011-Canon-on-Canon-EOS-70D___1263_795_1263_895

36
Lenses / Re: canon 7D2 with 100-400 ii lens with 1.4 Extender for birds
« on: January 14, 2015, 02:43:58 PM »
Alan, you need to shoot your targets from far enough away that the resolution limit is somewhere in the range of your target.  In both of these shots, the resolution limit is beyond the high-end of your target so nothing can be determined.

I was 25 metres away, with a good size target. You can look at the sharpness of the numbers and the curves in the same way as you do for images on TDP. The 1.4xTC is ever so slightly better. Here is the small print on a Focal Target at the same distance - the 1.4xTC is slightly  better, but the gain is hardly worth the hassle of holding a longer lens steady at a narrower aperture. (Top = 400mm, middle = 400mm upscaled 1.4x in PS, bottom = 400 + 1.4xTC). I have tried the lens with and without the TC on birds and get a much better keeper rate without the TC. On the 5DIII, the 1.4xTC is great.

37
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM
« on: January 14, 2015, 09:50:41 AM »

..........Unfortunately, I have lost my 7DII and 100-400 - my wife has appropriated them.  We now both take bird photos.  She uses the 7DII while I have to lug around the 5DIII +  300 mm f/2.8 II + 2xTC. Frankly, t don't get much extra for the additional weight and cost.

But that's nice to share this wonderful passion together.....no?
Absolutely yes. I think she needs a 400mm DO II for her next birthday.

38
Lenses / Re: canon 7D2 with 100-400 ii lens with 1.4 Extender for birds
« on: January 14, 2015, 03:43:27 AM »
My experience is that there is no significant advantage of using the 1.4xTC with the 100-400 II on the 7DII (but it does better on the 5DIII). The loss of IQ from the TC combined with an extra stop of noise gives it hardly any advantage over the bare lens plus a slight loss of AF and restriction to one focus square at f/8. Here are some shots of the centre of an iso12233 chart done with the bare lens on the 7DII compared with the 1.4xTC added and also the bare lens upscaled 1.4x using Photoshop. When colour is involved, as with bird plumage etc, the TC will fare worse because of any CA added.

ps - you can see the loss of IQ on adding the TC on the TDP site
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=972&Camera=963&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=2&LensComp=972&CameraComp=963&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0

The 7DII works brilliantly with very sharp lenses but the smaller pixels are more sensitive to softening of the lens whereas the FF is more resilient.

39
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM
« on: January 14, 2015, 12:26:40 AM »
A lady had one of these down below a dam where there were a few of us taking eagle photos. with the extender you only have the center point using the 7dii. She thought something was wrong with it but i explained that only the center point works with an f/8 lens. With the tamron you have more usable AF points. That is something to consider.

I have spent a lot of time comparing the 100-400 II with and without the 1.4xTC on the 5DIII and 7DII.  For my gear, the 5D + 1.4 xTC  + 100-400 @ 400mm is hardly distinguishable from the bare 100-400 on the 7DII in terms of resolution and noise.  Further, adding the TC to the 100-400 on the 7DII is a waste of time as the degradation of image and increase in noise nullifies any increase in resolution. For my bird photography, the 7DII plus 100-400 is far better than the Tamron 150-600 at f/6.3 600mm on the 5D and slightly better than the Tamron at f/8.  I didn't like the Tamron at 600mm on the 7DII or 70D.

So, I recommend using the 100-400mm II at 400mm on the 7DII or 400 or 560 on the 5DIII.

Unfortunately, I have lost my 7DII and 100-400 - my wife has appropriated them.  We now both take bird photos.  She uses the 7DII while I have to lug around the 5DIII +  300 mm f/2.8 II + 2xTC. Frankly, t don't get much extra for the additional weight and cost. 

40
Lenses / Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM Lens Review
« on: January 13, 2015, 05:39:44 PM »
The first review of the EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II has just appeared in ePhotozine
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/canon-ef-400mm-f-4-do-is-ii-usm-lens-review-26785

The sharpness at f/4 is phenomenal. The sharpness falls off with increasing f number, and rapidly above f/11.  From the Canon MTFs, at 560mm with the 1.4xTC it is probably sharper than the 300mm f/2.8 II at 600mm with the 2xTC and slightly lighter. It is a superb lens - pity it is so expensive.

41
PowerShot / Re: Convert the PowerShot N into a Rolleiflex Style Camera
« on: January 13, 2015, 09:45:31 AM »
It's worthy of Surapon!

42
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 150-600 sports AFMA
« on: January 09, 2015, 09:19:35 AM »
Can you use FoCal the way Neuro does? Take your own images and feed them to the program.

43
Photography Technique / Re: How to Expose and get sharp Focus of Moon
« on: January 08, 2015, 07:22:47 AM »
There are now several posts that you get sharper images on the old 100-400 and now the new 100-400 II with IS turned off. Is that true for just these lenses or for all lenses? Why does IS cause problems? Does using a tripod cause the problems (I thought the newer lenses detected they were on a tripod)?

44
Lenses / Re: New Canon 100-400mm Mk2 lens with 2x extender mk3
« on: January 07, 2015, 10:15:32 AM »
Just an observation: I'd have thought that in practice 2x extenders are best kept for fast lenses.

There is some truth in that. However, for someone chasing birds, any addition to the focal length is welcome. This usually results in experimentation with extenders.

Nevertheless, getting a supertelephoto is well outside of a normal budget, the 2x extenders provide a lot of additional focal length albeit at a price in IQ.

+1, i tend to always have a TC with me, just in case! :)

Chasing birds at f/11 without AF is not easy, to say the least, unless the bird is sitting immobile. In my opinion, the sheer inconvenience in using a 2xTC on an f/5.6 and the concomitant loss of IQ are not worth the the extra reach over 1.4x, which will be fairly marginal anyway because of the poorer IQ and the higher noise.

45
6D/24-105. Enjoy the sights and do not be a slave to your gear, especially a tripod.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 83