Can you tell the difference . . .

Started Feb 1, 2014 | Discussions thread
Great Bustard Forum Pro • Posts: 42,719
Re: Question:

Messier Object wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

Messier Object wrote:

Over the past 2 years or so my shooting has become more specialised to the point where birds have become over 90% of my shots. I know it won't last and I'll eventually swing back to landscapes and Macro, but for now it's birds and I've got myself plenty of (too many?) camera/lens combo options covering different lighting situations, different situations where weather, weight and bulk are factors, and of course different birds, static and BIF

This afternoon, in good light I laid out my gear in the backyard and took some shots of a bird on my roof, curious to see if in ideal light and shooting a static bird, I'd really notice much IQ difference

Lenses used:
ZD150mm f/2 + EC-20 (300mm)
ZD50-200mm SWD + EC-14 (at 283mm)
ZD300mm f/2.8
Sigma 50-500mm f/4.5-6.3 OS APO for Canon (at 500mm)
Canon 300mm f/2.8 L II + Canon 2xIII (600mm)
camera bodies: E-30, E-5, 5DIII

Each was shot hand held, with IS on, and I took a few frames just to make sure I got reasonably good focus.

The bird was at a range of about 25 metres.

To be fair on the gear, all were shot at ISO400, and 1/1600sec and I did stop down the 'lower grade' lenses just a bit - compensating in PP. I did my usual amount of NR in PP and also tweaked the white balance in PP just enough to hide any 'tells' that might ID the cameras.

How were they all shot at 1/1600 ISO 400, especially if the "lower grade" lenses were stopped down but the other lenses were not stopped down to the same f-ratio?

For example, if all were shot at f/8, it would make sense. But how would you have shot, for example, the ZD 300 / 2.8 at f/2.8 1/1600 ISO 400 and the Sigma 50-500 / 4.5-6.3 at f/8 1/1600 ISO 400?

the canon, ZD300, ZD150 were not shot wide open, and clearly I adjusted the exposure in PP.
This was not a serious test of lens quality, demonstration of equivalence, or comparison of FF to 4/3

Ah.  So some of the photos were intentionally underexposed.  That's what I was thinking, but it seemed to contradict your premise "to be fair on the gear".

It was merely a fun thing to try without any real preparation, so I'm not expecting any peer review of my method, and won't be discussing it further


But seriously, take a few hand-held snaps at 600mm of a bird on a roof with 5 different sets of equipment and see how they come out. If I repeated the exercise the 50-200mm might look better.

In my opinion, differences in focus accuracy would usually be the most important factor, unless the focal point were always within the DOF.

I am thinking of doing another exercise just comparing the E-5 +ZD300mm and the 5D3 + EF300mm. I just need to find a bird lazy enough to sit still long enough

If you shoot from the same position, the E5 will come out on top, for sure.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow