Tekforums

Chat => Photography => Topic started by: Binary Shadow on April 07, 2016, 06:11:31 AM

Title: Brighter days = photography
Post by: Binary Shadow on April 07, 2016, 06:11:31 AM
Now the weather and daylight hours are improving my photography itch has started again.

Upgraded to the Canon 7D mk2, I want to update my lens to the mk2 version to but its a bit of an expensive move.

Couple of images from the weekend at BTCC Brands Hatch, I haven't yet had a chance to get through all of them:

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1615/25952583600_c3ef0f53b9_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/FxkLVW)Tripod (https://flic.kr/p/FxkLVW) by Adam Woodford (https://www.flickr.com/photos/12512629@N07/), on Flickr

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1481/26199557366_013ecfdc1f_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/FVazCj)Different Line (https://flic.kr/p/FVazCj) by Adam Woodford (https://www.flickr.com/photos/12512629@N07/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: zpyder on April 07, 2016, 09:11:37 AM
Dude, you're not tempted by the sigma 150-600? Apart from the weight it's pretty sweet...cheaper than the mkii too.
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: Serious on April 08, 2016, 04:21:25 AM
The Sigma is actually quite heavy.

Second issue is getting any better results from it. In motor sports you need as much light in as you can get.
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: zpyder on April 09, 2016, 22:03:05 PM
I know it's heavy, blooming heavy! I've got one!

However, going from a crop sensor to full frame, I found 400mm just didn't cut the mustard any more. That left me with either the Tamron or Sigma 150-600 options.

I started out with the Tamron, it's actually quite a good lens, not too bad, did the job. Took it to Canada and took it on some hikes, got a few good shots:

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/309/20083531496_eccbfe6da1_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/wAHmdq)Eastern Kingbird (https://flic.kr/p/wAHmdq) by Chris Moody (https://www.flickr.com/photos/zpyder/), on Flickr

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/297/19876958960_92c27f4b76_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/whsBoY)Least chipmunk (https://flic.kr/p/whsBoY) by Chris Moody (https://www.flickr.com/photos/zpyder/), on Flickr

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/342/19514302294_0a20da5c84_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/vJpUcQ)North American beaver (Castor canadensis) (https://flic.kr/p/vJpUcQ) by Chris Moody (https://www.flickr.com/photos/zpyder/), on Flickr

So yeah, light is a bit of an issue. But one other benefit of going full frame, is you can get away with higher ISO. That beaver shot is at 3200, and was taken at dusk in very low light. I raised the exposure in post processing to bring it back to daylight levels. Yes if you look at it 100% there's noise, a stock agency likely won't take it, but it's still useable.

Yet for some reason I decided, that despite getting a good number of keepers, the Tamron wasn't for me. I traded it in and ended up with the Sigma 150-600mm Sport edition. Given that even the lens hood is metal, it's a good kilo heavier than the Tamron, and I seriously doubt I'd have been able to lug the Sigma around and up through the Rockies like I did the Tamron.

However, weight is the only real downside... autofocus is very reliable, the build quality also is nuts, so I know the lens will last me a good long while. To answer the question about needing the light for the motorsports, and if you're thinking the subjects in the above shots were stationary, the following weren't exactly slow movers, and were even photographed in this country in October last year, where the daylight isn't necessarily that great:

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/699/21553460823_2b35be0b16_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/yQB7Zv)Curlew (https://flic.kr/p/yQB7Zv) by Chris Moody (https://www.flickr.com/photos/zpyder/), on Flickr

(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5792/21553475783_9728304607_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/yQBcrr)Kestrel with cricket (https://flic.kr/p/yQBcrr) by Chris Moody (https://www.flickr.com/photos/zpyder/), on Flickr

And this one was stationary, but it shows the detail obtainable:
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1544/25727686363_721113641e_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Fct7Pn)Ruff (https://flic.kr/p/Fct7Pn) by Chris Moody (https://www.flickr.com/photos/zpyder/), on Flickr



So all in all, on a full frame that does well in low light / high ISO, the smaller max aperture isn't too much of an issue. I'd be curious what Binary has to say about the noise on the 7DMkII compared to the 7D, which I found to be exceptionally bad.
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: Serious on April 12, 2016, 02:27:07 AM
I bought the earlier 150-500mm version of the Sigma, which is a little lighter. It's a pain to try to hold steady and I doubt if I will take it out much in the future.

Then my old canon is an APS-C sensor, so it effectively ended up equivalent to 225-900mm. At the longer end it was a pain to use.

A number of professionals claim a 400mm with 1.4X teleconverter is a better option. Lighter, better quality image.

Then does motorsports really need a 600mm focal length? You can normally get close enough to use a 200mm lens without being in excessive danger. What do you actually want to see? The hairs in the drivers nostrils? ;D
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: zpyder on April 12, 2016, 11:38:10 AM
Problem with the 400 +teleconverter is cost, when the 100-400 MkII is more than the sigma without the telecoverter on top, you'd also end up with an f-stop less light.  Depending on what you read as well there are some comparisons that suggest that there really isn't much in it in terms of image quality.

Last I checked Adam still did a bit of wildlife photography as well so yeah, it's all personal choice. The weight is an issue but for what I do its my best option.

Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: Binary Shadow on April 12, 2016, 18:45:04 PM
Not sure on the sigma, I have had:

70-200 F2.8
150-500

Both were complete sh*t and so soft it was pointless using them.

Yep still into wildlife as well as motorsport and air shows. Using a crop body helps with the focal length.

I believe the noise on the 7d2 is better than the 7d but I haven't done a direct comparison.
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: Binary Shadow on April 20, 2016, 06:06:03 AM
When you look at this comparison between the 100-400 mk2 and the sigma 150-600 sport it looks pretty awful: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=972&Camera=963&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=978&CameraComp=963&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=0
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: zpyder on April 20, 2016, 21:30:03 PM
Yeah, must admit I am now rethinking things a bit and am seriously considering trading in my Sigma due to the weight and size, as we'll be finally going on our honeymoon in June and there's no way I can lug the sigma around the world!

Having said that, I still maintain that it is a damn good lens for the money. Yes it may not be as sharp as the Canon, but the difference is only really noticeable at pixel peeping levels, the main difference to me is the size and weight. I'll be having a play with the 100-400 and an extender in a shop sometime in the near future, if I can get the OK from the other half haha.
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: zpyder on May 04, 2016, 14:49:57 PM
So I ended up biting the bullet, as my wife and I still plan on doing a nature blog in the future, and our looming honeymoon is too good an opportunity to miss in terms of getting photographs of more exotic species. As a result the Sigma 150-600 is out and has been replaced with the 100-400mkII + a 1.4x II extender.

Initial thoughts:


So ultimately, I've given up some convenience of an all in one lens, for a lighter smaller package. The rest of the differences are minor enough to not factor in the decision making process really.

I am curious as to whether I'd have noticed any significant performance boosts if I'd bought the 1.4x III extender, but a second hand II model for £100 was too good an opportunity to miss.
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: Binary Shadow on May 12, 2016, 05:51:16 AM
Nice!

for a lighter smaller package.

Some might say that this is actually more convenient as you can take it more places and not have it pull your arms off.
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: Serious on May 15, 2016, 15:01:12 PM
Carrying a 70-300mm zoom is certainly more convenient than a 150-600mm - I can shove the smaller lens in my pocket.

Been considering a fishing waistcoat. BIG pockets to carry photographic stuff.
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: Serious on June 26, 2016, 02:39:20 AM
Something like this might be useful. It's meant for carrying two cameras but many bigger lenses have a tripod mount included for balance. You can screw one fastener into the camera and the other (there was two on the one I got, even if not in the illustration) into the camera base.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fotga-holdster-Shoulder-Adjustable-Panasonic/dp/B00UXA3BJO

Seems to be same one as being used by the middle photographer in this youtube. Does have some issue with the other two talking over his head though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hbli8lh9Pcw
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: Binary Shadow on August 12, 2016, 09:33:14 AM
Well iv gone for it, ebayed some kit and ordered the 100-400mk2, looking forward to it :D
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: zpyder on August 16, 2016, 22:57:27 PM
You won't regret it. It really is a good lens.
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: Binary Shadow on August 17, 2016, 05:52:48 AM
Arrived yesterday so hopefully get out at the weekend to try it out.
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: Serious on August 17, 2016, 18:31:25 PM
I like the lens but personally couldn't justify the price. Then it's white... :/

Considered the Tamron 70-200MM f2.8 lenses but they have focus breathing issues. Thing is so do Sigma and Nikon versions.




Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: zpyder on September 04, 2016, 16:55:36 PM
I'd never actually heard of the term focus breathing before, and had to look it up, interesting stuff!

As to the whiteness...I too kind of thought it looked odd to start with. Much like why people buy Silver bodies and then put black lenses on.

But you get used to it, and technically it's not about standing out from a crowd with the white expensive lens. The official answer from Canon is the white reflects more heat, so if you're for instance a nature photographer on safari, in the glaring African sun, then a big black lens will likely absorb more heat and expand and affect the IQ of the lens much more than a lighter coloured lens.

I guess the way to test this would be to have two identical camera set ups, but put a tight fitting black cover on one of the white lenses, and on a really sunny day go out and take some photos. I wonder if there'd ever be a noticeable difference in quality.
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: zpyder on September 05, 2016, 22:21:47 PM
Some example shots of the 100-400 II, from the Mauritius trip.

(https://c3.staticflickr.com/9/8186/29349491322_35d1cc9471_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/LHvPfs)
Mauritius grey white-eye (Zosterops mauritianus) (https://flic.kr/p/LHvPfs) by Chris Moody (https://www.flickr.com/photos/zpyder/), on Flickr

(https://c4.staticflickr.com/9/8335/29457838995_c4e5274d6c_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/LT68eM)
Red-legged golden orb-web spider (Nephila inaurata) (https://flic.kr/p/LT68eM) by Chris Moody (https://www.flickr.com/photos/zpyder/), on Flickr

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8598/28833726624_9fa3902034_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/KVWonE)
Day gecko (Phelsuma sp.) (https://flic.kr/p/KVWonE) by Chris Moody (https://www.flickr.com/photos/zpyder/), on Flickr

This ones a bit of a cheat as I used a 1.4x extender on it. But given it's a tiny fast moving subject, it's pretyt good that even losing a stop you can get results like this.
(https://c7.staticflickr.com/9/8497/28833909254_ce7c3a1e86_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/KVXjEs)
Small green metallic hoverfly (https://flic.kr/p/KVXjEs) by Chris Moody (https://www.flickr.com/photos/zpyder/), on Flickr

And on the day this photo was taken, I put the weather sealing of the lens and 5D body to the test
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/9/8025/28836168153_e0c1b82012_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/KW9U9Z)
Village weaver (Ploceus cucullatus) (https://flic.kr/p/KW9U9Z) by Chris Moody (https://www.flickr.com/photos/zpyder/), on Flickr

Suffice to say, it failed:
(https://c4.staticflickr.com/9/8126/29458053355_8334b72a29_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/LT7dXD)
Camera malfunction (https://flic.kr/p/LT7dXD) by Chris Moody (https://www.flickr.com/photos/zpyder/), on Flickr

An overnight stint in a bag of rice brought it back to life. It's working fine now, though I should really send it off for a service before any corrosion sets in.

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7684/28836341833_d36eb63c9c_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/KWaMMt)
IMG_1615 (https://flic.kr/p/KWaMMt) by Chris Moody (https://www.flickr.com/photos/zpyder/), on Flickr

(https://c7.staticflickr.com/9/8034/29423627086_4006d284c6_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/LQ4Meh)
striated heron (Butorides striata) (https://flic.kr/p/LQ4Meh) by Chris Moody (https://www.flickr.com/photos/zpyder/), on Flickr

And two rarities, a pink pigeon and a mauritian kestrel. Both these species are mega rare, rarer than pandas and tigers. At the end of the last century there were fewer than 10 individuals or both species left in the world. Through conservation efforts though, they're now at a stable population on their native island.

(https://c8.staticflickr.com/9/8109/28836403063_cf66039771_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/KWb6Za)
Mauritius Pink pigeon (Nesoenas mayeri) (https://flic.kr/p/KWb6Za) by Chris Moody (https://www.flickr.com/photos/zpyder/), on Flickr

(https://c3.staticflickr.com/9/8419/28833977194_49e306db3f_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/KVXERQ)
Mauritius kestrel (Falco punctatus) (https://flic.kr/p/KVXERQ) by Chris Moody (https://www.flickr.com/photos/zpyder/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: Serious on September 06, 2016, 07:33:26 AM
I'd never actually heard of the term focus breathing before, and had to look it up, interesting stuff!

As to the whiteness...I too kind of thought it looked odd to start with. Much like why people buy Silver bodies and then put black lenses on.

But you get used to it, and technically it's not about standing out from a crowd with the white expensive lens. The official answer from Canon is the white reflects more heat, so if you're for instance a nature photographer on safari, in the glaring African sun, then a big black lens will likely absorb more heat and expand and affect the IQ of the lens much more than a lighter coloured lens.

I guess the way to test this would be to have two identical camera set ups, but put a tight fitting black cover on one of the white lenses, and on a really sunny day go out and take some photos. I wonder if there'd ever be a noticeable difference in quality.

I first noticed Focus breathing on a pair of cheap 70-200mm lenses, this link confirmed it. Also covers the white issue, and a few other bits.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P80BpSQIIto

You can just put a white or camouflage cover on the black lens, although no other manufacturer seems bothered about the issue.  I would have thought keeping the camera temperature down would be more important yet their cameras are all black. And why have a white lens with black rubber? It would be fairly easy to make white rubber instead and the price isn't the concern here.
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: zpyder on September 06, 2016, 13:49:53 PM


I first noticed Focus breathing on a pair of cheap 70-200mm lenses, this link confirmed it. Also covers the white issue, and a few other bits.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P80BpSQIIto

You can just put a white or camouflage cover on the black lens, although no other manufacturer seems bothered about the issue.  I would have thought keeping the camera temperature down would be more important yet their cameras are all black. And why have a white lens with black rubber? It would be fairly easy to make white rubber instead and the price isn't the concern here.

I've noticed the effect before quite a bit when doing extreme macro work and focus stacking, just never heard the effect called focus breathing before. At first I didn't quite get why it was called that, but the more I think about it the more it fits.

As to no other manufacturers using them, I was sure I'd seen other white lenses, Sony make white telephoto lenses, and nikon used to. I don't know about other brands though.

I still maintain it'd be interesting to do some kind of experiment to see just how much effect, if any, the colour of the lens barrel has on IQ.
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: Serious on September 06, 2016, 18:47:49 PM

As to no other manufacturers using them, I was sure I'd seen other white lenses, Sony make white telephoto lenses, and nikon used to. I don't know about other brands though.

Sony at least make a white 70-200 f2.8, with black rubber grips. I wonder if it's to look like the Canon one? Actually it does. Then they did make white A5000 and A6000 cameras too but that was claimed just for 'style'.

Simple test, tape some paper (or cloth) around a lens, take some photos, remove it, then take some more. see if it actually makes a difference.
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: Binary Shadow on September 15, 2016, 20:31:53 PM
A couple of shots I got with my 100-400 mk2

(https://c6.staticflickr.com/9/8759/28883921533_14d60d1811_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/L1nDz8)781A4076 (https://flic.kr/p/L1nDz8) by Adam Woodford (https://www.flickr.com/photos/12512629@N07/), on Flickr

(https://c6.staticflickr.com/8/7482/29506200445_f6ebe5dc88_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/LXmZpT)781A3676 (https://flic.kr/p/LXmZpT) by Adam Woodford (https://www.flickr.com/photos/12512629@N07/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Brighter days = photography
Post by: Serious on September 16, 2016, 11:13:14 AM
Is that the famous bike rider Ivor Fellov?

Looking good so far. Despite the 70-200mm F2.8 being the supposed 'portrait lens' at the moment you should find that the 100-400 works just as well.