Shooting wildlife in motion with a D200, I set the shutter speed and aperture for my desired results and depend on the ISO to change for the correct exposure. Is there a speed limiting difference between the D700 & D7000? I depend on the DX magnification but run into soft images magnifing the animal's eyes using the 70-300VR II @ 5.6 and monopod. Any suggestions? Would the Sigma 120-400 or 150-500 OS be a better choise?
Using ISO as the 3rd variable verses only shutter & aperture.
(13 posts) (10 voices)-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
Podette said:
Would the Sigma 120-400 or 150-500 OS be a better choise?NO. All consumer level telezooms are soft at the long end. Get a prime.
AF-S 300mm f/4 IFED is optically great and works with 1.4xTCs flawlessly.
And cheapish too. The only decent long zoom alternative is the AF-S 200-400mm.What makes the 70-300 VR look soft on D7000 is the 16mp sensor.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Godless said:
NO. All consumer level telezooms are soft at the long end. Get a prime.
AF-S 300mm f/4 IFED is optically great and works with 1.4xTCs flawlessly.
And cheapish too.What makes the 70-300 VR look soft on D7000 is the 16mp sensor.
Agreed 100%...
I shoot with 300 f2.8's because I am a pixel peeper but that is overkill... a 300mm f/4 is the best option...
Posted 1 year ago # -
@godless - 70-300vr once You cross the 200mm border will look soft on everything
Posted 1 year ago # -
adamz said:
@godless - 70-300vr once You cross the 200mm border will look soft on everythingI know. I have had one of those. With the D700 it is still ok when staying below the 200mm mark. With the D7000 it´s another story entirely.
As previously stated, all consumer level telezooms get soft at the long end.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Godless said:
What makes the 70-300 VR look soft on D7000 is the 16mp sensor.
Trying to wrap my brain around this. Are you saying that the density of a 16mp sensor is too much for the this lens and that maybe a sensor with fewer MP should render sharper images with this lens? In which case an 18MP or 24MP sensor would be no better and possibly worse with this lens? Thanks
Posted 1 year ago # -
I've heard this argument before and here's what I think it means:
A denser sensor (i.e. 16mp vs. 12mp) will provide a greater level of detail and will therefore "expose" a lens's flaws more readily. If that's the case 4x4, your answer would be yes.
Is there an optical engineer in the house?Posted 1 year ago # -
Godless said:
NO. All consumer level telezooms are soft at the long end. Get a prime.
AF-S 300mm f/4 IFED is optically great and works with 1.4xTCs flawlessly.
And cheapish too. The only decent long zoom alternative is the AF-S 200-400mm.What makes the 70-300 VR look soft on D7000 is the 16mp sensor.
I think most of the testers got bad samples of the Simga zooms. I tested a 150-500mm and it was sharper than my AF-S300mm F4 with the TC14E. No question that the Nikkor is sharper without the TC though; of course it is also 200mm short without the TC.
Posted 1 year ago # -
1. Optimal sharpness rule of thumb: Use the Lowest Native Iso (100 for the D200 If I recall), stop the lens down 2 stops F8-F11. Keep your shutter speed equal to the focal length. 300mm = 300 x 1.5(crop) = 1/450th. Shoot Raw or "natural" setting. Any high vibrancy setting saturates details out.
Anything outside of that, you image will soften up instantly - there really is no way around it.
2. Every lens mentioned incl. the 70-300vr is sharp. Are there sharper lenses? Yes but that will set you back $400 - $4,000 more. The 70-300vr is more than sharp enough. If you can't meet #1 completely, different gear will more than likely give you the same result.
3. The D200 has less pixel density than the D7000. Side by side, the D7000 will be more sharp because of this.
4. Hand shake is present even with VR and a Mono-pod. A $6,000 lens and even a $6,000 body won't help that.
5. Your computer screen shows details that when printed are smaller than the tip of a ball point pen. Pixel peeping is a perfectionist's gateway straight to a torcherous mental hell.
I was shooting some deer one morning and none of them came out remotely close to what some great wildlife photographers post. Biggest lesson I learned - those guys will sit out for days and shoot 100s if not 1000s of photos to get that one shot. If they didn't have the absolute best gear, how long then would it take? I'm now very happy with what I got.
If you were going to upgrade anything the item that would give you a better fighting chance is a new body like the D7000. Cleaner ISOs and more density gives you two controllable gains. Lenses still would leave you in basically the same position you are in now - F-stop too low and shutter too low.
Posted 1 year ago # -
TaoTeJared said:
1. Optimal sharpness rule of thumb: Use the Lowest Native Iso (100 for the D200 If I recall), stop the lens down 2 stops F8-F11. Keep your shutter speed equal to the focal length. 300mm = 300 x 1.5(crop) = 1/450th. Shoot Raw or "natural" setting. Any high vibrancy setting saturates details out.Anything outside of that, you image will soften up instantly - there really is no way around it.
First of all welcome to NR Podette.
Second, TaoTeJared said it best...specially regarding what wildlife photographers have to deal with in getting the "right shot." In fact, I came across a National Geographic photographer on my trip to Sedona early this month and had a nice long conversation with him regarding shooting the "wild". One very interesting point he told me was that most amateur photographer that go out and shot wild life focus to much on the head/eye shot of animal. He told me if you want to do that, "just go to the zoo and you will get that shot." He said, the magic of shooting the wild (and the animals), is to incorporate and capture their surroundings...their habitats. Hence, for him composition is a key element in capturing the wildlife photography.
So keep that in mind next time you are out...you will find your shots to be more "wild."
Third, speaking on behalf of the D7000 (which I own), it's 1.5x crop factor is a nice advantage for me to have. My best wildlife shots have come from by using the lowest ISO setting possible by finding the best light; shooting between f8-f16 and getting as close to the wildlife, so long as I felt I was safe. No shot is worth getting hurt over, if you know what I mean. One area that I would recommend you changing is not to use a monopod, but a nice sturdy tripod with a gimbal head of some-sort.
Cheers....
Posted 1 year ago # -
what wildlife do you shoot? if it's birds, then a flash with a better beamer might help.
To make you feel better, i do exactly what you do, I have a 300 2.8 a TC-20eiii and a D700 and D300s.
I rarely get the pics I want.
I am waiting on a better beamer, it was supposed to be my christmas present.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Rx4Photo said:
Trying to wrap my brain around this. Are you saying that the density of a 16mp sensor is too much for the this lens and that maybe a sensor with fewer MP should render sharper images with this lens?Exactly.
With a 4mp increase in resolution, you need better glass or best of luck (with moving subjects).
Posted 1 year ago # -
Godless said:
Exactly.With a 4mp increase in resolution, you need better glass or best of luck (with moving subjects).
I don't believe we are anywhere close to the "out resolving" Nikon glass yet. Other brands or much, much older consumer lenses maybe.
There are whole threads already on the resolving topic. I don't want this to become the "focus" (get it? - sorry bad joke) but just to say there are varying opinions on this topic that no one has been able to prove on the 70-300vr or any other actual Nikkor lens is being out resolved. If everyone is working on 24 & 36mp APS-C sensors, then we are not there yet.
Canon is having some issues with some low consumer ones though - I have seen some interesting and quite persuasive tests comparing a Canon lens to a Nikkor lens that did not show the same characteristics of softness.
Posted 1 year ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
