XT3 + 100-400 + TC in twilight light: AF OK?

dv312 said:

dv312 said:

I would be surprised if it did not. For that type of reach I'd be shooting portrays and focus speed is not critical. If I had to pull focus my self I'd be happy if the IQ is decent. The few samples I've seen online look good though you never know if those are 1 in 100 shots or routine.

Click to expand...

In my case shooting jet planes with the XT3+100-400+TC was certainly not 1 in 100 shot routine

My success rate is at 98+% shooting around 2000 frames

When I did the same thing with my XT2 it's about 60% so the XT3 AF-C has much to do with the results I got

With Fuji teles you don't have too many choices

The 100-400 may be the only native choice today

Some have urged me to try 3rd party adapters with EOS teleprimes but I'm not convinced as yet for:

1) I'm happy with the 100-400 + TC (weight/size in consideration)

2) I'm still not convinced about those adapter's AF speed as opposed to the native 100-400

3) Canon EOS teleprimes tend to be heavy and expensive

The other alternative would be the Nikon D500 + 500mm PF but that'd require a second system investment and I'm not ready to go back to a system I left behind for Fuji

Now I'd wish Fuji delivers a 400mm f4 or a 500mm 5.6

That'd be awesome for my needs

Click to expand...

Thank you,

This is very helpful. As I own and enjoy a D500 and a nice collection of lenses, flashes and bodies the 500mm PF is on the short list yet it's a prime and this would cramp my style. I do shoot 80 percent or more at 600mm yet there are times when I want to widen up fast. I dabble in aviation photography and think you might enjoy these,







There is more on my site www.morrisaltman.com in the other folder.

Morris

Morris0 said:

baobob said:

Difficult question to answer

I use H1 with this combo It focuses ok indoors with incandescent light without problem even if no superfast

T3 focuses at -3 EV instead of -1EV If you can give figures ogf light at which you want to use the combo it will help to give an answer... with the H1

Click to expand...

Thank you Bob,

This mage is a good example of the type of light I frequently work in.

D500 @ 410mm, 1/60, f6.3, ISO 8000, fill flash and cropped from about 1/2 the frame

Which TC were you talking about?

Morris

Click to expand...

Morris,

May I ask why the need to work in this light so often? Yes, the golden hours are great for light and shore birds, etc. are actively feeding when tide is low but this is really poor light. I shoot a lot on the Gulf Coast of FL with my X-T2/100-400/1.4X but I'm at ISO 800/f.5.6/1/500th when the Sun is sinking below the horizon so your shots have to be after Sunset. The AF on my X-T2 with the 100-400 bare is still quite reliable in that light but I'm usually without the 1.4X when the light is that low.

PDAF sensels on mirrorless are minuscule compared to those on a DSLR so I don't see them performing as well in low light. That said I was at an airshow this past July with heavy overcast which ultimately cancelled the Thunderbirds. I was standing next to a guy with a Canon 70D with the big Sigma mounted when a KC 135 was making a low pass obscured by the thick haze. He was swearing because he couldn't get AF lock when my X-T2/100-400 snapped into focus for a 4 frame burst with all tack sharp. I expect the X-T3 to be noticeably better.

Bob




OOC Jpeg







--

rwbaron said:

Morris0 said:

baobob said:

Difficult question to answer

I use H1 with this combo It focuses ok indoors with incandescent light without problem even if no superfast

T3 focuses at -3 EV instead of -1EV If you can give figures ogf light at which you want to use the combo it will help to give an answer... with the H1

Click to expand...

Thank you Bob,

This mage is a good example of the type of light I frequently work in.

D500 @ 410mm, 1/60, f6.3, ISO 8000, fill flash and cropped from about 1/2 the frame

Which TC were you talking about?

Morris

Click to expand...

Morris,

May I ask why the need to work in this light so often? Yes, the golden hours are great for light and shore birds, etc. are actively feeding when tide is low but this is really poor light. I shoot a lot on the Gulf Coast of FL with my X-T2/100-400/1.4X but I'm at ISO 800/f.5.6/1/500th when the Sun is sinking below the horizon so your shots have to be after Sunset. The AF on my X-T2 with the 100-400 bare is still quite reliable in that light but I'm usually without the 1.4X when the light is that low.

PDAF sensels on mirrorless are minuscule compared to those on a DSLR so I don't see them performing as well in low light. That said I was at an airshow this past July with heavy overcast which ultimately cancelled the Thunderbirds. I was standing next to a guy with a Canon 70D with the big Sigma mounted when a KC 135 was making a low pass obscured by the thick haze. He was swearing because he couldn't get AF lock when my X-T2/100-400 snapped into focus for a 4 frame burst with all tack sharp. I expect the X-T3 to be noticeably better.

Bob

Click to expand...

Hi Bob,

Sometimes it's not the camera system that will pull focus in fog, it's the photographer. I shoot in fog all the time and love the mood. I'm out in all sorts of weather including rain and snow. Most of my best images are not in the pre dawn post sunset light yet I do work at those times taking images like this:



I would not have had time to pull focus myself yet my D300 + Sigma 150-600 did at 600mm, ISO 1600, 1/15, f6.3, flash

It's much more common that I'm working in the brighter 30 minutes of the magic hour taking images like this:





D300s + Sigma 150-600 Sport @ 600mm, ISO 400, 1/500, f8 fill flash

I'm trying to understand how far I can push the system. My bodies are all APSc just like the X-T3 and from what I see the X-T3 may be a tiny bit better than the D500 at high ISO.

I appreciate your thoughtful reply,

Morris

Morris

Morris0 said:

M4cr0s said:

Morris0 said:

M4cr0s said:

With the 1.4x you're at F/8.0 with the lens racked out to 400mm. F/11 with the 2.0x. Yes, it will (mostly) sorta focus, but depending on contrast and light on the target it may be a frustrating experience. Landscapes might be fine. Brown deer against brown grass probably not so. The -3EV rating Fuji give for the T3 is at F/2.0 or somewhere in that territory, so don't put too much weight on it.

On the other hand, w/o a TC the 100-400 can do pretty well in dusk/dawn situations. That extra stop or two of light really helps.

Click to expand...

Thank you,

Are you speaking from theory and or experience? I shot in with the XT3 with 100-400 in light that was a stop lower than the photo I posted and focus was accurate and snappy. It's much more complicated than just light levels as the position of the focus point selected may make a difference. This is why I was asking for people with experience in the field.

Morris

Click to expand...

Practical. Have not used the 2.0x though, only the 1.4X and found it depended greatly on contrast how "snappy" it was. White bird on dark background is often doable at very low light levels. As you say, what is under the focus point matters a lot. Generally been impressed with the 100-400 and AF both on the T2 and T3 in all kinds of conditions. Had initially low expectations for such a long and dark lens, However, the 1.4x puts a damper on things when the light drops. You would have to test for yourself if it's good enough/doable or not for your intended use. What I and others say are at best anecdotal/subjective

On a side note. I feel the image degradation with the 1.4x is borderline of what is acceptable to me and will only use it if there is no other option. Also, at F/8.0 you really start to struggle getting shutter speeds acceptable for moving targets in low light. ISO 6400-12800 is where you'll be at. That obviously means it is more challenging getting really crisp images. I don't want to sway you off of the TCs, but you have to have realistic expectations.

Click to expand...

The drop off in focus speed is the norm with even the very best prime lenses when the light is very dim or contrast low. For portrays I have no issue using manual focus. The loss of IQ with a TC you are reporting is different that what I've seen others say and it may come down to long lens technique. Do you shoot from a tripod?

Thank you,

Morris

Click to expand...

I can see the loss of detail/sharpness even on bright, cool and crisp days under controlled conditions (support + stationary target) with excellent shutter speeds. I see it in moon shots too, tripoded, 1/125th and remotely released, although the ever present atmospheric haze will hide it partially. Sadly it's too consistent to be down to my many flaws in technique. Could of course be about sample variation in the TC + lens.

"Stumbling through the light."
https://www.instagram.com/stumblingfalk/

M4cr0s said:

Morris0 said:

M4cr0s said:

Morris0 said:

M4cr0s said:

With the 1.4x you're at F/8.0 with the lens racked out to 400mm. F/11 with the 2.0x. Yes, it will (mostly) sorta focus, but depending on contrast and light on the target it may be a frustrating experience. Landscapes might be fine. Brown deer against brown grass probably not so. The -3EV rating Fuji give for the T3 is at F/2.0 or somewhere in that territory, so don't put too much weight on it.

On the other hand, w/o a TC the 100-400 can do pretty well in dusk/dawn situations. That extra stop or two of light really helps.

Click to expand...

Thank you,

Are you speaking from theory and or experience? I shot in with the XT3 with 100-400 in light that was a stop lower than the photo I posted and focus was accurate and snappy. It's much more complicated than just light levels as the position of the focus point selected may make a difference. This is why I was asking for people with experience in the field.

Morris

Click to expand...

Practical. Have not used the 2.0x though, only the 1.4X and found it depended greatly on contrast how "snappy" it was. White bird on dark background is often doable at very low light levels. As you say, what is under the focus point matters a lot. Generally been impressed with the 100-400 and AF both on the T2 and T3 in all kinds of conditions. Had initially low expectations for such a long and dark lens, However, the 1.4x puts a damper on things when the light drops. You would have to test for yourself if it's good enough/doable or not for your intended use. What I and others say are at best anecdotal/subjective

On a side note. I feel the image degradation with the 1.4x is borderline of what is acceptable to me and will only use it if there is no other option. Also, at F/8.0 you really start to struggle getting shutter speeds acceptable for moving targets in low light. ISO 6400-12800 is where you'll be at. That obviously means it is more challenging getting really crisp images. I don't want to sway you off of the TCs, but you have to have realistic expectations.

Click to expand...

The drop off in focus speed is the norm with even the very best prime lenses when the light is very dim or contrast low. For portrays I have no issue using manual focus. The loss of IQ with a TC you are reporting is different that what I've seen others say and it may come down to long lens technique. Do you shoot from a tripod?

Thank you,

Morris

Click to expand...

I can see the loss of detail/sharpness even on bright, cool and crisp days under controlled conditions (support + stationary target) with excellent shutter speeds. I see it in moon shots too, tripoded, 1/125th and remotely released, although the ever present atmospheric haze will hide it partially. Sadly it's too consistent to be down to my many flaws in technique. Could of course be about sample variation in the TC + lens.

"Stumbling through the light."
https://www.instagram.com/stumblingfalk/

Click to expand...

Do you have any samples that show the difference?

Thank you,

Morris

Morris0 said:

rwbaron said:

Morris0 said:

baobob said:

Difficult question to answer

I use H1 with this combo It focuses ok indoors with incandescent light without problem even if no superfast

T3 focuses at -3 EV instead of -1EV If you can give figures ogf light at which you want to use the combo it will help to give an answer... with the H1

Click to expand...

Thank you Bob,

This mage is a good example of the type of light I frequently work in.

D500 @ 410mm, 1/60, f6.3, ISO 8000, fill flash and cropped from about 1/2 the frame

Which TC were you talking about?

Morris

Click to expand...

Morris,

May I ask why the need to work in this light so often? Yes, the golden hours are great for light and shore birds, etc. are actively feeding when tide is low but this is really poor light. I shoot a lot on the Gulf Coast of FL with my X-T2/100-400/1.4X but I'm at ISO 800/f.5.6/1/500th when the Sun is sinking below the horizon so your shots have to be after Sunset. The AF on my X-T2 with the 100-400 bare is still quite reliable in that light but I'm usually without the 1.4X when the light is that low.

PDAF sensels on mirrorless are minuscule compared to those on a DSLR so I don't see them performing as well in low light. That said I was at an airshow this past July with heavy overcast which ultimately cancelled the Thunderbirds. I was standing next to a guy with a Canon 70D with the big Sigma mounted when a KC 135 was making a low pass obscured by the thick haze. He was swearing because he couldn't get AF lock when my X-T2/100-400 snapped into focus for a 4 frame burst with all tack sharp. I expect the X-T3 to be noticeably better.

Bob

Click to expand...

Hi Bob,

Sometimes it's not the camera system that will pull focus in fog, it's the photographer. I shoot in fog all the time and love the mood. I'm out in all sorts of weather including rain and snow. Most of my best images are not in the pre dawn post sunset light yet I do work at those times taking images like this:

I would not have had time to pull focus myself yet my D300 + Sigma 150-600 did at 600mm, ISO 1600, 1/15, f6.3, flash

It's much more common that I'm working in the brighter 30 minutes of the magic hour taking images like this:

D300s + Sigma 150-600 Sport @ 600mm, ISO 400, 1/500, f8 fill flash

I'm trying to understand how far I can push the system. My bodies are all APSc just like the X-T3 and from what I see the X-T3 may be a tiny bit better than the D500 at high ISO.

I appreciate your thoughtful reply,

Morris

Morris

Click to expand...

Looks like you know what you're doing and the XT3 + 100-400 won't let you down especially in able hands

dv312 said:

Looks like you know what you're doing and the XT3 + 100-400 won't let you down especially in able hands

Click to expand...

The op's work is stunning. I'm completely in awe. BIF images of this caliber and other his shots are world class. I am duly humbled.

https://www said:

M4cr0s said:

Morris0 said:

M4cr0s said:

Morris0 said:

M4cr0s said:

With the 1.4x you're at F/8.0 with the lens racked out to 400mm. F/11 with the 2.0x. Yes, it will (mostly) sorta focus, but depending on contrast and light on the target it may be a frustrating experience. Landscapes might be fine. Brown deer against brown grass probably not so. The -3EV rating Fuji give for the T3 is at F/2.0 or somewhere in that territory, so don't put too much weight on it.

On the other hand, w/o a TC the 100-400 can do pretty well in dusk/dawn situations. That extra stop or two of light really helps.

Click to expand...

Thank you,

Are you speaking from theory and or experience? I shot in with the XT3 with 100-400 in light that was a stop lower than the photo I posted and focus was accurate and snappy. It's much more complicated than just light levels as the position of the focus point selected may make a difference. This is why I was asking for people with experience in the field.

Morris

Click to expand...

Practical. Have not used the 2.0x though, only the 1.4X and found it depended greatly on contrast how "snappy" it was. White bird on dark background is often doable at very low light levels. As you say, what is under the focus point matters a lot. Generally been impressed with the 100-400 and AF both on the T2 and T3 in all kinds of conditions. Had initially low expectations for such a long and dark lens, However, the 1.4x puts a damper on things when the light drops. You would have to test for yourself if it's good enough/doable or not for your intended use. What I and others say are at best anecdotal/subjective

On a side note. I feel the image degradation with the 1.4x is borderline of what is acceptable to me and will only use it if there is no other option. Also, at F/8.0 you really start to struggle getting shutter speeds acceptable for moving targets in low light. ISO 6400-12800 is where you'll be at. That obviously means it is more challenging getting really crisp images. I don't want to sway you off of the TCs, but you have to have realistic expectations.

Click to expand...

The drop off in focus speed is the norm with even the very best prime lenses when the light is very dim or contrast low. For portrays I have no issue using manual focus. The loss of IQ with a TC you are reporting is different that what I've seen others say and it may come down to long lens technique. Do you shoot from a tripod?

Thank you,

Morris

Click to expand...

I can see the loss of detail/sharpness even on bright, cool and crisp days under controlled conditions (support + stationary target) with excellent shutter speeds. I see it in moon shots too, tripoded, 1/125th and remotely released, although the ever present atmospheric haze will hide it partially. Sadly it's too consistent to be down to my many flaws in technique. Could of course be about sample variation in the TC + lens.

"Stumbling through the light."
https://www.instagram.com/stumblingfalk/

Click to expand...

Do you have any samples that show the difference?

Thank you,

Morris

Click to expand...

I've dug through my archive to find comparable shots, it's hard since I'm brutal about culling and don't keep much stuff for "compare reasons". However these two leftover shots are remarkably close with same exposure settings from the same position, 7 minutes a part. Distance to the spikes on the railway bridge is about 1.9km from my position. Temperature was around 10 degrees celcius. Judge for yourself.

400mm: https://www.falkphoto.no/_3013294.RAF

560mm: https://www.falkphoto.no/_3013331.RAF

--
"Stumbling through the light."
https://www.instagram.com/stumblingfalk/

dv312 said:

Morris0 said:

rwbaron said:

Morris0 said:

baobob said:

Difficult question to answer

I use H1 with this combo It focuses ok indoors with incandescent light without problem even if no superfast

T3 focuses at -3 EV instead of -1EV If you can give figures ogf light at which you want to use the combo it will help to give an answer... with the H1

Click to expand...

Thank you Bob,

This mage is a good example of the type of light I frequently work in.

D500 @ 410mm, 1/60, f6.3, ISO 8000, fill flash and cropped from about 1/2 the frame

Which TC were you talking about?

Morris

Click to expand...

Morris,

May I ask why the need to work in this light so often? Yes, the golden hours are great for light and shore birds, etc. are actively feeding when tide is low but this is really poor light. I shoot a lot on the Gulf Coast of FL with my X-T2/100-400/1.4X but I'm at ISO 800/f.5.6/1/500th when the Sun is sinking below the horizon so your shots have to be after Sunset. The AF on my X-T2 with the 100-400 bare is still quite reliable in that light but I'm usually without the 1.4X when the light is that low.

PDAF sensels on mirrorless are minuscule compared to those on a DSLR so I don't see them performing as well in low light. That said I was at an airshow this past July with heavy overcast which ultimately cancelled the Thunderbirds. I was standing next to a guy with a Canon 70D with the big Sigma mounted when a KC 135 was making a low pass obscured by the thick haze. He was swearing because he couldn't get AF lock when my X-T2/100-400 snapped into focus for a 4 frame burst with all tack sharp. I expect the X-T3 to be noticeably better.

Bob

Click to expand...

Hi Bob,

Sometimes it's not the camera system that will pull focus in fog, it's the photographer. I shoot in fog all the time and love the mood. I'm out in all sorts of weather including rain and snow. Most of my best images are not in the pre dawn post sunset light yet I do work at those times taking images like this:

I would not have had time to pull focus myself yet my D300 + Sigma 150-600 did at 600mm, ISO 1600, 1/15, f6.3, flash

It's much more common that I'm working in the brighter 30 minutes of the magic hour taking images like this:

D300s + Sigma 150-600 Sport @ 600mm, ISO 400, 1/500, f8 fill flash

I'm trying to understand how far I can push the system. My bodies are all APSc just like the X-T3 and from what I see the X-T3 may be a tiny bit better than the D500 at high ISO.

I appreciate your thoughtful reply,

Morris

Morris

Click to expand...

Looks like you know what you're doing and the XT3 + 100-400 won't let you down especially in able hands

Click to expand...

Thank you,

Morris

Craig268 said:

dv312 said:

Looks like you know what you're doing and the XT3 + 100-400 won't let you down especially in able hands

Click to expand...

The op's work is stunning. I'm completely in awe. BIF images of this caliber and other his shots are world class. I am duly humbled.

Click to expand...

Thank you,

I enjoy producing these images and sharing them.

Morris

M4cr0s said:

https://www said:

M4cr0s said:

Morris0 said:

M4cr0s said:

Morris0 said:

M4cr0s said:

With the 1.4x you're at F/8.0 with the lens racked out to 400mm. F/11 with the 2.0x. Yes, it will (mostly) sorta focus, but depending on contrast and light on the target it may be a frustrating experience. Landscapes might be fine. Brown deer against brown grass probably not so. The -3EV rating Fuji give for the T3 is at F/2.0 or somewhere in that territory, so don't put too much weight on it.

On the other hand, w/o a TC the 100-400 can do pretty well in dusk/dawn situations. That extra stop or two of light really helps.

Click to expand...

Thank you,

Are you speaking from theory and or experience? I shot in with the XT3 with 100-400 in light that was a stop lower than the photo I posted and focus was accurate and snappy. It's much more complicated than just light levels as the position of the focus point selected may make a difference. This is why I was asking for people with experience in the field.

Morris

Click to expand...

Practical. Have not used the 2.0x though, only the 1.4X and found it depended greatly on contrast how "snappy" it was. White bird on dark background is often doable at very low light levels. As you say, what is under the focus point matters a lot. Generally been impressed with the 100-400 and AF both on the T2 and T3 in all kinds of conditions. Had initially low expectations for such a long and dark lens, However, the 1.4x puts a damper on things when the light drops. You would have to test for yourself if it's good enough/doable or not for your intended use. What I and others say are at best anecdotal/subjective

On a side note. I feel the image degradation with the 1.4x is borderline of what is acceptable to me and will only use it if there is no other option. Also, at F/8.0 you really start to struggle getting shutter speeds acceptable for moving targets in low light. ISO 6400-12800 is where you'll be at. That obviously means it is more challenging getting really crisp images. I don't want to sway you off of the TCs, but you have to have realistic expectations.

Click to expand...

The drop off in focus speed is the norm with even the very best prime lenses when the light is very dim or contrast low. For portrays I have no issue using manual focus. The loss of IQ with a TC you are reporting is different that what I've seen others say and it may come down to long lens technique. Do you shoot from a tripod?

Thank you,

Morris

Click to expand...

I can see the loss of detail/sharpness even on bright, cool and crisp days under controlled conditions (support + stationary target) with excellent shutter speeds. I see it in moon shots too, tripoded, 1/125th and remotely released, although the ever present atmospheric haze will hide it partially. Sadly it's too consistent to be down to my many flaws in technique. Could of course be about sample variation in the TC + lens.

"Stumbling through the light."
https://www.instagram.com/stumblingfalk/

Click to expand...

Do you have any samples that show the difference?

Thank you,

Morris

Click to expand...

I've dug through my archive to find comparable shots, it's hard since I'm brutal about culling and don't keep much stuff for "compare reasons". However these two leftover shots are remarkably close with same exposure settings from the same position, 7 minutes a part. Distance to the spikes on the railway bridge is about 1.9km from my position. Temperature was around 10 degrees celcius. Judge for yourself.

400mm: https://www.falkphoto.no/_3013294.RAF

560mm: https://www.falkphoto.no/_3013331.RAF

Click to expand...

Thank you for supplying the samples and there being RAW is super. If you look at the TC image, each of the bridge towers have a ball and spike at the top. Looking at the spike of the tower on our right, there is apparent atmospheric distortion (shimmy). It is not terrible yet it's present. Blowing them up to the same size I found them similar. Pixel peeking can drive you nuts. There is a limit to how much one can crop. Both look good to my eye.

Morris

Morris0 said:

M4cr0s said:

https://www said:

M4cr0s said:

Morris0 said:

M4cr0s said:

Morris0 said:

M4cr0s said:

With the 1.4x you're at F/8.0 with the lens racked out to 400mm. F/11 with the 2.0x. Yes, it will (mostly) sorta focus, but depending on contrast and light on the target it may be a frustrating experience. Landscapes might be fine. Brown deer against brown grass probably not so. The -3EV rating Fuji give for the T3 is at F/2.0 or somewhere in that territory, so don't put too much weight on it.

On the other hand, w/o a TC the 100-400 can do pretty well in dusk/dawn situations. That extra stop or two of light really helps.

Click to expand...

Thank you,

Are you speaking from theory and or experience? I shot in with the XT3 with 100-400 in light that was a stop lower than the photo I posted and focus was accurate and snappy. It's much more complicated than just light levels as the position of the focus point selected may make a difference. This is why I was asking for people with experience in the field.

Morris

Click to expand...

Practical. Have not used the 2.0x though, only the 1.4X and found it depended greatly on contrast how "snappy" it was. White bird on dark background is often doable at very low light levels. As you say, what is under the focus point matters a lot. Generally been impressed with the 100-400 and AF both on the T2 and T3 in all kinds of conditions. Had initially low expectations for such a long and dark lens, However, the 1.4x puts a damper on things when the light drops. You would have to test for yourself if it's good enough/doable or not for your intended use. What I and others say are at best anecdotal/subjective

On a side note. I feel the image degradation with the 1.4x is borderline of what is acceptable to me and will only use it if there is no other option. Also, at F/8.0 you really start to struggle getting shutter speeds acceptable for moving targets in low light. ISO 6400-12800 is where you'll be at. That obviously means it is more challenging getting really crisp images. I don't want to sway you off of the TCs, but you have to have realistic expectations.

Click to expand...

The drop off in focus speed is the norm with even the very best prime lenses when the light is very dim or contrast low. For portrays I have no issue using manual focus. The loss of IQ with a TC you are reporting is different that what I've seen others say and it may come down to long lens technique. Do you shoot from a tripod?

Thank you,

Morris

Click to expand...

I can see the loss of detail/sharpness even on bright, cool and crisp days under controlled conditions (support + stationary target) with excellent shutter speeds. I see it in moon shots too, tripoded, 1/125th and remotely released, although the ever present atmospheric haze will hide it partially. Sadly it's too consistent to be down to my many flaws in technique. Could of course be about sample variation in the TC + lens.

"Stumbling through the light."
https://www.instagram.com/stumblingfalk/

Click to expand...

Do you have any samples that show the difference?

Thank you,

Morris

Click to expand...

I've dug through my archive to find comparable shots, it's hard since I'm brutal about culling and don't keep much stuff for "compare reasons". However these two leftover shots are remarkably close with same exposure settings from the same position, 7 minutes a part. Distance to the spikes on the railway bridge is about 1.9km from my position. Temperature was around 10 degrees celcius. Judge for yourself.

400mm: https://www.falkphoto.no/_3013294.RAF

560mm: https://www.falkphoto.no/_3013331.RAF

Click to expand...

Thank you for supplying the samples and there being RAW is super. If you look at the TC image, each of the bridge towers have a ball and spike at the top. Looking at the spike of the tower on our right, there is apparent atmospheric distortion (shimmy). It is not terrible yet it's present. Blowing them up to the same size I found them similar. Pixel peeking can drive you nuts. There is a limit to how much one can crop. Both look good to my eye.

Morris

Click to expand...

I agree re atmospheric distortion, it was a good day in that respect, but it's definitely there. Also, that both are what I deem "usable". That's why they haven't been deleted in the first culling and is still on my disk. Shorter distances (say 20-30m) where atmospheric conditions don't come into play, I find the impact of the TC on resolution/sharpness more noticeable...if you "peep". I'll see if I can make a couple of samples tomorrow to show what I mean.

Morris0 said:

I'm a nature and wildlife photographer that needs to reduce my load due to an injury. I tried out a XT3 with 100-400 at Photo Pluss Expo here in NYC yesterday and was very impressed with the camera and lens performance. They did not have a 1.4x TC or 2x TC for me to try. Do any of you have experience with this combination at dawn or dusk? Dose AF work? Is it slowed down?

My current setup is a Nikon D500 + Sigma 150-600 Sport and the 600mm or more is needed as it's not uncommon for me to use a 1.4x TC on the 600mm and even a 1.7x TC.

Thank you,

Morris

Click to expand...

Hi Morris.

You're doing such a good job with your D500, I'd hesitate before recommending another system to you. I guess the only thing I would advise is to rent or borrow an X-T3 and see it works for you.

I'd be curious to see if you can make photos of swallows in flight with it!

superlevure said:

Morris0 said:

I'm a nature and wildlife photographer that needs to reduce my load due to an injury. I tried out a XT3 with 100-400 at Photo Pluss Expo here in NYC yesterday and was very impressed with the camera and lens performance. They did not have a 1.4x TC or 2x TC for me to try. Do any of you have experience with this combination at dawn or dusk? Dose AF work? Is it slowed down?

My current setup is a Nikon D500 + Sigma 150-600 Sport and the 600mm or more is needed as it's not uncommon for me to use a 1.4x TC on the 600mm and even a 1.7x TC.

Thank you,

Morris

Click to expand...

Hi Morris.

You're doing such a good job with your D500, I'd hesitate before recommending another system to you. I guess the only thing I would advise is to rent or borrow an X-T3 and see it works for you.

I'd be curious to see if you can make photos of swallows in flight with it!

Click to expand...

I'm confident I could photograph swallows in flight with the X-T3 and 100-400. It's tracking is on par with that of the D500. I've photographed swallows in flight with much less capable camera lens combinations.

There defiantly will be a learning curve and I adapted very quickly to the X-T3. With the help of the salesman I had customized the focus system to my liking in less than 5 minutes and was nailing focus and tracking people walking in the crowds in the dark exposition hall. These conditions are about as tough as one can find and I was impressed with the low light action capabilities.

I must drop 3 LBS from my system and the only way to do this and stay Nikon is to use the new Nikon 500mm PF. It is a very capable lens yet it's a prime and that cramps my style. I've discussed my options with my wife, a few friends that are photographers at my level and sent one of my students who is now quite proficient to check out the X-T3 with 100-400 to see how he reacts to it.

I've been using SLR cameras for 44 years and have changed cameras, lenses and even systems enough times to understand the challenges of changing. Learning the new system is fairly easy. I've already been through 2/3 of the manual and find the X-T3 intuitive. The hardest part is changing mussel memory. For example when I reached for the joystick to move the selected focus points I missed quite a few times, It will take a month or so to correct that. I've also got quite a large Nikon compatible kit and I'd want to replace most of it's function selling and purchasing new will not anything close to break even. I may get the XT-3 and 100-400 with TCs alone at first and slowly migrate. I can also purchase under evaluation and avoid the rental cost. This would give me just under a month to decide and I'd have no cost except the subway fair to and from B&H to do this.

It's a tough decision and I'm taking my time and researching. You will see I've commented and asked questions in another active thread related to processing software.

Thank you,

Morris

Morris0 said:

superlevure said:

Morris0 said:

I'm a nature and wildlife photographer that needs to reduce my load due to an injury. I tried out a XT3 with 100-400 at Photo Pluss Expo here in NYC yesterday and was very impressed with the camera and lens performance. They did not have a 1.4x TC or 2x TC for me to try. Do any of you have experience with this combination at dawn or dusk? Dose AF work? Is it slowed down?

My current setup is a Nikon D500 + Sigma 150-600 Sport and the 600mm or more is needed as it's not uncommon for me to use a 1.4x TC on the 600mm and even a 1.7x TC.

Thank you,

Morris

Click to expand...

Hi Morris.

You're doing such a good job with your D500, I'd hesitate before recommending another system to you. I guess the only thing I would advise is to rent or borrow an X-T3 and see it works for you.

I'd be curious to see if you can make photos of swallows in flight with it!

Click to expand...

I'm confident I could photograph swallows in flight with the X-T3 and 100-400. It's tracking is on par with that of the D500. I've photographed swallows in flight with much less capable camera lens combinations.

There defiantly will be a learning curve and I adapted very quickly to the X-T3. With the help of the salesman I had customized the focus system to my liking in less than 5 minutes and was nailing focus and tracking people walking in the crowds in the dark exposition hall. These conditions are about as tough as one can find and I was impressed with the low light action capabilities.

I must drop 3 LBS from my system and the only way to do this and stay Nikon is to use the new Nikon 500mm PF. It is a very capable lens yet it's a prime and that cramps my style. I've discussed my options with my wife, a few friends that are photographers at my level and sent one of my students who is now quite proficient to check out the X-T3 with 100-400 to see how he reacts to it.

I've been using SLR cameras for 44 years and have changed cameras, lenses and even systems enough times to understand the challenges of changing. Learning the new system is fairly easy. I've already been through 2/3 of the manual and find the X-T3 intuitive. The hardest part is changing mussel memory. For example when I reached for the joystick to move the selected focus points I missed quite a few times, It will take a month or so to correct that. I've also got quite a large Nikon compatible kit and I'd want to replace most of it's function selling and purchasing new will not anything close to break even. I may get the XT-3 and 100-400 with TCs alone at first and slowly migrate. I can also purchase under evaluation and avoid the rental cost. This would give me just under a month to decide and I'd have no cost except the subway fair to and from B&H to do this.

It's a tough decision and I'm taking my time and researching. You will see I've commented and asked questions in another active thread related to processing software.

Thank you,

Morris

Click to expand...

If you got to try it in the shop, that's already good.

I recommend taking the battery grip: just aiming through the electronic viewfinder and tracking a subject will drain the battery massively. And for wildlife I spend a lot of time aiming, waiting for the right moment to capture. I checked once: I could only manage 138 photos with one battery. (The XT3 is supposed to be a bit better than the xh1 in terms of battery life though.)

I look forward to seeing your results.

superlevure said:

Morris0 said:

superlevure said:

Morris0 said:

I'm a nature and wildlife photographer that needs to reduce my load due to an injury. I tried out a XT3 with 100-400 at Photo Pluss Expo here in NYC yesterday and was very impressed with the camera and lens performance. They did not have a 1.4x TC or 2x TC for me to try. Do any of you have experience with this combination at dawn or dusk? Dose AF work? Is it slowed down?

My current setup is a Nikon D500 + Sigma 150-600 Sport and the 600mm or more is needed as it's not uncommon for me to use a 1.4x TC on the 600mm and even a 1.7x TC.

Thank you,

Morris

Click to expand...

Hi Morris.

You're doing such a good job with your D500, I'd hesitate before recommending another system to you. I guess the only thing I would advise is to rent or borrow an X-T3 and see it works for you.

I'd be curious to see if you can make photos of swallows in flight with it!

Click to expand...

I'm confident I could photograph swallows in flight with the X-T3 and 100-400. It's tracking is on par with that of the D500. I've photographed swallows in flight with much less capable camera lens combinations.

There defiantly will be a learning curve and I adapted very quickly to the X-T3. With the help of the salesman I had customized the focus system to my liking in less than 5 minutes and was nailing focus and tracking people walking in the crowds in the dark exposition hall. These conditions are about as tough as one can find and I was impressed with the low light action capabilities.

I must drop 3 LBS from my system and the only way to do this and stay Nikon is to use the new Nikon 500mm PF. It is a very capable lens yet it's a prime and that cramps my style. I've discussed my options with my wife, a few friends that are photographers at my level and sent one of my students who is now quite proficient to check out the X-T3 with 100-400 to see how he reacts to it.

I've been using SLR cameras for 44 years and have changed cameras, lenses and even systems enough times to understand the challenges of changing. Learning the new system is fairly easy. I've already been through 2/3 of the manual and find the X-T3 intuitive. The hardest part is changing mussel memory. For example when I reached for the joystick to move the selected focus points I missed quite a few times, It will take a month or so to correct that. I've also got quite a large Nikon compatible kit and I'd want to replace most of it's function selling and purchasing new will not anything close to break even. I may get the XT-3 and 100-400 with TCs alone at first and slowly migrate. I can also purchase under evaluation and avoid the rental cost. This would give me just under a month to decide and I'd have no cost except the subway fair to and from B&H to do this.

It's a tough decision and I'm taking my time and researching. You will see I've commented and asked questions in another active thread related to processing software.

Thank you,

Morris

Click to expand...

If you got to try it in the shop, that's already good.

I recommend taking the battery grip: just aiming through the electronic viewfinder and tracking a subject will drain the battery massively. And for wildlife I spend a lot of time aiming, waiting for the right moment to capture. I checked once: I could only manage 138 photos with one battery. (The XT3 is supposed to be a bit better than the xh1 in terms of battery life though.)

I look forward to seeing your results.

Click to expand...

Dose the grip run off all the batteries at the same time or use them in sequence?

When I'm out in the cold I'm thinking it might be best to have the extra batteries in an inside pocket keeping them warm for full power. In some cameras, the batteries get warm when used so that would work in the grip. The only way to find out is to try and see. I get about 1,500 frames from a battery on the D500. I've been told to expect 250 to 300 on the T3. I don't mind carrying extra batteries. The trick is to change as they are getting low at a time when there is nothing to shoot. It's frustrating to run out when there is great action.

Thank you,

Morris

Morris0 said:

superlevure said:

Morris0 said:

superlevure said:

Morris0 said:

I'm a nature and wildlife photographer that needs to reduce my load due to an injury. I tried out a XT3 with 100-400 at Photo Pluss Expo here in NYC yesterday and was very impressed with the camera and lens performance. They did not have a 1.4x TC or 2x TC for me to try. Do any of you have experience with this combination at dawn or dusk? Dose AF work? Is it slowed down?

My current setup is a Nikon D500 + Sigma 150-600 Sport and the 600mm or more is needed as it's not uncommon for me to use a 1.4x TC on the 600mm and even a 1.7x TC.

Thank you,

Morris

Click to expand...

Hi Morris.

You're doing such a good job with your D500, I'd hesitate before recommending another system to you. I guess the only thing I would advise is to rent or borrow an X-T3 and see it works for you.

I'd be curious to see if you can make photos of swallows in flight with it!

Click to expand...

I'm confident I could photograph swallows in flight with the X-T3 and 100-400. It's tracking is on par with that of the D500. I've photographed swallows in flight with much less capable camera lens combinations.

There defiantly will be a learning curve and I adapted very quickly to the X-T3. With the help of the salesman I had customized the focus system to my liking in less than 5 minutes and was nailing focus and tracking people walking in the crowds in the dark exposition hall. These conditions are about as tough as one can find and I was impressed with the low light action capabilities.

I must drop 3 LBS from my system and the only way to do this and stay Nikon is to use the new Nikon 500mm PF. It is a very capable lens yet it's a prime and that cramps my style. I've discussed my options with my wife, a few friends that are photographers at my level and sent one of my students who is now quite proficient to check out the X-T3 with 100-400 to see how he reacts to it.

I've been using SLR cameras for 44 years and have changed cameras, lenses and even systems enough times to understand the challenges of changing. Learning the new system is fairly easy. I've already been through 2/3 of the manual and find the X-T3 intuitive. The hardest part is changing mussel memory. For example when I reached for the joystick to move the selected focus points I missed quite a few times, It will take a month or so to correct that. I've also got quite a large Nikon compatible kit and I'd want to replace most of it's function selling and purchasing new will not anything close to break even. I may get the XT-3 and 100-400 with TCs alone at first and slowly migrate. I can also purchase under evaluation and avoid the rental cost. This would give me just under a month to decide and I'd have no cost except the subway fair to and from B&H to do this.

It's a tough decision and I'm taking my time and researching. You will see I've commented and asked questions in another active thread related to processing software.

Thank you,

Morris

Click to expand...

If you got to try it in the shop, that's already good.

I recommend taking the battery grip: just aiming through the electronic viewfinder and tracking a subject will drain the battery massively. And for wildlife I spend a lot of time aiming, waiting for the right moment to capture. I checked once: I could only manage 138 photos with one battery. (The XT3 is supposed to be a bit better than the xh1 in terms of battery life though.)

I look forward to seeing your results.

Click to expand...

Dose the grip run off all the batteries at the same time or use them in sequence?

When I'm out in the cold I'm thinking it might be best to have the extra batteries in an inside pocket keeping them warm for full power. In some cameras, the batteries get warm when used so that would work in the grip. The only way to find out is to try and see. I get about 1,500 frames from a battery on the D500. I've been told to expect 250 to 300 on the T3. I don't mind carrying extra batteries. The trick is to change as they are getting low at a time when there is nothing to shoot. It's frustrating to run out when there is great action.

Thank you,

Morris

Click to expand...

On my XH1, it drains the batteries in sequence (mostly). First left, then right. The battery inserted in the main body goes down at the same time as the others, but much more slowly.

It's interesting that you're talking about the cold. Yesterday, for the first time this season, I had to put on gloves. I'm not sure how I could handle my camera with gloves if the grip wasn't there to make it bulky enough.

For you it's quite different though: you put it on a tripod. I'm holding mine 100% of the time, so my hands are exposed and I need to be able to handle the camera with gloves.

What we're told to expect in battery life from a mirrorless doesn't apply much to people doing wildlife; like I said, because of the long period of time spent aiming through the viewfinder. It might just be my own way of doing things. You'll find out how it works for you.

Took me a day to find time to do this, but here the samples are.

RAWs can be downloaded here. Wide open, tripoded, OIS off, base ISO, whatever SS the camera picked. Camera was fired by 10s self timer using ES. Gray day but reasonably clear, just after 9 o'clock in the morning. Temperature -0.3 degrees celcius rising from -3-4 in the night. I estimate distance to be around 50 meters. Target is the lamp/alarm bell on the top of the building down my street which was just under the centre single focus point.

The slight softness and loss of contrast in the TC shot is what I'm reffering to as image degradation. This consistently reproduceable both on and off tripod and I see it all the time. Not surprisingly the lens without the TC, stopped down to F/8.0 improves quite a bit. With the TC from F/8.0 to 11 shows improvement as well, but the softness never really goes away. Also, the softness with the TC is most visible racked all the way out, it becomes slightly better in the 100-300mm range. This mirrors the behavior of the lens without TC. Nothing shocking or groundbreaking, long zooms are almost always this way.

While the degradation of IQ with TC might not be an issue unless printing big, it does become an issue in web sizes when major crops are made. However, I remember your inspiring birding work from many years back when I was a Nikon shooter and I'm sure you'll be able to squeeze out excellent images of this combo as well.

RAWS:

TC

https://www.falkphoto.no/_3017885.RAF

No TC

https://www.falkphoto.no/_3017887.RAF

Screenshot of 100% views in Capture One. The 1.4x shot have had its brightness reduced by a bit to roughly equalize the exposures. Default C1 v11.3.1 sharpening and pic profile.



--
"Stumbling through the light."
https://www.instagram.com/stumblingfalk/

M4cr0s said:

Took me a day to find time to do this, but here the samples are.

RAWs can be downloaded here. Wide open, tripoded, OIS off, base ISO, whatever SS the camera picked. Camera was fired by 10s self timer using ES. Gray day but reasonably clear, just after 9 o'clock in the morning. Temperature -0.3 degrees celcius rising from -3-4 in the night. I estimate distance to be around 50 meters. Target is the lamp/alarm bell on the top of the building down my street which was just under the centre single focus point.

The slight softness and loss of contrast in the TC shot is what I'm reffering to as image degradation. This consistently reproduceable both on and off tripod and I see it all the time. Not surprisingly the lens without the TC, stopped down to F/8.0 improves quite a bit. With the TC from F/8.0 to 11 shows improvement as well, but the softness never really goes away. Also, the softness with the TC is most visible racked all the way out, it becomes slightly better in the 100-300mm range. This mirrors the behavior of the lens without TC. Nothing shocking or groundbreaking, long zooms are almost always this way.

While the degradation of IQ with TC might not be an issue unless printing big, it does become an issue in web sizes when major crops are made. However, I remember your inspiring birding work from many years back when I was a Nikon shooter and I'm sure you'll be able to squeeze out excellent images of this combo as well.

RAWS:

TC

https://www.falkphoto.no/_3017885.RAF

No TC

https://www.falkphoto.no/_3017887.RAF

Screenshot of 100% views in Capture One. The 1.4x shot have had its brightness reduced by a bit to roughly equalize the exposures. Default C1 v11.3.1 sharpening and pic profile.

Click to expand...

I am not sure if the shutter speed played a trick on you there. I know you used a tripod but 1/8 is still very slow. I remember a while ago I did a test and it took my tripod almost 10s to stop shaking and even somebody walking around closeby caused shaking.

maxxxx said:

I am not sure if the shutter speed played a trick on you there. I know you used a tripod but 1/8 is still very slow. I remember a while ago I did a test and it took my tripod almost 10s to stop shaking and even somebody walking around closeby caused shaking.

Click to expand...

Valid question but with all due respect, I don't think so. I was indoors shooting through an open window with no wind. There is no traffic nearby and I live in a very quiet street. I've seen various resonance type issues at slow shutter speeds and certain lenses/cameras (mainly mirror flappers) in the 1/2s-1/40th range before, but this is not it. I'm seeing the same phenomenon with higher shutter speeds, both handheld and tripoded and OIS on/off. The consistency and ease of reproducing it shows it's a feature of the lens/TC combo and not a multitude of other factors. It could however, as I mentioned previously, be a particularly bad "mating" of this specific sample of the TC and the lens. That happens. I did however exchange the first TC I got because of this and the glowing reports about the 100-400 and TCs, but it was just the same story with the new TC.

I've simply written this off as what happens when you stack even more glass behind of what is already a complex 21 element construction. There is not a single case in my experience where adding glass like UV, ND, Pola or Macro filters, or TCs to a lens and it will not in some way degrade potential maximum IQ. The impact may however be so small it is insignificant to real world usage or the added property might be more desirable than the negative impact.

--
"Stumbling through the light."
https://www.instagram.com/stumblingfalk/