Recent Feedback
i have nikkon D90 with Nikkor 70-300 lens.i like to " shoot" birds, close and far. those far away are usually in the open so i suspect i should be able to cope with loss of f stops. the closer birds and ones up in trees where light is not so bright might pose a problem if i lose too much f stop. ( i know i can increase ISO but at expense of quality).many of the guys i go out with have fixed lens 500s or equivalent. i prefer to stick with my lens ( because we are heading on safari next year) but wonder about an extender. i believe nikon have x1.4, x1.7 and x2 extenders compatible with my nikon lens.presumably that means 300mm becomes equivalent to a 420 lens , 510 lens and 600mm lens respectively. correct?i understand i will loses f stops the bigger the extender. correct?the shops here do not hold the range so how do i choose which to get to give versatility for bird shooting described above?thx
Optional Information: Make: NIKON D90 Already Tried: SEE MY QUESTION.
Hello, thanks for contacting us. My name is XXXXX XXXXX X'XX try to assist you with your issue.The x1.7 extender will give you a very good range, probably closer to a 550mm when using your lens in it's 300 setting (because of the ccd conversion factor the math does not always work linearly here). it will make you loose almost 2 fstops, remember that the more lenses you put on the darker the whole combo becomes.Also the extender makes you loose definition (this may be not noticeable but it will be there).Both things are not possible if you want to keep you 70-300 lens, you will have a darker image with the extender bu you will get the expected range....It's a trade off here... unless you are willing to take the extender off when shooting closer "darker" subjects.You can also go for the x1.4 extender but I doubt you will get the range you want. and you still lose 1fstop.BotXXXXX XXXXXne, if you are *not* willing to change the lens altogether to shoot your birds then you will have to withstand darker images.You can test the fstop loss by just forcing the camera to a 1 or 2 point higher fstop than the automatic and checking if you are comfortable with the result. In my camera 1 point is usually not that much and you can always use some exposure compensation afterward.Also your camera can take decent pictures up to 200ISO but then again it is all a matter of taste.Let me know if this covered your issue.Best.
Thank you Federico.
because we are often out fairly early to bird watch the light is not always terrific. sometimesi cant shoot at all.
when light is adequate i always shoot manual settings with the aperture around f 9.0 to cut depth of field . hence i often need to push the ISO up around 800 to achieve this . the shutter speed then can vary of course depending on just how dark it is.
so if i understood you correctly Federico, if i got a 1.7 extender and kept my fstop at 9, then that would mean my shutter speed would get very slow ...and hence probably a dark shot withmaybe movement/ blurring given weight of pointing the camera upwards (ie no monopod or tripod).
(my lowest f stop with the nikkor 70-300 lens is 4.5). as i think this thru, i suppose if i sacrifice DOF then a compromise would be to get my f-stop down to around 6.3 with the extender without having to push the ISO so much and achieve a faster "safer" shutter speed.
Fedrico, is it not possible to compensate for the "dark" picture using postprocessing with such things as Lightroom. i thought if the picture is aleast in focus the software couldfixit up (as long as not too much ISO? am i being unrealistic?
another part of my problem which i wonder if the extender may aggrevate is that most of my shooting is upwards towards the sky. hence the bird can be silhouetted even with "point " focussing and "point" light meter setting. whatimpact do you think the extender might have using these "point" settings to try an d force the camaera to focus its magic on thelittle bird?
thx again
david
Relist: Answer came too late.please answer my follow up query. i have waited nearly 12 hours for a reply.
Hello. My name isXXXXX can provide you with additional assistance.You are absolutely correct. Adding the extender will effectively increase your lowest aperture. However, there is a significant benefit to shooting to RAW format on these cameras in cases like this. As long as you have the camera set to use the RAW format, all information that is available at the time is in the photo and you will be most able to make adjustments to your shots post-processing.At a higher DOF, I think it would be advantageous to have the AF lock rather than continuous focusing because of exactly what you are mentioning. However, wherever you have the focus point set will still apply with an extender, and the metering will still be accurate since it is measured by the actual light coming through the lens - it's metering what's getting to the camera regardless of what comes before that. So, for example, if you had focus point and meter set to center and you put that center dot on the bird, you will get the settings you would expect. In order to silhouette a bird, you could simply point it to the site of the bird, lock the metering, point it back at the bird and shoot. There are actually many ways you can do this. In the example that you describe, with the bird against the sun, you would just have to be careful to be using spot metering versus center-weighted metering - in a picture of that high of a contrast, it just won't work.There are a couple of other things to consider. Post Processing is your friend - when you are out taking the photo the only thing you HAVE to avoid is "clipping", which is where the luminance beyond the range of the camera all gets put into the the edges of the range. For example, when you shoot, everything in the picture has to be between the actual lightest and darkest pixels of the framed shot - clipping is the only case really, where you won't have all the possible data in a RAW image to get the best picture from in post. Just about everything else can be corrected for without having to "add" information.Also keep in mind that the framing of the subject isn't the most important thing in digital photography, since in many cases, the RAW image proportions will not be the same as the final print - so some cropping will always be don. And generally we'd prefer having an extraordinary photo that fills three quarters of the frame than one that fills most of it, but is lit poorly. In todays SLR cameras you have some some room with the resolution - with 12.3MP of resolution in the D90, a normal degree of cropping won't affect the quality of the final product to a perceptible degree unless you're making poster-size prints.I would also experiment with the ISO values and go a little higher if you need to. With a digital SLR, you really only run the risk of adding some "noise" to the photograph... and really only at the very high settings. This type of noise can easily be corrected in post-processing through nearly perfect algorithms to replace the incorrect pixels.Only you will know for sure what works for you. What I have done and do is something you may want to try... take some pictures under very controlled settings - only changing one thing.... for example, take a picture of the same thing in the same lighting and only change the ISO setting, (and still meter appropriately) and then sit down on the computer and take a good look at the images. In something like photoshop you can zoom into the pixel level and see specifically what differences you see. Controlled shooting like that is the only way to know for certain for yourself. When I have to change something, I generally go with ISO since in my experience, on a modern digital SLR like yours, the effect, to me, seems negligible.I hope this answers some of your questions. Let me know if there's something that needs more explanation.Oh... and one more thing I would suggest. I ALWAYS carry a high quality (1.2) 50mm lens with me. That focal length on the d90 perfectly matches the focal plane to the CCD chip (equivalent to a 35mm film and 35mm lens). Regardless of the weather, lighting, or anything else, it will provide stunning pictures. Of course, I realize you're not going to be climbing trees to take pictures on the safari, so it has it's limitations. But if you bring that along with you and take some photos with it, I know you'll be glad you did.Mike
I'm sorry. I probably live on the other side of the world.I concur with Michael though. Best.
wow, what a great answer Mike.
i have never thought, or knew how to use the AF-l/AE-L functions.
let me see if I've got this right.
i go into menu / custom settings / controls / assign AEL - AEF button and then set it to "AE lock only" (or is it to "AE-L (hold")?) ?.
then when i see my little bird up in the tree with lots of light behind, i move across into a less lit up area, push shutter half way, then the AE-L, then back to the bird to let the spot focus do its job.
(or are you saying have both AE-L and AF-L on, which might mean the small bird with my expander may then be out of focus).
Mike, does VR have to be switched off using the expander?
and if you do not mind me seeking 2nd opinion on origional query, which expander would you suggest for my situation , the x1.4 ,x1.7 , x 2.0.
i should add, sometimes the birds are up high and silhoetted (the above problem you have advised on) and other times in the bushes closer up where there is less light!!
...and the problem is i need versatility as this little blighters move about so not much time to be switching lenses!!!
Mike, i dont have a 50 mm lens but do have a Nikon 18-55.. is that a poor substitute esp as i am taking my wife for her 60th to Africa next year.. what with a 70-300, and expander it may get a bit expensive to have to buy a dedicated new lens.
thx again for terrific responses.
David
Relist: Other.MIKE HAANIGAN WAS IN PROCESS OF ANSWERING THIS QUESTION ...ARE YOU THERE MIKE?wow, what a great answer Mike.i have never thought, or knew how to use the AF-l/AE-L functions. let me see if I've got this right.i go into menu / custom settings / controls / assign AEL - AEF button and then set it to "AE lock only" (or is it to "AE-L (hold")?) ?.then when i see my little bird up in the tree with lots of light behind, i move across into a less lit up area, push shutter half way, then the AE-L, then back to the bird to let the spot focus do its job.(or are you saying have both AE-L and AF-L on, which might mean the small bird with my expander may then be out of focus). Mike, does VR have to be switched off using the expander?and if you do not mind me seeking 2nd opinion on origional query, which expander would you suggest for my situation , the x1.4 ,x1.7 , x 2.0.i should add, sometimes the birds are up high and silhoetted (the above problem you have advised on) and other times in the bushes closer up where there is less light!!...and the problem is i need versatility as this little blighters move about so not much time to be switching lenses!!! Mike, i dont have a 50 mm lens but do have a Nikon 18-55.. is that a poor substitute esp as i am taking my wife for her 60th to Africa next year.. what with a 70-300, and expander it may get a bit expensive to have to buy a dedicated new lens.thx again for terrific responses.David
Relist: Answer came too late.WAS NOT TIMELY , PROBABLY AS I AM IN AUSTRALIA. THEN I GOT A SECOND PERSON WHO GAVE EXCELLENT RESPONSE TO XXXXX QUERY BUT WHEN I REPLIED TO HIM THE ORIGINAL PERSON WAS BACK 36 HRS LATER AN DDID NOT REPLY TO XXXXX
Thank you! That's quite a compliment! After this set of questions, please rate my answer, and then we can open a followup question if you'd like. When there are so many followup questions, I start getting a little pressure to do that. Please understand that we are in different parts of the world, so these delays will happen. If I thought that I had provided you an incomplete answer to your question, I may have checked back today when I wasn't working to see if I had missed something. So please be patient. Also, I am only compensated for helping you if you rate my answer highly, so I certainly want you to be happy with my level of service. However, there has to be a point at which the question is considered answered. While I could sit here and talk about this all day, they wouldn't let me keep doing this for long if I did. After giving you this additional information, I think I've covered the entire topic of your question, and if that's not the case, and you want to go into more detail, it's important to understand, that I'm not leaving this question and going to bed, expecting that you to need more answers right away. If you do need more answers, I'm happy to help, but please don't relist the question or that will prohibit me from being paid for the help I have provided so far, and I don't think that's your intention. This is basically all my family's fault... do you know how much they complain when you don't feed them?As for the settings - my suggestion is to become intimately familiar with all the lock settings. I think that with what you are shooting, the only time you may consider a AF-L, is in a situation where you don't think the subject will focus, like in a silhuette, so you won't use it often. AE-Lock, however, you will. So I would set the AE-Lcck for a half press of the butto so you can do as you are saying. For example, you are pointing to a bird and sea nice silluette, but you would like to also see some detail on the bird - yes, that's where this comes into play. You're taking the same picture, you just want it to meter from something other than the bird with the sun glaring around it. This might just be the tree 6 inches to the right of the bird where the sun isn't in the background. Then when it meters the light there for a typical "no sun" picture, amd you poing it back, you will have a properly metered picture of the bird - the sun wont be throwing off the camera so much that it's going to ruin the picture (imagine, when you meter and you're pointing at the sun, the camera is going to turn everything down, and down, down, and then more, except your shutter speed which will be like 1/1600th of a second. So the sillhuette will be the depest of black, but so might some of the tree, and your wife if she's standing next to it... and the black will be black... no more information about what is in that area of the picture.For the AF-Lock, I don't think you would want to use that in this case - if you are trying to push DOF out, you'll want it to focus on the subject this model can do suprisingly well in thie situation - just make sure the focus it's set up to you the focus illumination, or for it to be automatic - that's that other light that lights up before you take the picture, and it's to make sure it has enough light in the foreground to get focus. And it works are suprising distances - allowing the camera to see enough of the foreground to get focus. As I said, I would experiment with all this to find out what it means to you. Nothing can replace that - when you take a particular picture, changing one setting 5 ot 10 different ways... or with two different focal lengths., etc..You correctly point out the inconvenience of having a fixed focal length lense like I suggested. But where it comes in handy, is those brids you are talking about - maybe something you're thinking, "there's now way I can get a good shot of this"... The 50mm will take a picture without flash in a much wider variety of lighting conditions. LOL... when I use mine, I do get a litte annoyed when *I* have to move instead of the lens just having to move... and sometimes I end up in a precarious position to get my shot. But it's a lens that if I didn't have, I wouldn't have captured some of the best photos in my life that I now have. There isn't a zoom lens that can compare to it... in fact there are two 50mm lenses, one is f1.8, and the other is f1.4. The f1.4 is the one I'm talking about specifically. It's a much better lens with fewer lens elements and perfect optics. The only thing I've ever seen that can match it on my digital SLR is my 50mm from my Nikon F Flim Camera. Today that lense is up around $800 and manual focus. so not necessarily something I would expect someone to run about and buy. The 50mm f1.4 is reasonably priced though - and the best lense you will ever have for that camera or any Nikon. Here's the one I'm talking about.
Nikon 50mm f/1.4D AF Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras
But of course, if you don't want to have to shell out a few hundred bucks for a new lens that you are only going to use sometimes (although my rule is that I use that lense unless I really can't find a way to make it work for the shots I want) - in that case, you can get some nice pictures with the 18-55mm.
What I find with a longer focal length is that it "sort of flattens" the pictures... the depth of field is still there, and you see all the evidence fo the depth of field, but, how to I explain this? Ok... the dept of field is still there, but when you use a long zoom lens, you actually get more, but it's "compressed". And sometimes I do that just for effect... particularly in sports or car racing where you might want something like that. To explain that better, think of everyhing in front of your camera as an accordian-like tube. That's everything around the subject... everything perfectly to proportion when you take a picture - but when you zoom, what you are doing is "squeezing" that accordion a little toward the camera - you might even see more of the accordion now in the distance.... but the person standing behind the subject that's accross the street might look like he or she is instead 5 feet behind the subject. It hink that's what's in my head.
Do you understnad what I'm babbling about, or do I sound like a total mental case? It's getting very late and I love photography, so I shouldn't even be here because I'll never stop talking about it!
And finally, I think this is the only question I haven't answered - the extender. I don't use them and really wouldn't recommend anyone else does. There are plenty a people that will disagree with me on this, but a lense for one of this cameras, especially a good one like Nikon/Nikkor, is a precision crafted optical device. It is made br the absolute genious part scientest/part artist/engineer to perform perfectly the way it is desing. IMO, adding an extender in the mix would be like changing some colors in a Picasso.
Consider this - a 600mm Nikor Lens is about $10,500. So I wouldn't take an already fantastic (and not cheap) lens and change it to something else inexpensively. You won't be happy with the results. Do you really think you need that kind of focal lengh? Consider that you will need at least a monopod for something like that... but if you REALLy do need that kind of focal length, then in my opion, the only way to do it is to save up the $10k and get one. Remember the resulting photos, no matter how expensive everyhing on your camera is, will be limited by the least expensive components. I know that buying a $10k lense is not small order, and I certainly don't have one. But if you think of it this way, I think you'll be making the best choices. Especially coinsidering it's a special thing you are doing with the safari, and you don't do that kind of thing all the time (well I don't!). Stick with the original euqipent that fits into your budjet and use that.
Also, bring a long a small, but decent point and shoot. You will find that you can also get some astounding pictures with some of those cameras (no one has to know), but in certain circumstances. For example, my neice travels with one
EVERYWHERE, and last time I saw her pictures of Switzerland, I was flabberghasted... they were mosty landscapes, mountains, shorelines, etc. But I was like "how did you get pictures like that"... so I would bring that as a backup... and not only a backup, but so you can take a few pictures of the areas your are shooting in when you're shooting so you'll know what the conditions were at the time of shooting. If you think this sounds even more nuts... just wait. I'm full of them!
I have to run off to bed. I hope this has been helpful!
You kind of have me wishing I was going on that Safari with you!
Mike
Experience: 20+ Years Experience in Field. MCSE, ICCP, CNE, Greenbelt
been out of action Mike.
some developments.
1. the nikon TC does not fit my Nikkon 70-300 lens.
2. Sigma TC does but struggles with autofocus.
3. so i bought on 2 week loan the sigma 150 - 500 lens as a compromise. heavy to handle, reduced f stops as you pointed out. shots nt bad but having to drop the f stop meanti had to push the ISO and hence loss of sharpness.
4. so not so sure thisis the way to go.
5. been reading and lots of comments that a nikon fixed lens 300 will give great shots and then use a x1.4 TC and dont lose much f stop compared to the 150-500. better pictures they say.
6. if this is the way to go, then 300 f2.8 is best but expensive ++. Next the 300 f 4.0 but without VR. With each to use x1.4 TC.
your thoughts?
thx
Well, David, since it's not my money, I would go with the 300 f2.8 any day. I don't think you'll be happy with the 300 f4.0 simply because of the difference in quality. Given that other specs are equal when comparing two lenses from a manufacturer, generally there is a tremendous increase in overall quality in the one with the lower f stop - hence the price. To get to this lower f stop, they obviously have to let more light through. And to do that requires either fewer pieces of glass or higher quality optics. There's no other way. A good example is the 50mm lens I have for my Nikon. The f1.8 us about $250, and the f1.4 is over $500. But you can clearly see the difference in the lenses just by looking at them.David, in EVERY case where a fixed focal length lens would suit my need, I would not even consider a zoom lens. To me, the difference in quality is that substantial. I'm not even sure that I could quantify the difference, but I (and you too, I bet), if showed two photos, one with a fixed lens and one with a zoom, could immediately point out which is which. So IF you have the money to do that, I would recommend it - especially considering what you will be using it for. Something like that you MAY be able to rent rather than buy. But if money were no object, this is what I would buy. In fact, this lense and TC are matched perfectly.Nikon 300mm f/2.8G AF-S ED VR II Nikkor Super Telephoto Prime LensandNikon TC-20E III AF-S 2x TeleconverterNikon TC-14E II (1.4x) Teleconverter AF-S for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras One important note here is that the 300mm f4 with the TCE will not autofocus, so I think that's a non-starter.Also, not having the VR would be a big deal at this focal length. Not having it will cost you four or five steps in shutter speed! There's a nice little tool Nikon has called the "lens simulator" that might interest you. It's linked from the 300mm f2.8 lens page, but I just went into it and didn't see that specific lens. I didn't dig too deeply, though, and your other lenses are in there. It doesn't take the place of actually trying the lens, but it can give you a good way to compare certain aspects of each lens.Nikon Lens SimulatorI hope that answers some of your questions. If it doesn't or if it creates more, please let me know. It's always a pleasure!Mike