Out of Africa continued

[myrover2013]

Not wild life , but two of my favourite photos of the man, who went to the Serengeti in 1978

[coolcat]

Originally Posted by Gate Keeper

Tamron 70-300mm Di AF MF 1:4-5.6 Tele-Macro 0.95-00

I will go for the EVF settings Paul, thanks for suggesting it. I try not to go above ISO 400. Having said that I took some recently at 1600 of the fishermen bringing in their catch in their dug-outs. I will try almost anything Jeff

Another question? Are you a hood or a filter man?

Both

Always have a UV filter on the front of my lens purely for protection
Hood cuts down lens flare so always useful and I pack a range of Nd's, Grads and circular polariser

[Gate Keeper]

Originally Posted by myrover2013

Not wild life , but two of my favourite photos of the man, who went to the Serengeti in 1978

Good morning David, I have emailed a photo, taken of the great man whilst he was on holiday with the chief and an elder of the Masai tribe in March 1978. Due to copyright I could not take a chance of sharing the photo with everyone here.
Regards
Phil

[Gate Keeper]

Originally Posted by coolcat

Both

Always have a UV filter on the front of my lens purely for protection
Hood cuts down lens flare so always useful and I pack a range of Nd's, Grads and circular polariser

Like yourself Jeff, I use filters mostly to protect the lens from damage. The polariser is useful for picking up the cloud and the greens in the sea For the sunbird photo, I removed the UV filter to improve clarity.

A lot of debate on the photography forum re : hoods/filters ...

The Nikon body is protected by a custom made armour rubber jacket from Amazon, as the camera leads a hard life and has been dropped several times...eek! I need a good hood as the one I have, produces a vignette around the edges lol

[coolcat]

Originally Posted by Gate Keeper

Like yourself Jeff, I use filters mostly to protect the lens from damage. The polariser is useful for picking up the cloud and the greens in the sea For the sunbird photo, I removed the UV filter to improve clarity.

A lot of debate on the photography forum re : hoods/filters ...

The Nikon body is protected by a custom made armour rubber jacket from Amazon, as the camera leads a hard life and has been dropped several times...eek! I need a good hood as the one I have, produces a vignette around the edges lol

Morning Phil,

There's always been a debate on sticking another bit of glass in front of your optics but I'd far rather scratch a £20.00 filter than ruin an expensive lens

All the hoods on my lenses are the manufactured supplied ones specifically for the lens in question so don't really suffer from vignetting

[Gate Keeper]

Originally Posted by coolcat

Morning Phil,

There's always been a debate on sticking another bit of glass in front of your optics but I'd far rather scratch a £20.00 filter than ruin an expensive lens

All the hoods on my lenses are the manufactured supplied ones specifically for the lens in question so don't really suffer from vignetting

You are of course right Jeff about protecting the lens with a glass filter, given how expensive the lenses are. I am going to crack on with the converter and will try ISO 800-1000 as suggested by Woof25. Mike suggests I use these settings to compensate. Thanks Mike for your pm ...

We have to go to a memorial service for Jeremy Beadle, as it is 8 years since he passed away. There will be a small finger buffet, then the manager of the local cinema popped off. His service is at 2:30pm 5:00pm and 8:00pm

[Rocket]

I was out driving today and started thinking about Phil's dark images when using a tele converter. My advice on altering the EV will only work if you have a constant under exposure of a constant value when using certain equipment combinations.

It would be interesting Phil, to know if using iso 800-1000 and tele-convertor produces a better image than just using the lens on it's own and cropping the picture more. Using the word "better" may be a mistake as I can see pros and cons for both methods.

I would add that I do not shoot at long focal lengths (over 200mm) and have never used a tele-converter so I am interested in your conundrum.

[Rocket]

To answer my own question -

I found this http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/38001694


Seems most people say cropping is least desirable.

[coolcat]

I'm

Originally Posted by Rocket

I was out driving today and started thinking about Phil's dark images when using a tele converter. My advice on altering the EV will only work if you have a constant under exposure of a constant value when using certain equipment combinations.

It would be interesting Phil, to know if using iso 800-1000 and tele-convertor produces a better image than just using the lens on it's own and cropping the picture more. Using the word "better" may be a mistake as I can see pros and cons for both methods.

I would add that I do not shoot at long focal lengths (over 200mm) and have never used a tele-converter so I am interested in your conundrum.

Hi Paul,

I have a 1.4 and 2.0 Sigma teleconvertor and use them on either my 70-200 or 120-300 2.8 Sigma lenses.
If you pixel peep you can notice a drop off in sharpness when using them, more so with the 2.0.
Still give very useable results though .

I'm lucky in that both my telephoto lenses are fast so I don't get any of the focus problems that can occur .
I can just about get away with stacking both convertors to give me a monster reach but the quality of image does start to suffer quite significantly and autofocus starts hunting to make it impracticable, manual focus time only really.

I think with some of the extremely high megapixel Dslr bodies such as the new Eos 5Ds then cropping into the photo in editing may be a more worthwhile exercise.
The cost of those bodies is rather daunting at the moment though

[Gate Keeper]

Originally Posted by Rocket

I was out driving today and started thinking about Phil's dark images when using a tele converter. My advice on altering the EV will only work if you have a constant under exposure of a constant value when using certain equipment combinations.

It would be interesting Phil, to know if using iso 800-1000 and tele-convertor produces a better image than just using the lens on it's own and cropping the picture more. Using the word "better" may be a mistake as I can see pros and cons for both methods.

I would add that I do not shoot at long focal lengths (over 200mm) and have never used a tele-converter so I am interested in your conundrum.

A photo I took of this beautiful Eurasian Roller was badly criticised for being cropped, lacking artifacts and detailing by the photography forum. I can now get away with some cropping by telling them about it beforehand be in the write up that a photo has been cropped. Oh well, I am always learning