Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Reflections on shooting dark birds if flight: 150-600mm zooms vs FF length and FF vs APSc.
#11
 First off; the ticket in the boat window has been sitting in the south facing sun for some years and is faded, but I was showing comparative shots rather than reference images, so I wouldn't worry so about the depth of blacks here.

 

  The lens is composed of 11 elements in nine groups with an additional  protective front element of which 3 are ED.  Earlier manual models were around nine elements.

 The latest VRII model weighs 720 gms less and has an optical formula of 16 elements in 12 groups with 3 ED elements, extra nano-coatings.  In short there has been optical improvements over the last 20 years, since the introduction of my version.   

 

 

  The lens came with it's valise and a review of the day from "Chasseurs D'images" which I've photocopied here, it shows that according to their tests the center of the lens is as sharp as it gets already by F4, and it only nearly reaches very good values, although softer at the edges, at  F5.6 it's as good as it can do across the frame and F8 drops a little further. Personally, I would say that those figures are a little pessimistic.

 

 

  Exposure was 1/2000 F4 at ISO 250 at least for the second shot.

 

   The fact that the Tamron G2 does so well is testimony to the recent advances in tele-zoom lens design in terms of sharpness flare and contrast and has to much extent made the 500mm F4 lenses less expensive on the S/H market. 

 

  It just needs to let in more light!

#12
No worries. I do well believe that this is an excellent lens ... which is why I have a hard time to believe that it is inferior to the G2.

Just because of diffraction alone, f/4 should be better than f/6.3 on the G2 assuming that the lens is well centered.

 

These zoom lenses are darn good, yes, but at least I can see a difference in quality when it comes to the rendition of fine details within very white or very dark structures (like feathers). The word "micro-contrast" is a bit overused but it is exactly that (which is high resolution in conjunction with high contrast).

The sample images of the Sigma 150-600mm C are undoubtedly sharp but that micro-contrast is missing (at 50mp).

#13
BTW, Dave, excellent stuff at Flicker's! I planned to try a trip for the vultures in the high valley of Verdon, but I had to give up. I'll retry in September.

stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm Æ’/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm Æ’/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm Æ’/2.8, Samyang 8mm Æ’/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm Æ’/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.
#14
Quote:BTW, Dave, excellent stuff at Flicker's! I planned to try a trip for the vultures in the high valley of Verdon, but I had to give up. I'll retry in September.
Thanks stoppingdown! us vulture hunters need all the help we can get here...........

 

       .......hope you have a good run of luck!!......go well!

#15
Quote:No worries. I do well believe that this is an excellent lens ... which is why I have a hard time to believe that it is inferior to the G2.

Just because of diffraction alone, f/4 should be better than f/6.3 on the G2 assuming that the lens is well centered.

 

These zoom lenses are darn good, yes, but at least I can see a difference in quality when it comes to the rendition of fine details within very white or very dark structures (like feathers). The word "micro-contrast" is a bit overused but it is exactly that (which is high resolution in conjunction with high contrast).

The sample images of the Sigma 150-600mm C are undoubtedly sharp but that micro-contrast is missing (at 50mp).
Sometimes there is a big difference between theory and practice?

 

   Tele-zooms are a prime example of that!

 

   I'm certain that the 50Mps sensor is for perfect situations that don't correlate with my tele-experiences!
#16
I don't know the G2 lens so maybe you are absolutely correct and I am totally wrong. 

 

My comments were based on those sample crops of the conference batch cards

(BTW, D500 = 20.9mp APS-C -> interpolated to FF equiv. = 49mp).
#17
  I'm sure the G2 wouldn't do well against the modern 500mm VRII Nikor or the latest Canon equivalent!

 

 

   Anyway it's interesting to see the actual results from an expensive pro lens of the day vs a budget tele-zoom.

 

    No matter how good the G2 it still can't quite cut it before F7.1 whereas the Nikor is sharp from F4 (if you don't mind using the clarity/contrast slider)  

 That 1 1/3 rd extra stops comes at a price though.......  2.2 kgs of more weight!

  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)