Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 01 Jul 2018 (Sunday) 00:55
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

More reach?

 
Bassat
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2731
Joined Oct 2015
     
Jul 01, 2018 16:37 |  #16

oingyboingybob wrote in post #18654599 (external link)
The Sigma 150-600 C IMO is a fairly good zoom for the money as long as your requirements do not include manual focussing. The manual focus ring is pants, both in size and operation.

I understand what you mean, but have never heard the term 'pants' in this context. What?

And a follow-up question. If I get the Sigma, do I keep or sell the 100-400Lc?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
sidknee
Goldmember
Avatar
1,274 posts
Gallery: 614 photos
Likes: 9816
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Camarthenshire, UK
     
Jul 01, 2018 17:23 |  #17

Bassat wrote in post #18654648 (external link)
I understand what you mean, but have never heard the term 'pants' in this context. What?

And a follow-up question. If I get the Sigma, do I keep or sell the 100-400Lc?

It means 'rubbish' , it's English slang.
Sell it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2731
Joined Oct 2015
     
Jul 01, 2018 17:27 |  #18

I read several reviews of the Σ150-600 and the TC-1401. Good enough for me, I HOPE! I just placed my order for the refurbished lens & TC. Thanks, John. Looking forward to more reach. 840mm is phenomenal! F/11, not so much. But I'm usually pretty good light. And the 80D does f/8.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2731
Joined Oct 2015
     
Jul 01, 2018 17:28 |  #19

sidknee wrote in post #18654663 (external link)
It means 'rubbish' , it's English slang.
Sell it.

Thanks. For both.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
18,349 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 1382
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Jul 01, 2018 23:34 |  #20

Bassat wrote in post #18654664 (external link)
I read several reviews of the Σ150-600 and the TC-1401. Good enough for me, I HOPE! I just placed my order for the refurbished lens & TC. Thanks, John. Looking forward to more reach. 840mm is phenomenal! F/11, not so much. But I'm usually pretty good light. And the 80D does f/8.

I would hold onto the Canon til you've a good go with the new kit to see if you're actually happy with it; then sell the Canon if you are. Good luck, man!


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
12,768 posts
Gallery: 142 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3286
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Jul 02, 2018 01:11 |  #21

Bassat wrote in post #18654327 (external link)
Currently own EF 100-400mm f/4-5.6Lc. Wanting a bit more reach . . .

3.) Crop 100-400 shots (doing this now, not always the best choice)

Body is Canon 80D. Thoughts, opinions, considerations?

.
This makes me curious about something. . Things you have said in the past about ISO and noise grain have given me the impression that you aren't very picky at all about image quality. . And you have also said that you never print big - in fact, I think I remember you saying something about only doing tiny little stuff like 8 by 10 inch prints.

So ..... if you are only using the images at very small sizes, and aren't overly picky about image quality, what is it about cropping in to 100-400mm shots that you don't like. . I mean, you say, "not always the best choice", so what is it that you are displeased with when you crop your 400mm images?


.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2731
Joined Oct 2015
     
Jul 02, 2018 02:37 |  #22

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18654871 (external link)
.
This makes me curious about something. . Things you have said in the past about ISO and noise grain have given me the impression that you aren't very picky at all about image quality. . And you have also said that you never print big - in fact, I think I remember you saying something about only doing tiny little stuff like 8 by 10 inch prints.

So ..... if you are only using the images at very small sizes, and aren't overly picky about image quality, what is it about cropping in to 100-400mm shots that you don't like. . I mean, you say, "not always the best choice", so what is it that you are displeased with when you crop your 400mm images?

.

Tom, am I being overly sensitive, or is this post more than a tad condescending? "aren't very picky about IQ", "never print big", "tiny little stuff like 8 x 10", "only using at very small sizes". I don't believe I've ever read you like that before, but it seems a bit derogatory. May just be me at 3:00 am, but it feels a little harsh.

Nevertheless, you are correct, I care less about ISO noise than lots of other folks on these pages. I have perfectly acceptable ISO 6400 8"x10" prints from my 60D on display. In the 10 or so years I've been using digital, I've made two 11"x17" prints that I can recall. Most times I can shoot my 80D/6D in JPG at ISO 12800/25600 and be quite happy with the results for 4"x6", 5"x7" or web posting.

I do nothing paid; all of my photography is for my own enjoyment, mostly. I share family photos with family, and do the kids' sports/athletics as a way of staying involved (I don't care for sports, but I love my family, and enjoy taking photos). Most of my extended family has photos I've taken on their social media pages.

The point? I've always been a snap-shooter; my photos document my life and the lives of those around me. Nothing more. As such, I care a whole lot more about content than quality. That said, IQ is not irrelevant.

My dis-satisfaction with the 100-400L grows as the subject matter I try to capture gets smaller, and/or more distant. I've used it, with no reservations, at kids' outdoor athletics/sporting events. It turns in stellar (to me) results. We live out in the middle of corn-country USA. Last year my wife put up several bird feeders around the yard. We also have a small stand of trees in the backyard; it attracts critters. The finches and jays of my neighborhood are quite shy. So are the barn cats and local small game. Most of my 100-400 shots of this type need to be cropped to near 100% to get an acceptable framing. Otherwise, I've got a little speck of a barn cat or yellow finch in the middle of a vast sea of endless background. As such, most detail is lost. So far, I have no keepers. I estimate my distance from these subjects at about 50-75', at most. They are skittish, my backyard is wide open and flat; I'm not getting any closer to them. Hence the desire for a bit more focal length.

And I'm a gear slut who can afford to spend $1,000 on new lens just because I want one. As mentioned above, I just ordered the Sigma 150-600 + 1.4x TC. $967, free shipping, no tax. If I hold true to form, 840mm @ f/8 on my 80D should be at least acceptable. That is a HUGE increase in my focal length availability. I believe my tripod will be getting a workout when this thing arrives!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Choderboy
I Chimp, therefore I am
Avatar
5,477 posts
Gallery: 100 photos
Likes: 3167
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Post edited 7 months ago by Choderboy.
     
Jul 02, 2018 02:54 as a reply to  @ Bassat's post |  #23

Most people say the Sigma 150-600 S and C results are no different..

7D2, 150-600 Sport and Canon 1.4TCII on 7D2. Big crop, only 2635 pixels on the long side kept:

IMAGE: https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7503/27032706373_5550cd6b6b_o.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/HbMF​Nn  (external link) SE0_8949_2635cr_1280dm​p (external link) by Choderboy (external link), on Flickr

Dave
Image editing OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
12,768 posts
Gallery: 142 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3286
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Jul 02, 2018 02:55 |  #24

Bassat wrote in post #18654893 (external link)
Tom, am I being overly sensitive, or is this post more than a tad condescending? "aren't very picky about IQ", "never print big", "tiny little stuff like 8 x 10", "only using at very small sizes". I don't believe I've ever read you like that before, but it seems a bit derogatory. May just be me at 3:00 am, but it feels a little harsh.

.
Yes, you are being overly sensitive. . I meant nothing derogatory at all. . I don't even understand how you could think I was being derogatory. . Sheesh. .I will admit - the fact that you even think that maybe I was being derogatory has me pretty miffed. . I really hate having my attitude mis-interpreted. . I guess now I'm the one being overly sensitive, but if there is one thing that really upsets me it is someone thinking I am being critical when I am not.

I was simply taking many things that you have said over the years and applying them to your current decision / situation. . You are the one that said all of those things about yourself. . And those things don't seem consistent with some aspects of your dissatisfaction with your current reach. . So of course I am curious - when things don't seem to be consistent with one another, I will always be curious and seek to figure out why.


.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2731
Joined Oct 2015
     
Jul 02, 2018 03:10 |  #25

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18654897 (external link)
.
Yes, you are being overly sensitive. . I meant nothing derogatory at all. . I don't even understand how you could think I was being derogatory. . Sheesh. .I will admit - the fact that you even think that maybe I was being derogatory has me pretty miffed. . I really hate having my attitude mis-interpreted. . I guess now I'm the one being overly sensitive, but if there is one thing that really upsets me it is someone thinking I am being critical when I am not.

I was simply taking many things that you have said over the years and applying them to your current decision / situation. . You are the one that said all of those things about yourself. . And those things don't seem consistent with some aspects of your dissatisfaction with your current reach. . So of course I am curious - when things don't seem to be consistent with one another, I will always be curious and seek to figure out why.

.

I will own my over-sensitivity. Most likely, I should not be sitting here at this hour, on 3 hours of sleep, trying to think and communicate effectively. I did not mean to offend. I trust that you didn't, either; I've never read you like that before. We are all aware that it is quite impossible to read 'tone and intent' form the written word. History. Shall we move on?

I have said all the things you attribute to me; you read me well. My only defense is that not being overly picky is not the same as not caring at all. Over the last few years, I've pushed my abilities/gear in the wide direction. Now I'm going to spend some time at the other end of the focal length world.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
35,278 posts
Gallery: 98 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4856
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
Post edited 7 months ago by TeamSpeed. (6 edits in all)
     
Jul 02, 2018 07:56 as a reply to  @ Bassat's post |  #26

This is to be expected. Tom R is very concerned with the best IQ he can muster, as well as getting the largest resolution he can for very large prints, due to his needs for customers and his own criteria. Those desires and needs are probably is a bit different than many here, where they don't always print large or have ways to mitigate noise in a way it doesn't show up in the prints that are produced.

Every person has their own threshold or set of requirements for what constitutes a successful image. Since these two seem to be extremes from each other, then I understand the confusion on the comments, methinks. Since 8x10s can sit on a desk or end table, they do seem tiny if you are used to printing larger sizes that look awkward sitting on a table and probably belong on a wall. :lol: However calling 8x10s tiny seems a bit odd, considering that is one of the most common print sizes for portrait shooters, or those that do something like a large 24x36 collage comprised of 8x10s and 5x7s on a wall.

I have the Sigma 150-600 C and it works well with APS C and even a bit better with FF. I wouldn't mind the 100-400II, however I think I am more interested in the Tamron 100-400, very close IQ, AF is quick, and the lens is light & cheap, relatively speaking. I keep my eye out for deals on that lens, but if you need reach beyond 400mm, it is tough to beat the Sigma.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2731
Joined Oct 2015
     
Jul 02, 2018 09:48 |  #27

This is an example of what I mean about needing more reach. Mind you, if I'd had this subject in mind, I'd have used the 80D for more pixels on target. This was shot with 6D/100-400Lc. I was 10'-12' from the bird. The bird is about 2" long.

This is an 800-pixel (long side) export of the original crop, which was only 1210 pixels on the long edge. Roughly 100% crop, just to get a decent-sized subject in the frame. It looks pretty good at 4x6 and 5x7. At 8x10 there is a dearth of detail, especially considering the gear I am using. Using the 80D would have netted more detail, with more pixels on target. (1.6 crop + 1.2x pixel density = ~1.9x on the details).

This is the issue I am hoping to address with the 150-600, which in these types of circumstances will be shot on the 80D. I'm not sure I'll have much use for the TC-1401, but I'll give it a shot! That seems well into tripod territory to me.

Anyway. Finished product, and original SOOC JPG (downsized).


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Inspeqtor
Chet,You are a genius
Avatar
7,138 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Likes: 1426
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Elkhart, Indiana
     
Jul 02, 2018 10:18 |  #28

Bassat wrote in post #18654993 (external link)
This is an example of what I mean about needing more reach. Mind you, if I'd had this subject in mind, I'd have used the 80D for more pixels on target. This was shot with 6D/100-400Lc. I was 10'-12' from the bird. The bird is about 2" long.

This is an 800-pixel (long side) export of the original crop, which was only 1210 pixels on the long edge. Roughly 100% crop, just to get a decent-sized subject in the frame. It looks pretty good at 4x6 and 5x7. At 8x10 there is a dearth of detail, especially considering the gear I am using. Using the 80D would have netted more detail, with more pixels on target. (1.6 crop + 1.2x pixel density = ~1.9x on the details).

This is the issue I am hoping to address with the 150-600, which in these types of circumstances will be shot on the 80D. I'm not sure I'll have much use for the TC-1401, but I'll give it a shot! That seems well into tripod territory to me.

Anyway. Finished product, and original SOOC JPG (downsized).
thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by Bassat in
./showthread.php?p=186​54993&i=i182951796
forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses

thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by Bassat in
./showthread.php?p=186​54993&i=i26303783
forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses

This is a nice shot Tom!


When is the Sigma s'pose to arrive?


Charles
Canon EOS 60D Gripped * Canon EOS XSi * Flickr Account (external link)
Tokina AT-X Pro DX 11-20 f/2.8 * Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 DC Macro OS * Sigma 150-500 f5-6.3 APO DG OS HSM
Canon 18-55 IS Kit Lens * Canon 70-300 IS USM * Canon 50mm f1.8 * Canon 580EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2731
Joined Oct 2015
     
Jul 02, 2018 11:45 as a reply to  @ Inspeqtor's post |  #29

Thanks. I hope the lens ships today.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,954 posts
Gallery: 542 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1596
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Jul 03, 2018 07:53 |  #30

Tom I'm sure you are going to love the Sigma 150-600C, I know that I do, and I find a lot of other uses for it than the subjects that I bought it for. Before the Sigma I used to rent the original 100-400 for the times I really needed it. I would have to say that I think that my Sigma at least is as good at 600mm as any of the 100-400's I rented were at 400mm. The OS seems to work real well, but it is different in the way it seems to lock the image through the viewfinder. The Canon IS seems to have a more positive lock in the VF than the Sigma OS. Seems to be working great in the images though.

I think you will find that with some practice that the 1.4× TC when used on the 6D will be very doable, and it should be pretty good with the 80D too. With my airshow pictures I am using a shoulder stock system to help steady the camera and lens, but I'm regularly cropping my images by 1.5× from my 50D. This gives a 900mm FoV from a 50D that only leaves a 3168px long edge. Most of my shots are at 1/160 or slower too. With the aircraft tracking across the front the biggest issue with ¾ view shots is parallax making opposite ends of the aircraft have different apparent velocities.

It's a physically large lens, so you are still going to need something smaller and lighter as well. I would say that for me I think a good 70-300 would be a good match, but if you travel by air very much it might be a good idea to look at one of the newer lighter 100-400's as your traveling option. Or even just keep the 100-400 you have for now. It was a good lens option in it's day, and nothing has happened to make it a worse lens now. It just has some better competition now, hence Canon producing the new model.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,622 views & 26 likes for this thread
More reach?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Zac21
732 guests, 269 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.