Longer lens Vs megapixel cropping

W

woollyback

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,417
Edit My Images
No
Hello folks,

I have reached a bit of a dilema and wondered if you could put me straight.

I have been holding out for a long lens (to get to 600mm) as I am sure most birders / wildlife folk do, however now I have le cash I am not sure about its usefulness vs portability.

I tried the 500mm and was a fab lens but its not exactly a carry around all day jobbie which I like to do at times. Anyway that got me thinking

I am a canon shooter but the new Nikon D800 has 36mp - so the question is

If I took the D800 and 300 mm lens and cropped it (say by half), that would give me a field of view of a 600mm lens. But would that be all there was to it?? or does something else come into it?. Would I get equivalent IQ (300mm and pseudo 600mm) as it has been captured on the same sensor?

Does anyone have any examples / experience that will help me out before I stump up £6K

I wouldn't want to print massive (A3 at biggest)
Cheers for any info or details

Rob
 
woollyback said:
Hello folks,

I have reached a bit of a dilema and wondered if you could put me straight.

I have been holding out for a long lens (to get to 600mm) as I am sure most birders / wildlife folk do, however now I have le cash I am not sure about its usefulness vs portability.

I tried the 500mm and was a fab lens but its not exactly a carry around all day jobbie which I like to do at times. Anyway that got me thinking

I am a canon shooter but the new Nikon D800 has 36mp - so the question is

If I took the D800 and 300 mm lens and cropped it (say by half), that would give me a field of view of a 600mm lens. But would that be all there was to it?? or does something else come into it?. Would I get equivalent IQ (300mm and pseudo 600mm) as it has been captured on the same sensor?

Does anyone have any examples / experience that will help me out before I stump up £6K

I wouldn't want to print massive (A3 at biggest)
Cheers for any info or details

Rob
Click to expand...

You can't beat a big prime for wildlife, filling the frame and not cropping too much is preferred method :thumbs:
 
Neil B said:
You can't beat a big prime for wildlife, filling the frame and not cropping too much is preferred method :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Amen to that. I used to have the Nikon 500 AFS which I carried around all day with me but by end of play I was knackered. I sold that and now have the 600 AFS which I'm not going to attempt to carry all day. Look at how you shoot and decide from there. Do you wander all over whilst out or pretty static? Some people have decided on the 300 and a 2x tc for portability where others see reach as king and want a 600 or 800- only you know your style.
 
Thanks folks,

I agree a big prime is probably the first choice for IQ but it's not portable enough for me. I would end up with a £6K paperweight.

I was just wondering if the crop of a large mp file lost anything in IQ terms, but agree get closer or buy longer would be the ideal :)

Rob
 
woollyback said:
Thanks folks,

I agree a big prime is probably the first choice for IQ but it's not portable enough for me. I would end up with a £6K paperweight.

I was just wondering if the crop of a large mp file lost anything in IQ terms, but agree get closer or buy longer would be the ideal :)

Rob
Click to expand...

It would certainly loose the 'look' of longer lens. Background blur would be different for sure. This may or may not be an issue.

I think cropping is more closely comparable to adding TCs to the setup. I don't think there is a simple answer here.

P.s. I regards a pin sharp 8MP shot as a minimum. 36MP is big head-start.
 
For IQ, the running order is, 1) the right lens, 2) extender, 3) crop.

And BTW, if you crop half the image area, you have only increased effective focal length by 1.4x... ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top