How can I improve my range of glass

R

Rorie

Senior Member
So I have done some reading with the new info you guys helped with, and yes, it does seem to be the lens being too slow. A x2 TC dropping two stops seems to make the lens a bit useless unless the ISo Is ramped up.

I think a new lens it is!

Thanks again for all the help! I'll look at that sigma, any other suggestions welcome
 
P

PhotoAV8R

Senior Member
Re: crop sensor body (e.g., D90) and FX or DX lenses.

AIUI, it doesn't matter what type of lens is put on a crop sensor body, the crop factor will still apply. i.e., a 300 mm lens (whether FX or DX) will have the reach of a 450 mm lens. However, if one puts any 300 mm lens on a full frame body, one gets the reach of a 300 mm lens.

The difference between the FX and DX lenses is the DX may cause vignetting on a full frame body, whereas an FX lens won't. The full frame sensor doesn't affect the magnification; it affects the size of the view into the world.

You'll notice in this discussion, the type of lens isn't mentioned.

BWTHDIK
 
R

Rorie

Senior Member
Final question on the subject...

i am reading Ken Rockwells review of the sigma 150-500. His opening comment is:

Not for: If 200mm or 300mm isn't long enough for wildlife for you, nothing is. Getting closer will get you better results than a longer lens.

So, is this that true? Can someone give me an example photo... For example showing something In the distance zoomed in at 300mm, then what it's like at 500mm? It must surly make a difference!?
 
R

Rorie

Senior Member
Haha. I agree. I don't know how many times I've read "I don't use it so ou won't need it" but I do wonder if the extra range will make a difference for that far away animal, or if I will still be saying "if only it was closer...I need a longer lens"
 
S

Sambr

Senior Member
I will tell you a secret. No length will be enough. If you have a 300mm you will want a 600mm then that's too short and a 800 is starting to look good. My advice spend the money get a Nikon 300mm F4 & 1.4 TC learn to use it and I guarantee you will produce spectacular images.
 
Mycenius

Mycenius

Senior Member
grandpaw said:
I think the reason that they make the TC work on the F2.8 70-200 and not the 70-300 is because the lens is to slow. When you get to the middle and long end of the 70-300 the 2x TC would make it loose two stops of light and that is past what will work on a Nikon camera. With the 70-200vr F2.8 it makes it jump from a F2.8 up to a F5.6 lens which will still work on a Nikon camera.
Click to expand...

That makes a lot of sense I hadn't thought of it that way!

:)



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Mycenius

Mycenius

Senior Member
jwstl said:
My opinion is it's ok to read KR's site for technical details and info on Nikon gear but his opinions should be taken with multiple grains of salt. Here is a much more reliable reviewer's opinion of the 150-500 Sigma:

http://bythom.com/sigma-150-500mm-lens-review.htm
Click to expand...

Yeah definitely. Thom Hogan is by far a vastly better source, and less biased & more analytical. KR has lots of good info on his site but he is less pragmatic and tends to present his personal preferences as gospel. And as someone said he is also sometimes deliberately controversial to attract attention to his website..! :)



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Mycenius

Mycenius

Senior Member
PhotoAV8R said:
AIUI, it doesn't matter what type of lens is put on a crop sensor body, the crop factor will still apply. i.e., a 300 mm lens (whether FX or DX) will have the reach of a 450 mm lens. However, if one puts any 300 mm lens on a full frame body, one gets the reach of a 300 mm lens.

The difference between the FX and DX lenses is the DX may cause vignetting on a full frame body, whereas an FX lens won't. The full frame sensor doesn't affect the magnification; it affects the size of the view into the world.
Click to expand...

OK, must confess I didn't know that. I've read a lot on the crop factor effect over the years ever since I got my D70 about 2004 and never really had it explained that way. I always understood because Nikon DX lens were designed for the smaller sensor their focal length was relative to that and therefore wasn't 'magnified'...?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
J

jwstl

Senior Member
Mycenius said:
I always understood because Nikon DX lens were designed for the smaller sensor their focal length was relative to that and therefore wasn't 'magnified'...?
Click to expand...
I think that confuses a lot of people. Remember, focal length is a measure of distance from the film/sensor plane and that doesn't change as sensor size changes. A 24mm is 24mm away on DX and on FX. The focal length listed for DX is the actual focal length, not the "equivelant" focal length. Hence, the crop factor exists for them as well. Because DX lenses only have to cover the smaller sensor they can be made smaller, lighter, and less expensively. Those are the differences between DX and FX lenses.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
Mycenius

Mycenius

Senior Member
jwstl said:
I think that confuses a lot of people. Remember, focal length is a measure of distance from the film/sensor plane and that doesn't change as sensor size changes. A 24mm is 24mm away on DX and on FX. The focal length listed for DX is the actual focal length, not the "equivelant" focal length. Hence, the crop factor exists for them as well. Because DX lenses only have to cover the smaller sensor they can be made smaller, lighter, and less expensively. Those are the differences between DX and FX lenses.
Click to expand...

Cool - that all makes sense and is quite logical when you think about it! Dddohh! :shame: :rolleyes: :cool:
 
R

Rorie

Senior Member
Well thereis so much information flying about on this thread, it's great!

To go back a step though, why would you suggest the Nikon 300 with a TC. I get that the Nikon is better in low light, but with the TC, will it not bring it down to the same as the sigma?

Also, I know I will always want bigger (bigger is better, right ;) ) but can anybody show an example photo at 300, then the same at 500mm?
 
J

jwstl

Senior Member
The Nikon AF-S 300 f/4 is a very sharp lens and loses very little quality with the Nikon 1.4 TC attached. The 2 go together so well I never take the TC off my 300. I'd bet the only way to get better 400mm shots is with the 400 2.8.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
R

Rorie

Senior Member
Thanks for that... Maybe it's because I'm on my ipad, but are those things links, advertisements or what? I can't seem to select them from the page...
 
Mycenius

Mycenius

Senior Member
Rorie said:
Thanks for that... Maybe it's because I'm on my ipad, but are those things links, advertisements or what? I can't seem to select them from the page...
Click to expand...

It may not work on an iPad if it uses certain type of Java script or such like as Apple doesn't support that on it's mobile devices. You may need to be on a Laptop or Desktop (either Windows, Linux, or Mac).
 
Top