MC20+50-200 f2.8 Photos of Small Birds.

[drj3]

Attached are some images in direct sunlight using the MC20 on the 50-200mm f2.8 lens.

Given the direct sunlight, all images were underexposed to minimize over exposure of lighter and white areas. Highlights were further reduced and exposure increased in LR 6.14.

Distances were between 13 and 16 with a depth of field of 0.6 to 1 inch. All images uncropped.

I do not have any of the 100-400mm mFTs lenses, so I cannot comment comparison IQs for those lenses. The images would be somewhat less detailed than the MC14+300mm f4 at 420mm, but better than a crop of a 200mm lens image and probably better than a crop of a MC14+50-200 f2.8 image.











































--
drj3

 

[HicHic]

Thanks for these. Have you done a test with the MC-20 with the lens stopped down to see how much improvement there is? I'm curious what the sharpest aperture is with MC-20 and how much better it'd look if it was stopped down for these shots.

 

[drj3]

Thanks for these. Have you done a test with the MC-20 with the lens stopped down to see how much improvement there is? I'm curious what the sharpest aperture is with MC-20 and how much better it'd look if it was stopped down for these shots.

Not yet. I was fortunate to have a few minutes of better light and birds at the same time. However, the direct sunlight on birds with white feathers is not ideal for detail, since it tends to blow out a lot of the detail.

Since they were feeding, it was quick in/out in a couple of seconds, so getting a few okay images was the best I could do. I assume all my woodpeckers will be back when the excess of food provided by nature this year is reduced.

It will be a lot sharper at f8 (and at f6.3 and f7.1). See the quick comparison of the pixels on my computer monitor for f5.6 and f8 even with the ISO twice as high (200% enlargement).







--
drj3

 

[HicHic]

Thanks for these. Have you done a test with the MC-20 with the lens stopped down to see how much improvement there is? I'm curious what the sharpest aperture is with MC-20 and how much better it'd look if it was stopped down for these shots.

Not yet. I was fortunate to have a few minutes of better light and birds at the same time. However, the direct sunlight on birds with white feathers is not ideal for detail, since it tends to blow out a lot of the detail.

Since they were feeding, it was quick in/out in a couple of seconds, so getting a few okay images was the best I could do. I assume all my woodpeckers will be back when the excess of food provided by nature this year is reduced.

It will be a lot sharper at f8 (and at f6.3 and f7.1). See the quick comparison of the pixels on my computer monitor for f5.6 and f8 even with the ISO twice as high (200% enlargement).



--
drj3

That looks like a pretty good result at F8. If you get a chance again with good light to shoot them that close, I'd love to see how much better the subject will look.

 

[rgs_45]

From your shots, I like the way the the 50-200/2,8 + MC20 works well together. More than good enough for me. Now, if only OM will come out with a OM1X to pair with the 50-200/2.8, I will will hold of on buying a FF 100-400 + body. Thanks for sharing.

-Rich

 

[Owlsfan]

They aren't bad but I think the Panasonic 100-400 would give slightly better results in that light and at that close distance from what I've experienced with the lens. The 300F4 definitely would.

Impressive using the 2x but confirms that I don't need this lens as I'd more often than not be using it with the TC.

Obviously without the TC it will blow the other lenses away.

 

[HicHic]

Obviously without the TC it will blow the other lenses away.

Not wide open, and definitely not at the same shooting distance.

 

[Toni Genes]

The IQ looks good.

The images are a bit soft, but full of details. Some sharpening will make it look very good.

Even wide open is a very usable combo.