If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Will a tamron sp 2x pro teleconverter work with a canon 75-300 IS lens? Going to Alaska
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote:
Scott W wrote: Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote: The discussion has been about hand holding a long telephoto for wildlife or use a tripod, but I can't imagine NOT using a tripod for a serious landscape image with a wide angle lens. The OP needs to learn that a tripod will probably be the most significant improvement in image sharpness he could obtain, at least for many situations. My way of thinking on this is that if there is enough light that I can hand hold a 300mm lens and get a sharp image then when I am shooting at 30mm using that same shutter speed the blurring I get from camera shake will be insignificant. Yes, but we are talking f/11 with the 2x TC, and with landscapes, you often need f/8 to f/16 for depth of field. That plus low ISO for good S/N and exposure times are relatively long. Then add a polarizer, and 1/4 second and longer is common. Yup, a tripod is definitely needed there. If photographing from a boat or other moving platform, image stabilization is a big help when you can't use a tripod, but if you are on solid ground a tripod is essential in most situations unless one only wants snapshots and 4x6 inch prints. I think this is a rather broad statement, to say that you need a tripod or your photo will be good for nothing past 4x6 prints is a bit extreme don't you think? Yeah, that was an extreme statement. Good 8x10s hand held are are reasonably done, but would most likely be sharper with a tripod. If you can't get a great looking 8 x 12 print from a hand held shot using a good DSLR then there is something very wrong. I do a lot of shooting with and without a tripod and I would say that there are many cases were a tripod is a great help, but in bright light the help is minimal for short to normal lenses. Yes, I agree. I do a lot of hand held imaging too. But almost of the landscape images on my web site were done with a tripod (all but the Hawaiian sunset with sailboat), and most of the wildlife images too. Four images total hand held out of 289 currently on the site: http://www.clarkvision.com I think tripods are great and if you have one with you there is little reason not to use it. Now if we are talking about cases where camera shake is a problem, long shutter times, then we also should talk about mirror lockup. Even with a tripod you will suffer a fair bit of loss if you don't use mirror lockup. I don't know about other cameras but the 20D has a neat mode where when you push the shutter the mirror locks up, the camera waits 3 seconds and then takes the photo. Yes, that is a good point too. Of course if you are photographing bears this is not a recommended technique. If they are distant and still, it can still be a help to image sharpness. IMO if you are shooting landscapes with a tripod you might as well go the extra step of using a panoramic head and get images that are truly sharp. Once I have taken the time to setup the tripod and level it the extra time to take 15 to 30 photos to be stitched is nothing. Yes, I agree. But there is a lot of post processing effort involved. I have a lot more 1 frame images processed than I do mosaics, and many mosaics waiting to be processed. I need a faster computer and more time ;-). If I have a number to do I will run them in batch more. Mostly time is only needed it I have people moving in the photo and have to hand adjust the seams around them. The other thing to keep in mind is that it is ok to put the photos to be stitched off to the side and stitch them when you have good tools to do so. What I have found is photos that I could not stitch, at least easily, a few years ago I can stitch with ease now. This is particularly true of scenes with moving clouds, which the earlier version of the software I used would not blend at all well. I am willing to bet that what seems like a huge image now will seem pretty average in 10 years. 10 years ago the idea of dealing with image of 100MP seemed pretty far fetched, now it is no big deal. Scott |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Will a tamron sp 2x pro teleconverter work with a canon 75-300IS lens? Going to Alaska
Scott W wrote:
I am willing to bet that what seems like a huge image now will seem pretty average in 10 years. 10 years ago the idea of dealing with image of 100MP seemed pretty far fetched, now it is no big deal. Yes. interesting. I just looked back and 9 years ago, 1997, I started doing my first 4x5 drum scans: 650 mbyte files processed in Photoshop on a Pentium 1 100 MHz machine with 256 mbytes of RAM. Every operation I did meant a coffee break! Roger |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Will a tamron sp 2x pro teleconverter work with a canon 75-300 IS lens? Going to Alaska
I will be staying at Northface Lodge in Denali National Park in late August
mainly, among other places. I also plan on going over into Canada to do some shooting. Any suggestions for photographing Mount McKinley around Wonder Lake? I have purchased several additions to my equipment repertoire lately including a Galen Rowell Singh-Ray Soft Graduated Neutral Density Filter, more CF cards, Expodisc, etc and thought a 2x teleconverter might be nice to have. Don't you think a teleconverter would be wise to have? If not the Tamron one I mentioned, which one? Any other suggestions on low to moderate priced equipment/books/videos/workshops. I am willing to spend "some" money on something that will really help me get great photos and could possibly reuse, but I'm not rich and photography is more of a serious hobby than a career, so I probably won't spend 4k or more on a nice L lens. Thanks for all the help, Rick Baker http://www.rickbakerimages.com "Floyd L. Davidson" wrote in message ... wrote: I'm planning on taking a trip to Alaska in August. What part of Alaska, how are you traveling, what do you want to see and what do you want to photograph? The more detail, the better, because what you've said is no different than "I'm visiting the US in August." An overlay of Alaska on the Lower-48 puts Ketchikan down in Florida, while I'd be in Minnesota, and Attu is in California and Anchorage is somewhere near Kansas (?). The range of climate and geography is even greater. I want to make sure I have the proper equipment to get great wildlife shots of bears, eagles, etc. It might well vary from place to place. At the Anchorage zoo you don't need much of a telephoto to photograph a polar bear, where I live (bears are interactive and) the longer the lense the better... I have a Canon 20d digital SLR and various lenses including a Canon 75-300 IS lens. I was thinking about purchasing a 2x teleconverter to increase the range of my lenses. Will the Tamron SP 2x Pro Teleconverter work with my Canon 75-300 IS lens? As others have mentioned, that lens is a f/5.6 at 300mm, and a 2x teleconverter puts it down to f/11. Then consider that for best results you'll need to stop the lense down at least one f/stop (and depending on the lense maybe two). Hence you are then looking at f/16 or f/22! (I.e., that is acceptable many days of the year in Fairbanks, and rarely works well in coastal areas where the number of cloudy days is twice what it is in the Alaskan Interior!) If you think a 600mm lense is appropriate, perhaps a fixed focal length lense would be a better idea than a teleconverter. You still might want a teleconverter for the few times that you can take advantage of it... but put it into the "extras" category, and don't consider it a primary tool that will be used with any regularity. I'm not familiar with your camera, or how easy it is to use with manual focus lenses, so I won't comment on that, but obviously using the teleconverter means you have to be handy at manual focusing. (If you haven't tried it, you might want to buy something cheap to practice with before deciding to spend real money.) Familiarity with manual lenses might also find application if you decide to purchase a fixed focal length telephoto lense too, simply because older manual focus lenses are easier on the pocket book than newer AF lenses. How is the quality of this teleconverter? I will lose 2 stops, correct? I don't like bringing a tripod, but if I have to use it, I will. The question is not if you want a tripod. How many different tripods do you want to have available? Again, it depends on where you are going and your mode of travel. If you plan on backbacking you'll need something you can carry. If you don't plan on packing it far, a more substantial tripod is a good idea. An assortment of 3 or 4 different tripods is not unreasonable... Can I somehow use shutter priorty mode to increase the shutter speed and shoot without a tripod? Or is a tripod necessary? Any other suggestions on equipment/tips for getting good shots in Alaska? The tripod is necessary if you really want to shoot everything possible. Not having at least one would be a serious limitation. But again: where in Alaska, what mode of travel, and what is it you want to photograph? And I would seriously recommend not just giving extra thought to photo equipment tips, but also Alaska tips too! Ask questions in alt.culture.alaska, and maybe ask questions in some of the rec.travel groups too, and perhaps also in rec.backcountry if you are thinking of backpacking or anything close. As someone else mentioned, if this is a "once in a lifetime" trip to Alaska, you *don't* want to trust generalities either for your photography or for where to go. Find out *exactly* what gives you the best bang for the buck *before* you go, rather than once you are here and are locked into a schedule you can't change. A trip to Denali (along with literally a million plus other tourists each summer) is certainly interesting, as is the drive from Anchorage to Fairbanks... but in all truth what you would be seeing is the part of Alaska that is the most *similar* to where you live. What you'd miss is almost everything that makes Alaska what it is! Which do you want to see and photograph? -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Will a tamron sp 2x pro teleconverter work with a canon 75-300 IS lens? Going to Alaska
Rick Baker writes ...
I will be staying at Northface Lodge in Denali National Park in late August. I've stayed at North Face three times for up to 11 days each time, and also once stayed at their sister lodge up the hill, Camp Denali ... late August is great for the tundra changing colors and you should get chances at moose, caribou and grizz and maybe wolves. Email me if you want more details ... try to get on the pre-breakfast "photo bus" if they have one going out one morning, that's your best chance at grizzlies close to the road ... Any suggestions for photographing Mount McKinley around Wonder Lake? Most days it's clouded over but if it's clear I'd suggest skipping dinner and staying out at the Lake to shoot, that's what I always did (they will hold food for you, I've gotten back at 11 PM and they still had food for me) ... this way you get the best light ... you can take one of their mountain bikes along on the bus when you ride out in the AM and if it's clear just ask to be dropped off and ride back late while everyone is at dinner ... from the WL Ranger station it's mostly downhill to the lodge so it's easy enough if you have a pack for your camera gear (maybe 4-5 miles distance). If you're a moderately strong rider you can ask to get off at Eielson, which is about 26 miles from the lodge, if you're a really strong rider you can get off at Highway Pass but it's 33 miles and you have to bike up 2 passes to get to Eielson, but it's worth it if you're a good rider. There are a lot of caribou and bears in the Highway Pass area most years. You need to know what to do if you come across a grizzly bear in the road if you do this alone, but if you act properly you shouldn't have a problem (I never did ... so far). Here are some wildlife shots my wife and I have taken from this area the past couple of years (late Aug - early Sept) ... http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/T9D4036_grizz.jpg http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/W1037_bear.jpg http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/D3882_wolf.jpg http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/D3961_grizz.jpg Also here's a web page of thumbnails from Alaska (scenics and wildlife) that I started a few years ago and never finished, you can click on a thumb to see a larger image but the other links aren't implemented ... http://members.aol.com/marlinazul/gallery/g_alaska.htm ... the images from North Face are row 1 col 2,3,4, row 2 c 1-4, row 3 c 2,4, and row 4 c 1 ... the McKinley images from Wonder Lake are r1/c3, which was shot across from the WL Ranger Station late in PM (I was the only one there, everyone else was at dinner , and r2/c1 which was shot near the inlet/outlet of the lake near the gravel road. You can also shoot at Reflection Pond to get a nice reflection, but I always skip that area. You can bike to this area in the early AM from the Lodge but it's uphill, unfortunately. Don't you think a teleconverter would be wise to have? With the lens you have I'd get a 1.4x instead of a 2x ... a tripod will be handy if you find caribou or moose while on the bike since you can set up, but your bear and wolf shots need to come from a bus. A tripod is very handy for shooting scenics at Wonder Lake or the tundra, even a small light one. You can approach caribou safely to 25 yards legally and moose to 25 yards legally, but be careful with the moose -- some areas I will approach them to 25 yards but if it's flat and open or if they look particularly feisty I stay back further, they will stomp you if you misread their moods. Good luck, it's a great place with the tundra, mountain and animals when the weather cooperates ... our last time there we had 7 days with heavy smoke from forest fires south of Fairbanks and shot nothing, then it snowed which cleared the air, then we got the shots of the grizz and wolf on the same day to make up for all the bad days. So it's a place where you can do great or you can be really disappointed. Bill |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Will a tamron sp 2x pro teleconverter work with a canon 75-300IS lens? Going to Alaska
nobody wrote:
I will be staying at Northface Lodge in Denali National Park in late August mainly, among other places. I also plan on going over into Canada to do some shooting. Any suggestions for photographing Mount McKinley around Wonder Lake? I have purchased several additions to my equipment repertoire lately including a Galen Rowell Singh-Ray Soft Graduated Neutral Density Filter, more CF cards, Expodisc, etc and thought a 2x teleconverter might be nice to have. Don't you think a teleconverter would be wise to have? If not the Tamron one I mentioned, which one? Any other suggestions on low to moderate priced equipment/books/videos/workshops. I am willing to spend "some" money on something that will really help me get great photos and could possibly reuse, but I'm not rich and photography is more of a serious hobby than a career, so I probably won't spend 4k or more on a nice L lens. Thanks for all the help, Rick, Yes, a TC is nice to have, but only if it is used on a good lens. On a low quality lens, all it does is magnify the blur circle. Your 75-300 lens on a 20D is probably already maxed out in terms of resolution, so I don't think a TC will help (perhaps a little, but not worth the effort and loss of autofocus and shutter speed). If you are willing to spend a little, but not 4K, take a look at the 300 mm f/4 L IS lens and a Kenko pro 300 1.4x TC. I use both and find them excellent. The 300mm is about $1100, and a 1.4x Kenko is about $200. Then a good tripod. For that focal length, a Bogen 3001 tripod will be limiting (too much vibration), so a 3021 class tripod is needed, with a good head. A much lighter Gitzo 1228 carbon fiber would be ideal, along with a good head and perhaps the Wimberly sidekick. The 1228 is about $460, a good ball head $250-400, sidekick $250. I use an arca-swiss B1 ballhead (about $400) on the 1228, and carry the sidekick. This would be a good starter wildlife system that would produce good results and something you would not need to replace later. You could look for ball heads on ebay, and perhaps the other stuff, but they are rare and the prices aren't much lower than new. This is the system I take when I need to travel light for wildlife (300mm, 1.4 and 2x TCs, Gitzo 1228, B1 head, sidekick, plus shorter focal length lenses and a 1D Mark II body). (For more serious stuff, then it's a 500mm f/4 plus the 300 plus more sturdy tripod and full Wimberly.) I'm not a pro either, but I take the fun seriously ;-). ---just my opinion. Roger |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Will a tamron sp 2x pro teleconverter work with a canon 75-300IS lens? Going to Alaska
Rick,
I recommend paying close attention to what Bill says. Bill helped me out a lot when I started into wildlife photography with big lenses, and has always given me good advice. His experience with both equipment and locations is very impressive. And if we say something contradictory, go with Bill. Roger |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS: Schneider Large-Format Lens TRADE!!! | Bill Gillooly | Large Format Equipment For Sale | 2 | February 20th 05 06:43 AM |
Zoom lens for Canon 300D - Tamron/Canon | Siddhartha Jain | Digital SLR Cameras | 13 | January 16th 05 04:35 PM |
FS: Canon T90 + lots of FD lenses | aeiouy | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 0 | January 11th 05 05:14 AM |
FS: Tamron 24-70mm Zoom for Canon EOS (+ original box/etc.) | Lewis Lang | General Equipment For Sale | 1 | September 18th 03 02:12 AM |
FS: Tamron 24-70mm Zoom for Canon EOS (+ original box/etc.) | Lewis Lang | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 0 | September 18th 03 01:58 AM |