-= 90D owners unite! Discuss and Post Photos

MatthewK wrote in post #18936650
If you can get close to the subject, your 5D4 + 90D and 100-400II will be superb, so don't start second guessing until YOU put them through their paces It's a "reach progression", start with the 5D4 + 100-400, if you need more reach try the 1.4, and then swap to the 90D, then 90D + 1.4.

I don't think that there is all that much use for the "5D4 and 1.4x" range, unless the 5D4 does some tricks you like that the 90D doesn't do. You seem to have this notion that the 5D4 is better for noise, so you use it for as long as possible in your "reach progression", but that is not true in complicated comparisons like this. The 5D4 is only significantly better for noise at the beginning of the zoom range where the 90D uses 100mm and the 5D4 uses 160mm because the entrance pupil is smallest at the wide end of any zoom. In any of these thought experiments, one overarching fact is that a zoom is best zoomed to max focal length, for the most light collection from any object or composition. Putting the TC on the 5D4 forces you to maintain a zoomed out position deeper into your "reach progression", losing light, and giving very little advantage over the bare D90, but bring the AF up to f/8 and adding TC aberrations unnecessarily.

John Sheehy wrote in post #18936805
I don't think that there is all that much use for the "5D4 and 1.4x" range, unless the 5D4 does some tricks you like that the 90D doesn't do. You seem to have this notion that the 5D4 is better for noise, so you use it for as long as possible in your "reach progression", but that is not true in complicated comparisons like this. The 5D4 is only significantly better for noise at the beginning of the zoom range where the 90D uses 100mm and the 5D4 uses 160mm because the entrance pupil is smallest at the wide end of any zoom. In any of these thought experiments, one overarching fact is that a zoom is best zoomed to max focal length, for the most light collection from any object or composition. Putting the TC on the 5D4 forces you to maintain a zoomed out position deeper into your "reach progression", losing light, and giving very little advantage over the bare D90, but bring the AF up to f/8 and adding TC aberrations unnecessarily.

I disagree with the last sentence about losing light except for a small amount absorbed by the teleconvertor glass. The light from a particular object is spread over more pixels.
As a thought experiment, suppose without the teleconverter, a bird's eye is spread over 10 pixels at a given exposure setting; all of the light from the eye is going into those pixels. Using the teleconverter, the bird will cover more of the sensor, including its eye. As the light from the eye will also cover more pixels, the light at each pixel will be dimmer at the same exposure settings. Many of us will reduce the shutter speed on a long zoom to reduce movement blur, so we need to amplify the reduced signal on each pixel more. A camera with less noise is preferable, in this circumstance.

mhannemann wrote in post #18936553
So, I took the new 90D to my first kid soccer game last Saturday. Tons of bright light - I'm talking f/8 1/320s and it was ISO 100.

i hope those weren't your settings for shooting the action...i took mine to my nephews soccer games, ill try and see if i can find something to post

so, had my nephew(12) run at me as fast as he could while i focused with AI Servo through the view finder...shot at f3.2 and here's where i may have messed up, i zoomed my lens 120-300f2.8 from 171-196 throughout his run...anyways....total count is 25 shots, of those 7 are total trash(kinda crazy that there were 3 sets of 2 that were off in a row), 3 are questionable...but i think the rest hit well...here's a gif...this isnt a full 100% crop, as that gives such a small area, but i cropped the original shot to 2600 or so on the long end

https://gifyu.com/imag​e/kN13

well the gif didn't work...will try and find somewhere else to host it...here's the first shot for an idea

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2hoX​sLT

RodS57 wrote in post #18936739
I'm not sure if you have listed your glass so this may not be possible and I hope this doesn't confuse things but considering location and subject I'd set things up as follows (light permitting)

5D4 + 70-200 (or similar)

90D + 100-400

This gives maximum range before you have to change the setup. Toss in a TC and something short for landscapes.

Just remember, if you can't see the full bear at 70mm then you may be on the menu.

Rod

Good suggestions there! Especially about the bears - theoretically our guide has got them visible well before they’re within a 70mm view!

I don’t have the 70-200 but do have the standard 24-105 instead - this is a great idea you’ve got there.

Thanks!

Capn Jack wrote in post #18936815
Many of us will reduce the shutter speed on a long zoom to reduce movement blur, so we need to amplify the reduced signal on each pixel more. A camera with less noise is preferable, in this circumstance.

Hi Capn'. Have I read this right or have I missed the point? Reduce shutter speed to reduce movement blur.

MatthewK wrote in post #18936650
If you can get close to the subject, your 5D4 + 90D and 100-400II will be superb, so don't start second guessing until YOU put them through their paces It's a "reach progression", start with the 5D4 + 100-400, if you need more reach try the 1.4, and then swap to the 90D, then 90D + 1.4.

This was my thinking.

I have the 5D Mark IV and 100-400 II and when I needed the extra reach I'd put on the 1.4x III but did not like shooting at f/8 hence adding the 90D to my collection - Loving this new combo at the minute, just wish it would stop raining so I can get out!!

Martin.D wrote in post #18936914
This was my thinking.

I have the 5D Mark IV and 100-400 II and when I needed the extra reach I'd put on the 1.4x III but did not like shooting at f/8 hence adding the 90D to my collection - Loving this new combo at the minute, just wish it would stop raining so I can get out!!

Send some over to northern Australia! We haven't had a drop of rain since April and it's hot as hell!

Ray.Petri wrote in post #18936896
Hi Capn'. Have I read this right or have I missed the point? Reduce shutter speed to reduce movement blur.

I see how that sentence is confusing. An example may clarify what I am trying to explain.
Using a 500 mm lens, I may use a shutter of 1/500 second. With the teleconverter, I may use 1/600 second. As numbers go, 1/600 is smaller than 1/500, hence the wording in my sentence.

Capn Jack wrote in post #18936965
I see how that sentence is confusing. An example may clarify what I am trying to explain.
Using a 500 mm lens, I may use a shutter of 1/500 second. With the teleconverter, I may use 1/600 second. As numbers go, 1/600 is smaller than 1/500, hence the wording in my sentence.

Capn Jack, thank you for your informative response. Perhaps with your skilful manipulation of the facts and figures you would be a perfect candidate to become one of the UKs members of parliament.
Our country needs you! (Statement attributed to Lord Kitchener c1914). Just joking Capn.

John Sheehy wrote in post #18936805
I don't think that there is all that much use for the "5D4 and 1.4x" range, unless the 5D4 does some tricks you like that the 90D doesn't do. You seem to have this notion that the 5D4 is better for noise, so you use it for as long as possible in your "reach progression", but that is not true in complicated comparisons like this. The 5D4 is only significantly better for noise at the beginning of the zoom range where the 90D uses 100mm and the 5D4 uses 160mm because the entrance pupil is smallest at the wide end of any zoom. In any of these thought experiments, one overarching fact is that a zoom is best zoomed to max focal length, for the most light collection from any object or composition. Putting the TC on the 5D4 forces you to maintain a zoomed out position deeper into your "reach progression", losing light, and giving very little advantage over the bare D90, but bring the AF up to f/8 and adding TC aberrations unnecessarily.

You're the only one making this way more complicated than it needs to be, John. Based on noise characteristics and ease of managing in post, yeah, I'll take a 5D4+1.4 over any APSC. Sorry if that doesn't jive with your in-the-weeds skullduggery.

Capn Jack wrote in post #18936815
I disagree with the last sentence about losing light except for a small amount absorbed by the teleconvertor glass. The light from a particular object is spread over more pixels.

You get it over more pixels, too, with higher pixel density, without the small losses of contrast and light in the TC, and without making it harder for phase-detect AF to "see". That was part of my point.

Define "exposure settings". Do you mean the same Av and TV values? That would not be true, and who uses the same Av value when they add a TC? Is it even possible if you were already wide open without the TC? I can see what you're saying if you mean "the same entrance pupil" (with 1.4x the f-number) and "the same shutter speed", but the entrance pupil size is not a direct part of "exposure settings".

Did you actually mean "increase the shutter speed", or, "reduce the exposure time"? In any event, the most common *wise* decision would give the same shutter speed at any same FOV (including reduced FOV if you get into cropping) since pixel count is very close with the 5D4 and 90D, and motion blur as measured in pixels is very similar. A person may choose to increase the shutter speed for a higher pixel count, but that is "meeting the pixels"; not "meeting the image". Noise vs motion blur is always a compromise. The fact that leaning towards less motion blur and more noise can be seen better with a higher pixel count does not mean that you have to do it. It is an optional compromise, but the image created with a higher pixel count and the same, slower shutter speed that might be chosen for a lower pixel count would not be any worse than the lower pixel count image, and still show more detail despite being able to isolate the motion blur better, visually.

And what kind of noise would that be? You just said in another post that you don't believe that read noise is significant. Do you realize that photon noise is pretty close for all current sensors of the same size, or per square millimeter of different sensor sizes, so one camera would be just as good as the next here, based on your belief that read noise is insignificant, and you are correct, if we are talking about higher tones of lower ISO settings. The cameras do vary quite a bit, however, in deep shadows and truly high ISOs, because of read noise, or "camera-added electronic noise" if you want a more semantics-proof label for the problematic noise.

Anyway, I think you missed my point. My point is that zooms, whether they vary in open f-number or are consistent across their range, have smaller entrance pupils at the wide end of the zoom. This is to be avoided, if possible. Zooms at the long end can benefit from having a TC if the pixels are too large to fully tap the analog resolution of a lens, but when you zoom out with a TC still attached, to give an angle of view present in the zoom without a TC, you have a smaller entrance pupil and a higher f-number than you would with the bare lens with that same angle of view. That is why I would skip the "5D4 with 1.4x" stage in MatthewK's "reach progression".

I'd vote for 'What the Duck' for PM at the moment!

Sorry for the OT, although WTD is a photographer duck

MatthewK wrote in post #18936983
You're the only one making this way more complicated than it needs to be, John. Based on noise characteristics and ease of managing in post, yeah, I'll take a 5D4+1.4 over any APSC. Sorry if that doesn't jive with your in-the-weeds skullduggery.

I'm making it more efficient; that's what I am doing. One could say that you are making things complicated, by using a TC when it is counter-productive; there is nothing more complicated about a "5D4 -> 90D -> 90D+TC" reach progression vs a "5D4 -> 5D4+TC -> 90D -> 90D+TC" one; in fact, it has one less step and eliminates the TC (with it's AF debilitation and small aberrations and contrast loss) in more of the range. TCs should be a last resort for pixels-on-subject. Perhaps if you were using an older APS-C against the 5D4, it might be better to include the "5D4+TC" range, or never even use the APS-C because it doesn't have higher pixel density, and being old, has a lot more noise per unit of sensor area.

The idea that larger sensors (especially with larger pixels) are best and should be used as much as possible in your "reach progression", even if it requires a TC, is not true. The 90D has a better imaging surface, per unit of sensor area, over the 5D4. It has a little less noise per unit of sensor area, especially at higher ISOs. The only IQ benefit that exists for the 5D4 (when you are above base ISO) in this "reach progression" is the range where you have the zoom at 1.6x the focal length with the 5D4 vs the 90D, and only because the zoom gives a larger entrance pupil at the longer end of its range, because you use the entire 5D4 frame without a TC that would shrink the entrance pupil for the same angle of view.

There a significant amount of telling going on here, but not a whole lot of showing, which for me, not helpful. I stop reading when things start going deep into the technical weeds. Am I alone in this? I’m a visual learner, so some comparative images that help connect the dots would be helpful. Although I returned the 90D, I remain curious what the sensor has to offer, although if it requires a whole lot of extra this that or the other steps in post, it would be difficult for me to embrace that.