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 EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 12 Sep 2019 (Thursday) 14:42
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

-= 90D owners unite! Discuss and Post Photos

 
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
4,459 posts
Likes: 1170
Joined Jan 2010
     
Jul 25, 2022 09:30 |  #2806

Clough wrote in post #19408658 (external link)
I’m looking for some recommendations based on everyone’s experiences, I’m really happy with the camera, just leaves something to be desired in the early mornings and evenings for most part I can get some reasonably good images I generally shoot wildlife, birds when the bigger mammals are not cooperating. This past weekend for instance I was after some elk pictures (I will post some when I get home tonight, before and after I ran through topaz denoise and some with sharpening). I’m running a ef 100-400 mk II I have a 1.4 III extender but very rarely use, my question for you guys is what is the best route to take with gaining a bit better early and late light performance and reduce having to crank up iso? Do I look for a used ef 400 2.8 or 4 (600mm wouldn’t be out of question either) and be able to also use the extender. Or do I jump to a r7 which will seem to give a bit better results from what I’ve gathered and use what I have with the adapter while gaining the better animal auto focus? I understand full frames are better for these scenarios but would 100% miss the reach of a crop sensor.

I haven't seen any convincing evidence that the RAW noise of the R7 is any better than the 90D; it is slight, at best. What is very different is the OOC JPEGs and default DPP conversions; they have more noise vs detail intelligence in their processing.

Regardless, the M6-II, 90D, R7, and R6 have very similar noise per unit of sensor area, and are Canon's top tier, and you can't really improve noise over the 90D without getting a lens with a larger pupil, and that would be true even if you switched to the R6, Canon's cleanest FF camera.

Now, many people *think* that the 90D is noisy per unit of sensor area, but they are ignoring the roles of magnification and gratuitous sharpening at the pixel level.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Clough
Member
86 posts
Gallery: 22 photos
Likes: 755
Joined Nov 2021
     
Jul 25, 2022 11:56 as a reply to  @ John Sheehy's post |  #2807

Ya I wasn’t set on getting a new body already, I really like the 90d and think it’s really underestimated camera. Anytime I have any doubts about it I scroll through this thread and realize I still have a lot to learn haha just would like like some better low light performance. I would really like a 400 2.8 but I could justify the cost of a f4 more considering this is strictly a hobbie, but would like to lower my iso as much as possible in those situations were wildlife is generally more active.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drsilver
Goldmember
Avatar
2,052 posts
Gallery: 749 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 8243
Joined Mar 2010
Location: North Bend, WA
     
Jul 25, 2022 13:32 |  #2808

Clough wrote in post #19408704 (external link)
Ya I wasn’t set on getting a new body already, I really like the 90d and think it’s really underestimated camera. Anytime I have any doubts about it I scroll through this thread and realize I still have a lot to learn haha just would like like some better low light performance. I would really like a 400 2.8 but I could justify the cost of a f4 more considering this is strictly a hobbie, but would like to lower my iso as much as possible in those situations were wildlife is generally more active.

That's the bane of aspiring sports and wildlife photographers. There will be times when you'll truly need a long, fast, very expensive lens to get the shot you want. The question becomes, how much are you willing to spend to get that shot?

If you're a pro or an aspiring pro, there's every possibility that lens is just a worthwhile capital expense. Maybe.

If you're a hobbyist, how committed are you? Is it even possible to do it financially? Would you have to sell your car to get a 400 2.8? You'll need your car to get to places where you can use that lens.

I'm a hobbyist with a general budget for my hobby and I weigh my expenses carefully. But I'm not immune to convincing myself that I really need this "too expensive" thing. But many of those extravagances became daily drivers and when I use them, I'm happy. So, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Welcome to the club.


Flickr (external link) : Instagram (web)] (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
markesc
Goldmember
4,672 posts
Gallery: 2025 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 34075
Joined Feb 2014
Post edited 4 months ago by markesc.
     
Jul 25, 2022 14:41 |  #2809

Well.

So you need 'more light' somehow -

2 ways to get there

a) A lens that gathers more light or b) a camera sensor that gathers more light

What's cheaper? What do you want to carry around all day?

If you have trillions to blow - then yeah, get that 600mm F4  :p

OR: You can simply get a full frame that gathers more light - A used Canon 5dIV or maybe a new R - I picked up the R recently on sale NEW for $1599... You don't need obscenly fast AF for 4-legged animals, but if you have TRILLIONS to blow then sure, get an R5...

Do keep in mind that even with a full frame and the same 100-400ii, you'll lose the whole "crop factor" aspect, which will then require either more cropping or better approach skills. So then you can go full circle and end up right back to where you started as you're then going to have lower pixel density on said full frame.

Also: 1.4xIII = slower AF... I am in the minority opinion that it will hurt more than it helps, so, I'd ditch the extender, and gain back a stop of light - which, will then allow for better ISO use, but maybe work on your approach game.

Overall you would likely be better with a combination of full frame and better approach skills. Usually deer/elk, once they're acquainted with you, won't really care if you creep up on them.

I have been as little as less than 15' away and have then get "bored" of me:


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

Clough wrote in post #19408658 (external link)
I’m looking for some recommendations based on everyone’s experiences, I’m really happy with the camera, just leaves something to be desired in the early mornings and evenings for most part I can get some reasonably good images I generally shoot wildlife, birds when the bigger mammals are not cooperating. This past weekend for instance I was after some elk pictures (I will post some when I get home tonight, before and after I ran through topaz denoise and some with sharpening). I’m running a ef 100-400 mk II I have a 1.4 III extender but very rarely use, my question for you guys is what is the best route to take with gaining a bit better early and late light performance and reduce having to crank up iso? Do I look for a used ef 400 2.8 or 4 (600mm wouldn’t be out of question either) and be able to also use the extender. Or do I jump to a r7 which will seem to give a bit better results from what I’ve gathered and use what I have with the adapter while gaining the better animal auto focus? I understand full frames are better for these scenarios but would 100% miss the reach of a crop sensor.


https://chrismarkes.sm​ugmug.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
markesc
Goldmember
4,672 posts
Gallery: 2025 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 34075
Joined Feb 2014
     
Jul 25, 2022 14:53 |  #2810

The other part to this:

IS has improved a TON - so that 100-400ii should allow for iso400-800 f5.6 and shutter speeds around 1/50th or faster; maybe under expose by -2/3rds to buy shutter speed rather than going higher ISO...

Personally I believe the "thing" with these shots truly comes down to approach skills > camera equipment.

drsilver wrote in post #19408739 (external link)
That's the bane of aspiring sports and wildlife photographers. There will be times when you'll truly need a long, fast, very expensive lens to get the shot you want. The question becomes, how much are you willing to spend to get that shot?

If you're a pro or an aspiring pro, there's every possibility that lens is just a worthwhile capital expense. Maybe.

If you're a hobbyist, how committed are you? Is it even possible to do it financially? Would you have to sell your car to get a 400 2.8? You'll need your car to get to places where you can use that lens.

I'm a hobbyist with a general budget for my hobby and I weigh my expenses carefully. But I'm not immune to convincing myself that I really need this "too expensive" thing. But many of those extravagances became daily drivers and when I use them, I'm happy. So, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Welcome to the club.


https://chrismarkes.sm​ugmug.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Clough
Member
86 posts
Gallery: 22 photos
Likes: 755
Joined Nov 2021
     
Jul 25, 2022 15:48 as a reply to  @ drsilver's post |  #2811

That’s exactly it, I don’t mind spending the money if it’s gunna get me we’re I wana be haha I often compare when I want something for this hobby to my old hobbies and find I can justify it a lot easier due to the amount of money I’d dump into them and have no return on it when it was time to sell. As photo equipment seems to hold its value a lot better. I will not be selling my truck in order to finance this next step either haha




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Clough
Member
86 posts
Gallery: 22 photos
Likes: 755
Joined Nov 2021
     
Jul 25, 2022 16:15 as a reply to  @ markesc's post |  #2812

Lol I wish I had trillions to blow, I threw the 600mm in there cause a guys gotta have a dream! I find myself using the extender less and less, this spring I was in the Rockies snow was on the ground in most places and the extender seemed to work flawlessly with all the extra bright light reflecting off the snow that’s the only place I’ve really been happy with it.

My approach game is pretty reasonable I would think anyways but could always be better right! I would much rather work with what I have but there’s always that what if in the back of my head it seems.

This last post is what makes me realize I need to worry more about the settings also, i hadn’t under exposed, and I should of dropped my shutter speed even more then I had. I had a mental block that said no more at 1/100th when I should of dropped a little more off. Thanks for the input! It’s much appreciated




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drsilver
Goldmember
Avatar
2,052 posts
Gallery: 749 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 8243
Joined Mar 2010
Location: North Bend, WA
     
Jul 25, 2022 17:03 |  #2813

My big-lens experience comes from a sports past. My biggest limitations were the sidelines.

I dabble in some bird and wildlife photography now, mainly because it reminds me of shooting sports. A lot of crossover in the skills. But the only way to become a great wildlife photographer is to become a great hunter. If you can get close enough, the best gear is the gear you have with you. Get out there and shoot with whatever you have.

That hunting skill is something I do not possess and probably never will. Without that, a long, fast lens probably wouldn't help me too much. At least not enough to make a difference on a regular basis. So that's something I don't really have GAS about. My 400 5.6 on a 90D is fine. No antacid needed.


Flickr (external link) : Instagram (web)] (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Clough
Member
86 posts
Gallery: 22 photos
Likes: 755
Joined Nov 2021
     
Jul 25, 2022 17:46 as a reply to  @ drsilver's post |  #2814

The more I think about it the more I realize how much i have to work my camera skills, going to a new body would be a complete waste definitely. I think ill bide my time and wait for a used 400 f4 or if I have the funds a 2.8 to pop up, they seem to be few and far between local to me I have hard time buying sight unseen and spending that type of money without at least putting my hands on it so I have time to develop my camera skills. Here is the elk picture from Saturday i was talking about, please forgive me ha i was wrong on the settings i definitely could of dropped the shutter speeds quite a bit more and got a way better result talk about amature hour! i could also very well be pixel peeping when i should not be and just look at the picture as a whole. The first photo is right after import into lightroom and the second is a crop and run through denoise nothing else.


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
markesc
Goldmember
4,672 posts
Gallery: 2025 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 34075
Joined Feb 2014
     
Jul 25, 2022 17:51 |  #2815

Yeah you would be surprised what you can get away with in terms of low shutter speeds. You will however need to take multiple shots as some will be out of focus or have motion blur. I have noticed that the IS on the 100-400II behaves differently depending upon angle - so it will work better if you are parrallel to the ground, and "less good" as you move up to get that bird high up in a tree. Keep your elbow in, and sometimes, don't even start taking shots if you've been walking/hiking/climbin​g...take a few for a breather, become acquainted with the area/vibe/etc...

One other minor thing - in your 90d menu, there's a setting in C.Fn II: Autofocus Tracking sensitivity - I have mine set to "Locked on" (all the way to the left). #4 - AI Servo 1st image priority = "Focus" (all the way to the right), #5 Second image priority = "Focus" (all the way to the right") - #12 face tracking - Disabled (I have never used this on the 90d) -

For fun - my 100-400II, no extender micro adjustment is on 1: All by same amount +2 <------- I didn't use a chart or anything, just a quick trial/error for a minute and ain't broke/no fix!! haha.

Hope this helps!

Clough wrote in post #19408807 (external link)
Lol I wish I had trillions to blow, I threw the 600mm in there cause a guys gotta have a dream! I find myself using the extender less and less, this spring I was in the Rockies snow was on the ground in most places and the extender seemed to work flawlessly with all the extra bright light reflecting off the snow that’s the only place I’ve really been happy with it.

My approach game is pretty reasonable I would think anyways but could always be better right! I would much rather work with what I have but there’s always that what if in the back of my head it seems.

This last post is what makes me realize I need to worry more about the settings also, i hadn’t under exposed, and I should of dropped my shutter speed even more then I had. I had a mental block that said no more at 1/100th when I should of dropped a little more off. Thanks for the input! It’s much appreciated


https://chrismarkes.sm​ugmug.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
markesc
Goldmember
4,672 posts
Gallery: 2025 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 34075
Joined Feb 2014
     
Jul 25, 2022 17:53 |  #2816

I'm sure the accountants at Canon wish they never made the 400 f5.6 - that's the sleeper of all wildlife lenses!! I could never find one for sale as people tend to hold onto them, so ended up with the 100-400II. I did rent the 100-400I - did a week long trip and found it was nice, but, not consistent (about the same ballpark as the original tamron 150-600 roughly)...

drsilver wrote in post #19408826 (external link)
My big-lens experience comes from a sports past. My biggest limitations were the sidelines.

I dabble in some bird and wildlife photography now, mainly because it reminds me of shooting sports. A lot of crossover in the skills. But the only way to become a great wildlife photographer is to become a great hunter. If you can get close enough, the best gear is the gear you have with you. Get out there and shoot with whatever you have.

That hunting skill is something I do not possess and probably never will. Without that, a long, fast lens probably wouldn't help me too much. At least not enough to make a difference on a regular basis. So that's something I don't really have GAS about. My 400 5.6 on a 90D is fine. No antacid needed.


https://chrismarkes.sm​ugmug.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
markesc
Goldmember
4,672 posts
Gallery: 2025 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 34075
Joined Feb 2014
     
Jul 25, 2022 17:54 |  #2817

Had a lot more glare going on here than it looks... thought it was sort of a "neat" scene with the light streaks.... they didn't stick around as the sun dropped closer to the horizon...


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


https://chrismarkes.sm​ugmug.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Clough
Member
86 posts
Gallery: 22 photos
Likes: 755
Joined Nov 2021
     
Jul 25, 2022 18:27 as a reply to  @ markesc's post |  #2818

Sure does help! ill try it out ill probably do a micro focus adjustment again i thought i had it pretty close but l think i could do some fine tuning!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
markesc
Goldmember
4,672 posts
Gallery: 2025 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 34075
Joined Feb 2014
     
Jul 25, 2022 18:34 |  #2819

It's dangerous!! I think second guessing becomes the biggest issue with that stuff... but I'd make sure you have a solid chart on the neighbors house far enough away that you're easily into infinity to dial it in for animal situations...

Clough wrote in post #19408861 (external link)
Sure does help! ill try it out ill probably do a micro focus adjustment again i thought i had it pretty close but l think i could do some fine tuning!


https://chrismarkes.sm​ugmug.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Oristo
Member
Avatar
36 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 10
Joined Apr 2022
Location: Savannah, GA, USA
     
Jul 25, 2022 19:20 as a reply to  @ Clough's post |  #2820

For lower shutter speeds, I hacked a plastic air rifle gunstock camera mount to lower my shake frequency,
then added a red dot sight. The next refinement is mounting a remote shutter release.


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




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

707,945 views & 8,176 likes for this thread
-= 90D owners unite! Discuss and Post Photos
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
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 cjp42
1185 guests, 196 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.