Canon lens test 300 f/4 L + 2x

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by JohnR66, Jun 12, 2005.

  1. JohnR66

    JohnR66 Guest

    JohnR66, Jun 12, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. JohnR66

    Steven Toney Guest

    Most photos for long lens are 3D objects not 2D -- I understand why you are
    testing a 2D print, but it would not be the normal domain of this lens and
    TC combo -- more the domain of fix focal length MACRO, whcih canon has some
    very good ones that have great sharpness and do great MACRO imaging with the
    right technique and small set of tools

    I would like to get a very good reach and touch combo for a 20D for birds
    and an other wildlife --


    "JohnR66" <> wrote in message
    news:dkXqe.940283$...
    >I reshot the test im more controlled conditions. I have more confidence in
    >this combo now!
    > http://home.att.net/~jriegle/canon300.htm
    > John
    >
     
    Steven Toney, Jun 12, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. JohnR66

    JohnR66 Guest

    "Steven Toney" <> wrote in message
    news:BtXqe.3020$...
    > Most photos for long lens are 3D objects not 2D -- I understand why you
    > are testing a 2D print, but it would not be the normal domain of this lens
    > and TC combo -- more the domain of fix focal length MACRO, whcih canon has
    > some very good ones that have great sharpness and do great MACRO imaging
    > with the right technique and small set of tools
    >
    > I would like to get a very good reach and touch combo for a 20D for birds
    > and an other wildlife --
    >
    >
    > "JohnR66" <> wrote in message
    > news:dkXqe.940283$...
    >>I reshot the test im more controlled conditions. I have more confidence in
    >>this combo now!
    >> http://home.att.net/~jriegle/canon300.htm
    >> John
    >>

    >
    >

    I agree with what you said but the 2D test gets all parts of the image in
    the focus plane for a quick go/nogo evaluation. Shooting through lots of
    atmosphere is hard to get definitive results due to all the churning of the
    air and thermal effects bending the light, causing blurring and distortions.
    My first test was shooting through over 100 yards of air on a sunny day. A
    bit unrealistic for shooting small birds where I'd be within 50 feet or so.
    I need to put the combo through more field use to see how it performs. Out
    of focus rendering (Bokeh) is nearly as important as the sharpness which the
    2D test does not show.

    I'll try to get shots of some birds to see if this set up is a workable
    combo. I'd like to have the 500mm f/4 lens, but that's a dream...

    John
     
    JohnR66, Jun 12, 2005
    #3
  4. JohnR66

    Steven Toney Guest

    My too purchase lens list is expensive, but I'd rather save a bit over time
    and get the fastest glass with IS I can get even if delays getting the
    lenses

    I'm ramping up my digital photo time/learning and getting a long term set of
    "toys" over the next few years as I approach retirement to have good set of
    toys to play with when I have more time, but when the income lowers a bit --


    "JohnR66" <> wrote in message
    news:UUXqe.940463$...
    > "Steven Toney" <> wrote in message
    > news:BtXqe.3020$...
    >> Most photos for long lens are 3D objects not 2D -- I understand why you
    >> are testing a 2D print, but it would not be the normal domain of this
    >> lens and TC combo -- more the domain of fix focal length MACRO, whcih
    >> canon has some very good ones that have great sharpness and do great
    >> MACRO imaging with the right technique and small set of tools
    >>
    >> I would like to get a very good reach and touch combo for a 20D for birds
    >> and an other wildlife --
    >>
    >>
    >> "JohnR66" <> wrote in message
    >> news:dkXqe.940283$...
    >>>I reshot the test im more controlled conditions. I have more confidence
    >>>in this combo now!
    >>> http://home.att.net/~jriegle/canon300.htm
    >>> John
    >>>

    >>
    >>

    > I agree with what you said but the 2D test gets all parts of the image in
    > the focus plane for a quick go/nogo evaluation. Shooting through lots of
    > atmosphere is hard to get definitive results due to all the churning of
    > the air and thermal effects bending the light, causing blurring and
    > distortions. My first test was shooting through over 100 yards of air on a
    > sunny day. A bit unrealistic for shooting small birds where I'd be within
    > 50 feet or so.
    > I need to put the combo through more field use to see how it performs. Out
    > of focus rendering (Bokeh) is nearly as important as the sharpness which
    > the 2D test does not show.
    >
    > I'll try to get shots of some birds to see if this set up is a workable
    > combo. I'd like to have the 500mm f/4 lens, but that's a dream...
    >
    > John
    >
    >
     
    Steven Toney, Jun 12, 2005
    #4
  5. JohnR66 wrote:

    > I reshot the test im more controlled conditions. I have more confidence in
    > this combo now!
    > http://home.att.net/~jriegle/canon300.htm
    > John
    >
    >


    The 300mm f/4 + 2x TC = f/8. If you are photographing with a
    Canon 20D, 350 or other camera with with 6.4 micron pixels,
    at f/5.6 the diffraction spot size is already larger than
    the pixel spacing.

    Diffraction spot size for green light:

    f/4 = 5.2 microns
    f/5.6 = 7.2
    f/8 = 10
    f/11 = 14
    f/16 = 21

    It is worse for red light, better for blue light.

    All f/8 images would look softer than f/5.6 or f/4 if the lens
    is performing near the diffraction limit.

    Roger
    http://www.clarkvision.com
     
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark), Jun 12, 2005
    #5
  6. JohnR66

    Guest

    In message <dkXqe.940283$>,
    "JohnR66" <> wrote:

    >I reshot the test im more controlled conditions. I have more confidence in
    >this combo now!
    >http://home.att.net/~jriegle/canon300.htm


    Why were you surprised that the 300 f/4L was crisper than the 50mm
    F/1.8?

    There seems to be a myth going around that the 50mm Canon lenses are
    their sharpest; this is not true at all. Many of the L telephotos are
    much sharper than the 50mm lenses.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Jun 12, 2005
    #6
  7. JohnR66

    JohnR66 Guest

    Here are a couple bird shots with the 300/4L and the 2x at ISO 400.

    Mom feeds baby
    http://home.att.net/~jriegle/grackle1.jpg

    Grackle (full frame, just shrunk for the Web)
    http://home.att.net/~jriegle/grackle2.jpg

    At 20 feet, these birds are too big for the frame. At 30 feet, they fill the
    frame. 60 or 70 feet would be the limits for song birds. Hope to get
    something more interesting when I visit my parents place. They live in the
    country, out in the woods where they see bluejays, blue birds, king fishers,
    woodpeckers, hummingbirds and a dozen or so more.
    John


    >JohnR66" <> wrote in message
    >news:dkXqe.940283$...
    >I reshot the test im more controlled conditions. I have more confidence in
    >this combo now!
    > http://home.att.net/~jriegle/canon300.htm
    > John
    >
     
    JohnR66, Jun 12, 2005
    #7
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Guest

    test test test test test test test

    Guest, Jul 2, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,023
    halfalifer
    Jul 2, 2003
  2. PeterH

    Canon 90-300 or Sigma 70-300 ?

    PeterH, Jan 24, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    5,882
    Steven M. Scharf
    Feb 11, 2004
  3. Marcel Alsemgeest

    300D + Sigma 70-300 or Canon 100-300?

    Marcel Alsemgeest, Aug 13, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    1,265
    Summitar
    Sep 5, 2004
  4. canon 70-300 v. tamron 28-300

    , Nov 6, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    1,164
    Steve Dell
    Dec 24, 2004
  5. Tom

    Canon 17-85mm IS Lens vs Canon 17-40L Lens

    Tom, May 17, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    786
    SamSez
    May 21, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page