Cropping Confusion.

In short to your question on first post, given the same distance and lenses 5DsR will give you better crop-ability. More resolution means you'll see more noise at magnification, if you downscale 5DsR files the noise is comparable to your 5DIV. If your intention to take photo and crop the hell out of it, then the image will show more flaws. As for the latter I suggest to get close to KF or place the perch closer to you. When I started photographing KF, I only have a mesh screen in front of me with the KFs flying over and above my head, one time perch 2ft away from my lens and I had 500mm at the time (darn it).

As suggested Sigma 150-600mm is a good start to get closer to subject.

I have no experience on 400mm DO mk1 but report suggest bare lens sharpness is acceptable but with any TC, sharpness do suffer. In this instance Sigma 150-600mm maybe favourable at tele end.

5D3 + 500mmII ISO1600 slightly cropped
Kingfisher (Alcedo atthis) by Robin Lee, on Flickr

5DsR + 500mmII ISO1600 70% cropped (I think)
Queen Portrait by Robin Lee, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
robinsslee said:
In short to your question on first post, given the same distance and lenses 5DsR will give you better crop-ability. More resolution means you'll see more noise at magnification, if you downscale 5DsR files the noise is comparable to your 5DIV. If your intention to take photo and crop the hell out of it, then the image will show more flaws. As for the latter I suggest to get close to KF or place the perch closer to you. When I started photographing KF, I only have a mesh screen in front of me with the KFs flying over and above my head, one time perch 2ft away from my lens and I had 500mm at the time (darn it).

As suggested Sigma 150-600mm is a good start to get closer to subject.

I have no experience on 400mm DO mk1 but report suggest bare lens sharpness is acceptable but with any TC, sharpness do suffer. In this instance Sigma 150-600mm maybe favourable at tele end.

5D3 + 500mmII ISO1600 slightly cropped
Kingfisher (Alcedo atthis) by Robin Lee, on Flickr

5DsR + 500mmII ISO1600 70% cropped (I think)
Queen Portrait by Robin Lee, on Flickr
Click to expand...


Awesome!

I've made good progress with the KF, 2 weeks ago, I didn't even know where it was perching, now I'm within 25 feet or less of it. I've come to realise during this thread that that is more the key, ie, getting closer. I felt so confident with the KF last time out (or maybe it felt more confident with me) that I was able to use a 2 second timer to photograph it in an attempt to eliminate as much camera shake as possible. I'll work on getting closer for now using the kit I have, those few extra feet I think will make the difference but not ruling out future 'upgrades', probably starting with glass as oppossed to higher res sensors, following research on both. I'm not knocking the 5Div, I don't think I will ever part with it, it's a different league to anything I've owned previously, I love that camera.

Provisonally have a day with the KF Thursday or Friday this week if nothing crops up.

Incredible images Robin.
 
Dale. said:
Awesome!

I've made good progress with the KF, 2 weeks ago, I didn't even know where it was perching, now I'm within 25 feet or less of it. I've come to realise during this thread that that is more the key, ie, getting closer. I felt so confident with the KF last time out (or maybe it felt more confident with me) that I was able to use a 2 second timer to photograph it in an attempt to eliminate as much camera shake as possible. I'll work on getting closer for now using the kit I have, those few extra feet I think will make the difference but not ruling out future 'upgrades', probably starting with glass as oppossed to higher res sensors, following research on both. I'm not knocking the 5Div, I don't think I will ever part with it, it's a different league to anything I've owned previously, I love that camera.

Provisonally have a day with the KF Thursday or Friday this week if nothing crops up.

Incredible images Robin.
Click to expand...

Good luck with the upcoming KF session, the key is getting as close as you can given the equipment you have at the time or move perches/hides to maximise the image you aimed for.
 
robinsslee said:
In short to your question on first post, given the same distance and lenses 5DsR will give you better crop-ability. More resolution means you'll see more noise at magnification, if you downscale 5DsR files the noise is comparable to your 5DIV. If your intention to take photo and crop the hell out of it, then the image will show more flaws. As for the latter I suggest to get close to KF or place the perch closer to you. When I started photographing KF, I only have a mesh screen in front of me with the KFs flying over and above my head, one time perch 2ft away from my lens and I had 500mm at the time (darn it).

As suggested Sigma 150-600mm is a good start to get closer to subject.

I have no experience on 400mm DO mk1 but report suggest bare lens sharpness is acceptable but with any TC, sharpness do suffer. In this instance Sigma 150-600mm maybe favourable at tele end.

5D3 + 500mmII ISO1600 slightly cropped
Kingfisher (Alcedo atthis) by Robin Lee, on Flickr

5DsR + 500mmII ISO1600 70% cropped (I think)
Queen Portrait by Robin Lee, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Now you are just showing off :D

Mind if I ask where you took these? :)
 
Dale. said:
Is the S really that much better than the C? I'm not at all familiar with the S.

:)
Click to expand...
Having had both definetly a NO
 
I have the Sigma C and briefly tried the S. In terms of image quality there was little if any difference. The S is weather sealed and much much heavier.

The Canon EF 400mm f5.6L USM Lens has a good reputation for bird photography but the max aperture is not great and has no IS.

I have yet to find a better theoretical solution than the Canon 500 or 600 L.

Getting closer in good light will help.Hopefully they will get used to you. My favourite bird.

I agree glass rather than a new body is the solution.
 
T_J_G said:
Why not grab a crop body, that’ll get you a bit closer to filling the frame? And you can retain good ISO performance too
Click to expand...

Which Canon crop body would you suggest that would give great high ISO performance, and be suitable for wildlife in general? The 7D2 comes to mind, but the ISO performance isn't brilliant.
 
Isn't the 90D meant to be a step up?
 
Jelster said:
Which Canon crop body would you suggest that would give great high ISO performance, and be suitable for wildlife in general? The 7D2 comes to mind, but the ISO performance isn't brilliant.
Click to expand...

I've no idea, I haven't touched a Canon camera since I had the original 7D. I'd probably say 80/90D at a complete guess.
 
T_J_G said:
Why not grab a crop body, that’ll get you a bit closer to filling the frame? And you can retain good ISO performance too
Click to expand...
Jelster said:
Which Canon crop body would you suggest that would give great high ISO performance, and be suitable for wildlife in general? The 7D2 comes to mind, but the ISO performance isn't brilliant.
Click to expand...
Craikeybaby said:
Isn't the 90D meant to be a step up?
Click to expand...
swanseamale47 said:
The 90d isn't as good as the 80d in low (so I'm told by a mate)
Click to expand...


For my sins, I already own a 7D mki (as well as a 40D) and it's a camera I've never really got on with. It's always been a noisy, bandy grainy beast, in my hands at least. ETTR has helped but it's still tempremental.

That said, I have been tempted to try it again at least, it's currently sitting in my kit cupboard, looking like new but untouched and if I'm honest, unloved. I may take it along this week, but leaving a 5Div on the shelf and taking a 7Dmki instead just doesn't feel right. I'll take both, bag some shots with the 5D if the KF is playing ball, then give the 7 a workout and see, especially if the light plays ball too, as last week, I was up at ISO 3200 with the 5D, it didn't break sweat but my 7D would probably melt at that setting.
 
If you can't get close enough you really don't have many options and you quickly get stuck in what I call "the equivalence circle."

Usually the *best* choice is the most expensive, a big fast prime lens. If you're using a 600/6.3 that isn't as sharp wide open, then going to a 600/4 that is will make a significant difference. And you need a lens like that to get close to actually recording 31MP on your current camera, or really benefitting from more MP w/ another body.

But as you go up in FL you also loose light... 400/2.8, 600/4, 800/5.6. The "best" images will always come from shorter distances that can be taken with shorter lenses. But that's "technically best"; don't forget about more artistic/environmental shots which are not as demanding.
 
sk66 said:
If you can't get close enough you really don't have many options and you quickly get stuck in what I call "the equivalence circle."

Usually the *best* choice is the most expensive, a big fast prime lens. If you're using a 600/6.3 that isn't as sharp wide open, then going to a 600/4 that is will make a significant difference. And you need a lens like that to get close to actually recording 31MP on your current camera, or really benefitting from more MP w/ another body.

But as you go up in FL you also loose light... 400/2.8, 600/4, 800/5.6. The "best" images will always come from shorter distances that can be taken with shorter lenses. But that's "technically best"; don't forget about more artistic/environmental shots which are not as demanding.
Click to expand...



The light looks good tomorrow, I think it may even be a battle to control the whites, that white bit on the KF's neck is a bu**er. I can see the merit in faster/brighter lenses now, but they are out of reach financially, at least for the time being. A s/h 600f4L is my best bet in that respect. F4 at 600 must be paradise. :)

So, for now, 5Div tomorrow with the Sigma, 7D will be in my bag if the light is promising. I'm taking steps tomorrow to get a bit closer, mainly putting perches out that will be closer than the ones already there. I'm within 25 feet now, which after just over a week, is good I think. If I can get that sub 20 feet tomorrow, I'll be happy.

I would still like a back up body with a more modern (capable) sensor, than the 7D but the 7D might suprise me tomorrow, we'll see. A back up body would more than likely be crop, I'm already researching 80D v 90D dynamic range.

Ultimately though, I need to get that bit closer, use what light I have and get the odds in my favour, one thing I did notice was the camera shake, even on a locked gimbal but with my hand pressing the shutter. I have to remedy that. Basically, for now, I have to make the most of what I have and maybe soon, I can drop some cash on a faster lens that will also bring the best out of my sensor.

I do like to get shots that don't have to be frame fillers and the Sigma actually gives quite a pleasing background too. That camera shake though, minute as it is, isn't helping the fine detail.

Posted elsewhere, but for reference, and it shook its tail. :LOL:

IMGL4286 DPP LR CS6 JP tp.jpg
 
Dale. said:
The light looks good tomorrow, I think it may even be a battle to control the whites, that white bit on the KF's neck is a bu**er. I can see the merit in faster/brighter lenses now, but they are out of reach financially, at least for the time being. A s/h 600f4L is my best bet in that respect. F4 at 600 must be paradise. :)

So, for now, 5Div tomorrow with the Sigma, 7D will be in my bag if the light is promising. I'm taking steps tomorrow to get a bit closer, mainly putting perches out that will be closer than the ones already there. I'm within 25 feet now, which after just over a week, is good I think. If I can get that sub 20 feet tomorrow, I'll be happy.

I would still like a back up body with a more modern (capable) sensor, than the 7D but the 7D might suprise me tomorrow, we'll see. A back up body would more than likely be crop, I'm already researching 80D v 90D dynamic range.

Ultimately though, I need to get that bit closer, use what light I have and get the odds in my favour, one thing I did notice was the camera shake, even on a locked gimbal but with my hand pressing the shutter. I have to remedy that. Basically, for now, I have to make the most of what I have and maybe soon, I can drop some cash on a faster lens that will also bring the best out of my sensor.

I do like to get shots that don't have to be frame fillers and the Sigma actually gives quite a pleasing background too. That camera shake though, minute as it is, isn't helping the fine detail.

Posted elsewhere, but for reference, and it shook its tail. :LOL:

View attachment 260304
Click to expand...

Nice, did you use noise reduction to the whole pic?
 
robinsslee said:
Nice, did you use noise reduction to the whole pic?
Click to expand...

Nope, no NR on that. It is though at ISO 2000, f6.3, 1/125sec, some camera shake, despite a tripod ( I actually switched the IS back on to try and counteract the shake I was getting pressing the shutter button, not sure if that was a mistake or not on a tripod) and a fair crop too, the KF was also quite aggitated trying to stun the stickleback, there is movement on the tip of the tail as the 'swipe' ends.

A lot of lessons learned here, glad I asked the question. (y)

That tawny is a stunner btw!
 
Last edited:
I have owned a 7Di and a 7 Dii, the latter is in a different league in my opinion. I could never get on with the 7Di noise. Some accounts say the 80D and 90D are better at noise reduction. If I need reach I use the 7Dii rather than the 5Diii.
 
Last edited:
Brentor said:
I have owned a 7Di and a 7 Dii, the later is in a different league in my opinion. I could never get on with the 7Di noise. Some accounts say the 80D and 90D are better at noise reduction. If I need reach I use the 7Dii rather than the 5Diii.
Click to expand...


Very interesting. my relationship with the 7D mki has been love/hate. I will give it a chance to redeem itself tomorrow, the light looks good, which it seems to like.
 
Dale. said:
Very interesting. my relationship with the 7D mki has been love/hate. I will give it a chance to redeem itself tomorrow, the light looks good, which it seems to like.
Click to expand...

I wish you all the best, if only I had access to local kingfishers, they are my favourite bird.
 
Dale. said:
Nope, no NR on that. It is though at ISO 2000, f6.3, 1/125sec
Click to expand...
Dale. said:
The light looks good tomorrow, I think it may even be a battle to control the whites, that white bit on the KF's neck is a bu**er.
Click to expand...
You'll need to do some testing in order to determine how significantly using a higher ISO reduces noise with your cameras; but based upon these test results there is negligible benefit to going above ISO 600 w/ the 5D Mk4. Basically, ISO is not exposure and it doesn't cause noise with digital imagery... based upon the empirical data I would say drop the ISO as needed to save the highlights; it won't make much difference in the end results... just don't go much below ISO800 unless you really have to.
 
Last edited:
Brentor said:
I wish you all the best, if only I had access to local kingfishers, they are my favourite bird.
Click to expand...

Thanks. They are out there, just need to find them. I dread to think how many miles I've walked this last few years in pursuit but I've enjoyed every step. Stick at it and your reward will come with that tell tale flash of blue, then you know you're in. (y) I'm not sure where you stay but there may be local bird watching groups that could help you too.


sk66 said:
You'll need to do some testing in order to determine how significantly using a higher ISO reduces noise with your cameras; but based upon these test results there is negligible benefit to going above ISO 600 w/ the 5D Mk4. Basically, ISO is not exposure and it doesn't cause noise with digital imagery... based upon the empirical data I would say drop the ISO as needed to save the highlights; it won't make much difference in the end results... just don't go much below ISO800 unless you really have to.
Click to expand...

Very interesting, that chart is gold. Thanks. (y)
 
Last edited:
A few questions have risen for me from this thread. My understanding has changed and it's clear now that whilst the Sigma is a lovely lens for what it is, it may not be capable of making the most of the 5Div's sensor.

I have a 300L f4 as well as the 100-400L (mk1). I'm guessing these lenses, although shorter than the Sigma, would offer more 'cropability' being Canon L on a Canon body? So I'd actually be better off using them at longer distances, within reason of course?

The 600Lf4 is out of reach for me, even second hand, it's £6k+, divorce territory. :LOL:

The only lens with decent range and an achievable price tag would be the 400L f5.6 prime but probably overkill with me already having 400mm in Canon L glass, which is a very sharp copy and why I haven't changed to the Mk2 100-400.
 
Last edited:
Dale. said:
A few questions have risen for me from this thread. My understanding has changed and it's clear now that whilst the Sigma is a lovely lens for what it is, it may not be capable of making the most of the 5Div's sensor.

I have a 300L f4 as well as the 100-400L (mk1). I'm guessing these lenses, although shorter than the Sigma, would offer more 'cropability' being Canon L on a Canon body? So I'd actually be better off using them at longer distances, within reason of course?

The 600Lf4 is out of reach for me, even second hand, it's £6k+, divorce territory. :LOL:

The only lens with decent range and an achievable price tag would be the 400L f5.6 prime but probably overkill with me already having 400mm in Canon L glass, which is a very sharp copy and why I haven't changed to the Mk2 100-400.
Click to expand...

I imagine your sigma 150-600mm will still be better than any 100-400mm or 400mm/5.6 cropped down to match it.

Assuming you are using 5D4 which is 30MP:
Cropping down a result from a 100-400mm or 400mm/5.6 will result in 13MP i.e. 1.5x crop.
Cropping down from a 300mm lens will result in 7.5MP i.e. 2x crop

If you downsize your result from your sigma 150-600mm to 13mp or 7.5mp, I am willing to bet a penny or two that you will actually have shaper results.

So save yourself some pennies and just buy a 1.4x for your 150-600mm and shoot on the odd 3 days we actually get decent sunlight in this county :p
(Then really hope to god that a KF lands LOL)
 
Last edited:
If you want extend your reach digitally+optically without getting into divorce+kidney selling territory your options are considerably higher outside canon IMO.

For example a panasonic 100-400mm on an Olympus e-m1ii will give you 800mm reach at 20MP.
which is the same as cropping down a result of 5D4+150-600mm to 17MP.

Doesn't look like a huge win but I think panasonic is a better lens than sigma 150-600mm (NO 1st first hand experience)

But you could also buy an olympus 300mm f4 with 1.4x and 2x TC which will get you as far as 1200mm f8 at 20MP!

Having spent forever doing the math I think my setup was/is pretty good too without having to sell a kidney.

But if you want to stay with canon and extend you reach I'd seriously look at 90D or M6ii :)
 
Dale. said:
I have a 300L f4 as well as the 100-400L (mk1). I'm guessing these lenses, although shorter than the Sigma, would offer more 'cropability' being Canon L on a Canon body? So I'd actually be better off using them at longer distances, within reason of course?
Click to expand...
Whilst the 300/4 is clearly a better lens than the 150-600, it's unlikely that it would crop down to the same framing and win the contest.
Your 5D4 has a pixel density that challenges the best lenses available and the only realistic solution is a better 600mm lens unless you can get closer.
 
Last edited:
Dale. said:
A few questions have risen for me from this thread. My understanding has changed and it's clear now that whilst the Sigma is a lovely lens for what it is, it may not be capable of making the most of the 5Div's sensor.

I have a 300L f4 as well as the 100-400L (mk1). I'm guessing these lenses, although shorter than the Sigma, would offer more 'cropability' being Canon L on a Canon body? So I'd actually be better off using them at longer distances, within reason of course?
Click to expand...
Like I said earlier, you're getting into the circle of equivalence... if you use a shorter FL it has to be sharper in order to generate the same results. That's because it is going to project the image smaller onto the sensor, which requires it be resolved by a smaller area/pixels, and it's going to be cropped harder/enlarged more.

I see a couple of possible benefits to using the other lenses. One is that they are faster which means more light. The second is that they are not as critical of technique (camera shake). But again, the images will be cropped/magnified more which tends to equalize things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top