Subforums
-
-
- 27
- posts
17,103 topics in this forum
-
- 5.7k replies
- 1.4m views
-
- 21 replies
- 4.2k views
-
- 523 replies
- 170.5k views
-
- 1 reply
- 10.5k views
-
- 9 replies
- 163 views
-
- 18 replies
- 453 views
-
- 5 replies
- 122 views
-
- 59 replies
- 2.8k views
-
- 79 replies
- 5.4k views
-
- 12 replies
- 6.5k views
-
- 39 replies
- 3.6k views
-
- 33 replies
- 1.8k views
-
- 11 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- 63 replies
- 5.8k views
-
- 11 replies
- 2.1k views
-
- 231 replies
- 85.5k views
-
- 28 replies
- 1.6k views
-
- 415 replies
- 63.9k views
-
- 18 replies
- 1.4k views
-
- 32 replies
- 2.2k views
-
- 80 replies
- 12.1k views
-
- 3 replies
- 368 views
-
- 63 replies
- 18.3k views
-
- 6 replies
- 607 views
-
- 19 replies
- 2.9k views
-
- 16 replies
- 767 views
-
- 10 replies
- 819 views
-
- 7 replies
- 4.3k views
-
- 17 replies
- 1.7k views
-
- 16 replies
- 1.7k views
-
- 249 replies
- 22.7k views
-
- 12 replies
- 726 views
-
- 7 replies
- 717 views
-
- 46 replies
- 3.9k views
-
- 6 replies
- 903 views
-
- 12 replies
- 1k views
-
- 6 replies
- 744 views
-
Anyone with a Panasonic S5 II or S9 interested in testing my in-cam ARRI compatible LOG C3 profile? 1 2
- 34 replies
- 6.7k views
-
- 21 replies
- 1.6k views
-
- 23 replies
- 6k views
-
Popular Contributors
-
Forum Statistics
-
Total Topics17.1k
-
Total Posts348.1k
-
-
Member Statistics
-
Posts
-
Thank you for all this extremely helpful advice!! This is so helpful. It is just stunning how much knowledge comes together here, in this forum. But how do you achieve that, provided it is a 4/3 lens without an aperture ring (like my olympus 17 & 45 mm 1.8 and the 12-32 kit lens)? As I understand it, the only mode that allows for locking the shutter at 1/50 and being able to adjust the aperture via the camera is the manual mode under the movie mode - which does not allow auto iso, right? (Strangely, the M mode for stills allows for auto iso). While using standard, do you leave the "sharpness", "saturation", etc. as it is, or would you recommend to dial them down a bit? I'll try that, keeping in mind that the standard profile offers some flexibility to adjust the colors in post. The correction that you have shown above are impressing. I have always used the touch focus with AFS. This is one of the best features of this camera, as it is incredibly responsive and accurate. I got the e-mii for some time after selling the gx the first time, and the gx fares far better in this regard. -
Hi and thank you! Yes I agree with all of what you say. I have been reading a lot that mirrorless cameras will be able to focus at any given aperture through the range unlike DSLR's which typically won't focus after f8. I can get round this at about f16 using the Sigma macro by engaging the lights on the MF-12 flashes to focus which is useful for skittish insects and invertebrates like bees. You spoke about diffraction which starts at around f11 - f13 and atmospheric "haze". Sure no matter what you do with sharpening things will still look pretty warped? This is a good example of *atmosphere* which I took a while back when I was trying to get used to the 200-500mm lens I have - the plane was shot at 450mm f/8: I don't have any experience with TC's but the closest thing I do have experience with is some Kenko extender tubes which when used with my Sigma gave me 1.4x magnification. The result was incredibly soft but I was able to recover it using a sharpening technique in GIMP by creating an overlay sharpening layer. The image below of the sea urchin shell was in fact shot with a 50mm f/1.8 that came from the Nikon FM originally that my parents bought before I was around. I completely agree that any lens with a TC will not have the same properties that a lens of a similar focal length will have. I'm just trying to think "light" and more affordable and practical. After all the Canon 1200mm for example is around 20k Euro. I realize that one won't be able to do everything but trying to find that balance between things is the key. If the 100-500mm is going to be sufficient and more practical then the 200-800mm and offer better image quality then that's going to be the solution for me. With a 1.4x TC it will offer a similar FoV to my D500/500mm f/5.6 combo, though the 200-800 without a TC will do the same thing. Of course that's where things start to get confusing for me a little of which direction to go in. Due to the light loss I also think it's better to use a TC with a much faster lens. Say a 400 f/2.8 and that way things won't be "so" degraded. When you say that I "haven't thought things through properly", I realize that I don't have much experience due to many factors. My only real wildlife experience is birds at various nature reserves I used to volunteer for which were pretty much the same thing and nothing very interesting and of course I had set times where I was there. Originally I started out wanting to do astrophotography which led me to my Pentax and as a result I have plenty of nightscape experience as that's pretty much all I had access (due to various reasons but most of all I live in the center of a big city and the surrounding area has no natural land around it as it's all built up with towns and more cities). The nearest place is around 5-8 hours drive away. Basically I'm really keen to get more into the other things and traveling off the beaten path away from civilization is going to help me achieve that. Once I have some experience in different environments and know what works for me I'll be fine 🙂 -
Canon R6II and R7 can record 4K for long hours without overheating, on my ex R7 the only time I see heating bar was during summer inside a clear tent which is like greenhouse on stereoid, even DJ's equipement got overheated, but R7 still only 4 bars out of 10 so pretty alright. R8 on the other hand will need a fan to go through summer outdoor for long 4K recording, for broll it was fine though, just you will see the the overheating bar pretty often in video. The 4k50P quality is really great, but now I got R5C the quality is even better, R5C is probably the closest to C70 in terms of noise performance in clog. I also got powershot V1, this one can record 4K for hours without overheating, but the bar did went to 5 at one stage, that was because the location is next to the heater. It is a nice C cam for wide and as a pocket cam. So my current setup is R5C/R8 and V1 for 3 cam and 3 60/40w cob lights with battery for wedding, with this setup I only need 1 pelican case, 1 backpack and 1 bag for tripod/stand. I used to have the R5 as well, after their latest firmware I haven't seen the overheating warning at all, even I shot 8K broll in outdoor summer. One thing with Canon is on the EOS side, only R5/R5C/EOS R can have hdmi out + internal recording + internal screen on, all other models the screen either go black if recording internally or have internal screen but can't record internally if you are connected to hdmi -
I have the same policy in that a job isn't just a job as in all jobs are the same, but some do not fit into a standard box or coverage. In my genre of weddings, having everything take place in one single location is a completely different beast to; bride getting ready at X, groom at Y, ceremony at A, reception at B, which can make for HUGE logistical issues. -
By Ilkka Nissila · Posted
A 200-800 may be appropriate for wildlife documentary but adding TCs to an f/9 long lens to increase the size of long-distance subjects in the image is unlikely to be very useful. The aperture with a 2X will be f/18 and usually one starts to see significant blurring due to diffraction at f/13 and smaller. The best use of TCs is generally for increasing the magnification at close to intermediate distances where the image quality degradation is not significantly present. At long distances, especially when photographing over water, the temperature variations across layers of air, and humidity in the air, distorts and blurs the image and the longer your focal length, the more obvious it becomes. It's almost always better to be in a location which allows the wildlife to get closer and then shoot without a TC. I'm saying "almost" because there are situations where the light is good only when photographing subjects at longer distances and at closer distances the light is blocked by trees, hills etc. so in that case the longer focal length is needed to get the good light (but atmospherics still apply). In a video, the small aperture may not be a critical issue as the shutter speed is typically lower than in stills (e.g., 1/50s to 1/100 s when at 25 or 50 fps), bright sunlight giving f/16 1/100 s at ISO 100, for example. However, bright sunlight can lead to harsh shadows and in order it to look good, it should come at the right angle (which is usually low above the horizon). At low angles the sunlight is attenuated more by the longer distance of travel in the atmosphere. This generally improves the quality of light on the subject but the quantity is reduced. For stills, usually people want high sharpness in the details of the animal which can dictate a faster shutter speed such as 1/400 s or even 1/3200 s for birds-in-flight. A lot of the time there are clouds and in many cases the most atmospheric and beautiful light is before and after sunrise and sunset, and in those conditions you might be at ISO 25600 even with a f/5.6 lens. A lot of wildlife are the most active in these time windows. So the best times-of-day for photography might not be possible with an f/9 lens let alone f/18. Having the skills to pan effectively make it possible to do some shots successfully in lower light by allowing the subject to have controlled movement blur (sharp head, blurry wings, landscape blurred into trails) but this requires great skills. Even though some softness can be corrected with sharpening and noise-reduction algorithms, garbage-in-garbage-out still applies. A lens with a really small aperture means usually elevated ISO and increased noise. A 200-800+2X will have significantly reduced contrast over a native 1200 mm lens, for example, and if the noise is increased by the need to use fast shutter speeds and higher ISO, then the deciding parameter (contrast divided by noise) in terms of the clarity of subject details will be reduced from multiple factors: atmospherics, low-light-noise, reduced contrast due to use of imperfect optical system (with TC), all working to make it harder to get high-quality images. I'm not saying it's not a good idea to use a lens like the 200-800 for the stated purpose; especially for video with the camera+lens on a tripod and fluid head, it may be a very practical compromise for travel-based wildlife photography, but one should have realistic expectations and when people talk about 2X use to magnify long-distance subjects with a small-aperture lens, then I can't really but feel that the OP hasn't thought it out through and might not have a lot of experience with very long lenses. I think a lens like the 100-500 is much more travel-friendly and might give a greater pleasure of the experience but it also requires you to be closer to the wildlife or select subjects that work with that range. It might be a good idea to take both the 100-500 and 200-800 and use the 200-800 when you feel up to it (traveling can be exhausting) and when photographing subjects which require the reach while the 100-500 can be carried along more casually and with other lenses. For video I think fluid head and tripod give the best results when it comes to these focal lengths, but a fluid head won't easily adopt to regular photography with shorter focal lengths such as landscape in low light. A 1600 mm lens is going to be tough to keep steady no matter what gear is used.
-
