Big Lens Discussion

[r.harris1]

No post-processing tool in the world can replace lost data. That's basic physics. You can use filters and sharpening to create the illusion of a cleaner image to untrained human eyes but you can't replace actual image data.

The computer guys have an expression for this: GIGO. Garbage In, Garbage Out. With digital post processing, you can do a better job of concealing the garbage, but it essentially still is garbage.

That's why there are still tripods.

This isn't some new discovery either. Pretty much all of this was formally codified in optical physics terms in the nineteenth century.

The main benefit to digital cameras is that you can take 10+ images per second and just maybe one of those handheld shots is clearly that the rest. That was not cost effective 20+ years ago when a 36-exposure roll of slide film & the requisite E-6/C-41 processing totalled $20-30.

The pro 35mm SLRs from that era had mirror lockup (MLU) to reduce the image degration from the vibration caused when the reflex mirror flipped up. It is also why there were remote cable shutter release cords.

Even today, not all tripods are created equal. Tripods have different performance characteristics based on size, weight, construction material. A heavy Gitzo metal tripod with fewer leg segments is going to transmit less vibration than a flimsy lightweight carbon fiber tripod.

For those of you who say "I can get great handheld shots with my 600mm honker", I believe you. I'm also convinced that you deleted 50-100 crummy shots on your dSLR. In the old days, you would have burned through $100 of film/processing. Even if you could shoot at 10fps on the best SLRs, you'd still have to reload.

High-capacity digital storage cards have changed the game. In the old days, professional underwater photographers dived with 10-12 SLRs in waterproof housings because each SLR body was only useful for 36 exposures.

For the best final image quality, you need to start with good source material.

There's a reason why Olympic biathletes and other shooters use support. Even a tenth of a millimeter movement during a camera shot can result in a lot of blur particularly in telephoto images. Again, this topic has been beaten to death for decades upon decades.

What you say is certainly true. That said, I'd also say that it is easier to get better hand-held shots on modern longer lenses and modern bodies via image stabilization (IS) tech (in the lens, body or both). Higher ISO capabilities in the same modern bodies help too, though that degrades image quality by reducing dynamic range and SNR (which reduces color fidelity, among other things). Noise reduction software can help to some degree but to your point, we're already starting with a degraded image with less latitude in post.

When I'm ambitious (read: not being the lazy guy I normally am), I do carry my tank of a tripod and gimbal on my bird/animal shoots. It lets me get the best possible image quality by allowing me to have a better balance between being closer to base ISO and having a reasonable shutter speed than I can with IS technology.

 

[dmb8021]

Since I don’t know much about the mirrorless cameras, I wasn’t sure if this suggestion would be relevant, but if you find that the camera isn’t focusing where you have the focus point (front or back focusing), you might want fine tune your autofocus. I think because you are using an F mount lens with the adapter, you might want to do this.

 

[tizeye]

I'm a Gitzo girl myself, and have been for many years. I had a Manfrotto once but once I discovered Gitzo and also the Arca-Swiss clamp system I went with that and have never looked back.

Likewise with Arca-Swiss. I replaced all heads on my tripods with the exception of one where there was no competing head, but they make a Manfrotto to Arca-Swiss adapter, so can keep an Arca plate on camera (also on lens mount) for easy switching. While I have a heavy/steady aluminum Manfrotto that will switch between video and pano heads, have become a big fan of carbon fiber for my lighter duty tripod and monopod. My hands don't freeze when I grab it during the winter either.

Back to the subject of long lens. For hikes with a long lens, prefer this which found at local camera store, and CHEAP! https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/822252-REG/Sirui_BSRP326_P_326_6_Section_Carbon_Fiber.html. I really like it and not certain the premium price models provide any benefit. This is the one I put the adapter on as I like the Manfrotto specific monopod head I had, but a ball head would work fine too, switching camera from portrait to landscape orientation. With BIF, you don't need a tripod with a swivel gimbal head...this pivots to follow the bird where planted on ground...and much quicker to set up for a bird that won't wait. Also, with a heavy lens you don't have that weight dangling around your neck. Carry it like a rifle with the camera/lens resting on your shoulder. Can even go handless but I also use the sling style "walkaround" strap attached to the camera. Technically could go handless, but it enables dangling while using both hands to retrieve and attach filters or even change lens. While that compass is a joke, but the clip is sweet! Attach to a rear belt loop where collapsed monopod is out of the way, but easy to add if you need it.

While it might not be a rock steady as a tripod, it is far better than handholding as it takes 99% of the handholding shake out.

 

[Apple fanboy]

Likewise with Arca-Swiss. I replaced all heads on my tripods with the exception of one where there was no competing head, but they make a Manfrotto to Arca-Swiss adapter, so can keep an Arca plate on camera (also on lens mount) for easy switching. While I have a heavy/steady aluminum Manfrotto that will switch between video and pano heads, have become a big fan of carbon fiber for my lighter duty tripod and monopod. My hands don't freeze when I grab it during the winter either.

Back to the subject of long lens. For hikes with a long lens, prefer this which found at local camera store, and CHEAP! https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/822252-REG/Sirui_BSRP326_P_326_6_Section_Carbon_Fiber.html. I really like it and not certain the premium price models provide any benefit. This is the one I put the adapter on as I like the Manfrotto specific monopod head I had, but a ball head would work fine too, switching camera from portrait to landscape orientation. With BIF, you don't need a tripod with a swivel gimbal head...this pivots to follow the bird where planted on ground...and much quicker to set up for a bird that won't wait. Also, with a heavy lens you don't have that weight dangling around your neck. Carry it like a rifle with the camera/lens resting on your shoulder. Can even go handless but I also use the sling style "walkaround" strap attached to the camera. Technically could go handless, but it enables dangling while using both hands to retrieve and attach filters or even change lens. While that compass is a joke, but the clip is sweet! Attach to a rear belt loop where collapsed monopod is out of the way, but easy to add if you need it.

While it might not be a rock steady as a tripod, it is far better than handholding as it takes 99% of the handholding shake out.
View attachment 924539

I’ve tried a monopod, but never really get on with it. Always ends up with me picking up the camera and monopod together as the BIF moves out of range!

 

[Clix Pix]

Same here! I have a couple of Gitzo monopods and don't use either of them because I don't like having to hang on to the thing the whole time and because, yes, invariably the subject moves and I end up doing the same thing AFB describes: picking up the whole works in order to get the shot I want! I am much happier with a tripod and gimbal head that I can position in place and then use the camera, following the BIF with the lens and gimbal head, and then after shooting if I need to step away from the tripod for a minute to reach into my bag or grab a tissue as I sneeze, I can do so safely without fumbling with the monopod.

Wimberley has a new monopod-specific head that apparently works like a gimbal or a regular ballhead but is much more compact -- kind of looks like the setup you've got, Tizeye -- but I opted to go for the gimbal head instead. If I used a monopod a lot, though it would have been very appealing to me.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

Well, I just picked up a used Olympus 40-150 2.8. It’s a very nice lens with a super useful range for me, while not being too heavy. With an eventual 2x teleconverter purchase, this will replace my 100-300. I’m not worried about the Olympus news enough to change my mind with this new lens.

 

[Clix Pix]

How much of a light penalty will you pay in using that 40-150 f/2.8 lens with a 2x TC? How about image quality compared to the 100-300mm? I am finding that with my 100-400mm Sony that adding a 1.4x TC definitely creates a difference in light, IMO really more than the one full f/stop advertised. The TC is great in good light but not so great when the subject is in shaded or darker areas. I would never put a 2x TC on the 100-400mm lens or my 200-600mm. I haven’t actually tried the TC on the Bazooka yet, a relevant situation hasn’t come up yet.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

How much of a light penalty will you pay in using that 40-150 f/2.8 lens with a 2x TC? How about image quality compared to the 100-300mm? I am finding that with my 100-400mm Sony that adding a 1.4x TC definitely creates a difference in light, IMO really more than the one full f/stop advertised. The TC is great in good light but not so great when the subject is in shaded or darker areas. I would never put a 2x TC on the 100-400mm lens or my 200-600mm. I haven’t actually tried the TC on the Bazooka yet, a relevant situation hasn’t come up yet.

I’ve seen a lot of sample shots with the 2x. I believe it takes two stops, which won’t be an issue for the intended setting. It also matches the Panasonic, but with better glass. I like that in combo, I would have a range of 40-300. It would be all I need for a zoo outing, for example.

 

[Clix Pix]

I haven't ventured out to the local zoo here yet so no idea how well my lens and 1.4x TC will fare with that, but I do remember from past visits that there were times when we were in a building, significantly darker environment than being outdoors, and that whatever camera and lens combo I was using then didn't work out too well in those situations.

It's good you've already seen lots of sample shots with the 2X TC -- that will help a lot when you start using your own lens with it! Looking forward to seeing your photos.....

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

That’s where the 2.8 throughout the range comes in. I was able to get some sharp indoor photos with it in testing.

An early bee sample:

 

[Hughmac]

I missed the 2.8 part of the report at the first read, and wondered why you had bought the 40-150mm

It looks to be a great combination, and now I understand your reasoning behind it.

Cheers

Hugh

 

[Clix Pix]

Definitely the light penalty with an f/2.8 lens will be a lot less problematic than with an f/ 4.5 or f/5.6 or slower lens!

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

My 100-300 is just an entry level zoom at 5.6 at the long end. The 2.8 is pro glass with a TC designed for just it and one other lens. The weird thing is that the zoom turns in the opposite direction as my other lenses. That will be a mind bender.

 

[Clix Pix]

I spent some time this afternoon at a local botanical garden with my 100-400mm and 1.4x TC attached..... After reviewing the images in the computer this evening I can see that I still need to work on my technique when it comes to handholding a long lens and I have to remember that I've also got a TC on there as well, which affects everything, especially the minimum focusing range and of course the aperture! Sigh.....

I would love to be able to afford a Sony 500mm or 600mm prime lens, in which case issues with a TC would be lessened since the prime lenses are set up differently than a zoom that goes from one focal length and aperture to another throughout its range.....

Ah, yeah, it takes time to adjust to when zooms turn in a different direction or when critical buttons such as the lens release button on the camera body are in a different place! I am STILL after seven months of using this A7R IV trying to get used to where the lens release button is on the body, as it is in an entirely different position than the ones on the Nikons I used for so many years. My muscle memory still reaches for where the button is on a Nikon....

 

[Apple fanboy]

I spent some time this afternoon at a local botanical garden with my 100-400mm and 1.4x TC attached..... After reviewing the images in the computer this evening I can see that I still need to work on my technique when it comes to handholding a long lens and I have to remember that I've also got a TC on there as well, which affects everything, especially the minimum focusing range and of course the aperture! Sigh.....

I would love to be able to afford a Sony 500mm or 600mm prime lens, in which case issues with a TC would be lessened since the prime lenses are set up differently than a zoom that goes from one focal length and aperture to another throughout its range.....

Ah, yeah, it takes time to adjust to when zooms turn in a different direction or when critical buttons such as the lens release button on the camera body are in a different place! I am STILL after seven months of using this A7R IV trying to get used to where the lens release button is on the body, as it is in an entirely different position than the ones on the Nikons I used for so many years. My muscle memory still reaches for where the button is on a Nikon....

You mean in the right place! Out of interest what sort of shutter speed where you at in those images? You really have to push the ISO with a TC.

 

[Clix Pix]

I'd have to look at the exif again but in some cases, yes, it was clear that in some cases the shutter speed and/or ISO weren't high enough, I could see when looking through potential images to process. That is a thought, maybe I should take the thing off Auto ISO and set it at some arbitrarily high number just to see if that makes a difference. I'd forgotten about Auto ISO, and yes, sometimes it doesn't quite do what the user expects that it will!

 

[Hughmac]

Didn't someone (@mollyc?) say earlier on in this thread that they'd been advised to set the ISO to at least 1600?

I'll try that out when I finally remember to

Cheers

Hugh

 

[Apple fanboy]

I'd have to look at the exif again but in some cases, yes, it was clear that in some cases the shutter speed and/or ISO weren't high enough, I could see when looking through potential images to process. That is a thought, maybe I should take the thing off Auto ISO and set it at some arbitrarily high number just to see if that makes a difference. I'd forgotten about Auto ISO, and yes, sometimes it doesn't quite do what the user expects that it will!

Definitely take it off Auto ISO I’d say. Experimenting is the key.
[automerge]1593278925[/automerge]

Didn't someone (@mollyc?) say earlier on in this thread that they'd been advised to set the ISO to at least 1600?

I'll try that out when I finally remember to

Cheers

Hugh

Sounds about right depending on conditions. Easier to move the ISO down once you have established a reasonable shutter speed.

 

[mollyc]

Didn't someone (@mollyc?) say earlier on in this thread that they'd been advised to set the ISO to at least 1600?

I'll try that out when I finally remember to

Cheers

Hugh

I don't know about ISO, but with that lens I probably do usually use that as a minimum in most circumstances. I was told a minimum SS of 1/1000-1/1600 depending on your own stability.

I don't hesitate to shoot at high ISO and just leave it there, but that depends on your camera model of course.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

I always keep it under 1600 on M43, but usually getting enough light outdoors in order to keep shutter speeds up isn’t an issue. With the IBIS on M43, you can drop down on shutter speeds fairly well. I often hang in the 1/hundreds.

 

[Clix Pix]

I think I will do that, tinker with the ISO settings in my A7R IV and take it off Auto ISO, as I suspect that this has been part of the problem I've experienced with my 100-400mm and the 1.4x TC as the lens itself is already slow at its native f/4.5-5.6, and of course the impact is especially noticeable at the long end at 400mm. Feels like I am losing more than just a full f/stop. Haven't noticed any issues with Auto ISO and my other lenses as most of them are faster and I haven't yet tried the TC on my 200-600mm, the Bazooka. Might as well get this figured out now!

And, yes, the other thing I could do is experiment with shutter speed as opposed to always using Aperture Priority. That in itself could make a difference in certain shooting situations.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

I’m really enjoying the 40-150 2.8. I took some pictures of the kids playing in the sprinkler, and I was wondering what this noise was that I thought I was seeing. I zoomed in to 100% to discover they were very tiny water droplets!

 

[mpfuchs]

Didn't someone (@mollyc?) say earlier on in this thread that they'd been advised to set the ISO to at least 1600?

I'll try that out when I finally remember to

Cheers

Hugh

That would be a good starting point for decent lighting. Or course early mourning, late evening, you might not always be able to get there...