Need Expert Advise on 500mm Lense Set-up

[RAD2LTR]

Re: Need Expert Advise on 500mm Lense Set-up

Not to drag this topic off air racing at the moment, but here is my album from Monterey. https://www.flickr.com/photos/473099...06817401/page1

Will

[wingman]

Re: Need Expert Advise on 500mm Lense Set-up

Will -- did you post pictures in this thread? The AAFO index page is showing a post from you in this thread but nothing is showing up in the thread.

Neal

[RAD2LTR]

Re: Need Expert Advise on 500mm Lense Set-up

Will -- did you post pictures in this thread? The AAFO index page is showing a post from you in this thread but nothing is showing up in the thread.

Neal

I just posted a link to my Flicker album from the Historics. No actual pics, but I guess I could just for fun


My friend Tim in his Jag xk120. 500mm, F8, 1/200, ISO100


everyone needs some Ferrari GTO in there day.


CanAm action... 200mm F9, 1/125 ISO 64

ISO100, F11, 250mm 1/125

ISO100, 200mm,f10,1/125


The lens shoots through windshields without a polarizer pretty well


This lens has allowed me to change how I both shoot and edit pics. My old 70-300 never would have been this sharp.
ISO64, 250mm, F10, 1/160


I'm really looking forward to taking another stop in my photography this weekend. I'm getting more comfortable with the lens, looking forward to using it at a longer reach than most of what I posted here. I can't wait to see what I capture from the pylons.

Will

[Desertdawg]

Re: Need Expert Advise on 500mm Lense Set-up

Will,

Now that you have used your new lense at the air races, what is your overall impression of this new lense?

Looking at the photos you posted looks like you were able to zoom in and capture some good detail.

:beer chug:

Hans

[RAD2LTR]

Re: Need Expert Advise on 500mm Lense Set-up

Hans,
To be honest, I think I might have a bad copy, but I'm honestly not sure. It seems like the camera has focus issues with the lens.

I did verify that the lens does not like filters, or at least the ones that came with it as I tried the filters on Connor's rental lens and had the same focus issues that I had on mine, but not as bad. That said, I've seen some pics of the sun using a 10 stop ND filter and they look amazing, so that points to either my filters are junk, or there is something going on with the lens. The fact that Connor's rental lens had issues but not as much (the image was less out of focus than the same image shot with my copy of the lens) is a head scratcher, but perhaps his rental lens might have a little bit of an issue but not a huge one.

The thing that really has me scratching my head is that yes, there could be some user error happening on my part. I can't say for sure however. It seems like I should be getting more really crisp, sharp images than I have been, but again, I'm not used to trying to pan with a 500mm lens. The stationary stuff I shot where I was using a tripod is tack sharp. Here are a couple tripod mount shots.



As you can see, monumentally sharp.

Its stuff like this that makes me wonder if the lens has focus issues on moving targets however.

1/400 at 480mm I've got very steady hands and I can pan a shot well, that image should be as sharp as can be. Its not.
The same with this one, although this was pushing things, 1/125 at 480mm.


But when I shoot stuff like this, it really makes me wonder is it me, or is it the lens?

480mm, 1/160

1/250 at 450

1/100 at 440mm

1/125 at 440mm

1/200 at 420mm

1/250 at 440m

I shot the F22 at the Santa Rosa airshow on Sunday, looking at the pics, they are all soft, even though I pushed the shutter speed to 1/1600. That said, I haven't looked at them on the computer yet. What looks soft on the camera isn't always soft on the computer apparently. The Sport setting for the VR seems to be totally useless, and that again makes me wonder if there is an issue with my copy of the lens.

The lens also works amazingly well as a portrait lens, you just need to be 50 feet away to take the shot. The F35 shot above is a good example.

After doing a ton of research its not an uncommon thing to have to send the lens back. Some people have sent several copies back before getting a good one. Knowing this really really makes me wonder if the issues I'm having are me or if they are the lens? Truthfully, I don't know. I'm about 80% sure I'm going to send mine back, but I hate blaming equipment for user error. I think the lens is an awesome lens, when it works, or when I work with it. The results speak for themselves with the shots that I got right. The shots that I didn't get right really leave me wondering, is it the lens or is it me? As far as the VR issues, Sport mode is worthless, and I can't tell the difference between normal mode on, and VR totally off. (Again, that makes me think that there is something wonky with the lens.) I just don't know for sure however.

I did a lot of messing with the camera at Reno, its now setup entirely differently than I've ever had a camera setup. I now use back button focusing, and a few other adjustments. I think the changes may have made a difference for the better, but again, I don't know for sure. If my F22 shots do happen to be soft, I'm sending the lens back. I would have to try pretty hard to end up with soft images shooting 1/1600 for a shutter speed to end up with crap.

I love what the lens is capable of capturing, I'm not sure I love my copy however.

Conner, lets hear your thoughts.

Will

[wingman]

Re: Need Expert Advise on 500mm Lense Set-up

The best of these look awfully good. Obviously more testing, and maybe trying another copy is indicated here, but I suspect you may just be expecting too much. If your best pylon shots are tack sharp, then I think you may well be just like the rest of us. It says something if your tripod tests are all tack sharp. In fact, it says a lot.

So Connor was using the same lens. Was Joseph using it also? I'd like to see what they have to say...

Neal

[Desertdawg]

Re: Need Expert Advise on 500mm Lense Set-up

Will,

Thanks for the feedback. Back in the day before digital surpassed the quality of film, it usually took 1-3 days to get your film back, and then, you'd be happy with 25-50% good shots, 10% really good shots.

Now with digital age, the heartbreak can be the same day :-)

With your first couple outings (Laguna Seca and Air Race) you shared some really sharp photos. So something is working right with your focus. You have to remember, when you zoom in 400-500mm, then try for prop blur (1/60, 1/80, 1/120) and then, a fast moving subject, it takes practice (+ real good steady hand) for a nice follow through (pan).

Connor had some nice sharp shots as well. I guess the old saying goes, you get what you paid for, $1,300.00 vs the next level at $6,900.00. For the hobby photographer that price differential really makes this lower price lens something to consider. However, if we have several members having issues it may not be a good option.

Keep us posted.

Hans

[RAD2LTR]

Re: Need Expert Advise on 500mm Lense Set-up

The thing I have to wonder is if my good shots are the right combo of wrong to end up with a good shot. (Does that make sense? In other words, the shot is out of focus just enough for the focus to be spot on with the lens being off just the right amount.) I also wonder if the camera/lens struggles to focus on moving objects for some reason. It gets close but not right on (except for when it does nail it.) The reason I think this could be plausible is due to the number of crazy high (to me at least) shutter speed shots that aren't tack sharp. I think with my 70-300 that U2 shot would have been tack sharp at 1/400 shutter speed. Why is it soft on the big lens? I followed it for plenty of time, and honestly didn't get a single good sharp pic of the plane. Its not like it was going fast, or was far away, or was on a low contrast background. All the elements for a sharp shot were there, and its not sharp. The same with the F22 shots I too at 1/1600. I could be standing on a boat while sailing and get a sharp shot at that speed. Yet, from the looks of things on the camera, they aren't sharp. When I have a chance to see them on the computer, that will be the deciding factor as to whether or not I send the lens back. At this point, I like what is possible with the lens, and based on Connor's experience, he has shot a ton of epic shots with it with no issues, but with a rental lens, they will send a bad lens back immediately if its bad. The odds of a bad copy are pretty low.

I'm scratching my head on this one.

Will

[Florian]

Re: Need Expert Advise on 500mm Lense Set-up

Hi Will,

As mentioned I noticed at my lens that the photos were soft shen shooting at a big angle, VR activated and high shutter speeds (>1/800). Did you also used VR on the U2 shots?
Can you post some 100% crops (just the area where you had the active focus point) from static medium and far distance shots to check the sharpness?

[RAD2LTR]

Re: Need Expert Advise on 500mm Lense Set-up

My focus points were all centered. The VR was always on. (The way I've used all 3 of my lenses since I started shooting digital.) I can't recrop the U2 pics on this computer, it will have to wait till I get home. I'll see if I can do some F1 or biplane stuff from the pylons at some point during the day.

Will

[AAFO_WSagar]

Re: Need Expert Advise on 500mm Lense Set-up

It's hard for me to tell not seeing the full size original, but are we dealing with some DOF issues here?

When I first got my D4, my shots were all over the place with a VERY low wow%. Now, I'm getting a lot higher percentage of good shots but some have some pretty distinct DOF issues, good here, not so good there....

That you're getting some really good shots and some that are somewhat soft, I actually see a lot of that as well (D4-200-400) Would that I had not nuked a lot of my iffy shots to look at for example but, we ask the autofocus to do quite a lot when shooting stuff that's moving as fast as our subjects...

Really nice work by the way!

[RAD2LTR]

Re: Need Expert Advise on 500mm Lense Set-up

Full sized shots, some clear, some not so much.

U2

https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5188/29776022921_ce975a43a5_o.jpg

Dreadnought

https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8323/29205651314_59d2ea55d2_o.jpg

Voodoo

https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8237/29691072402_fbdb9a93e7_o.jpg

Perhaps I am expecting too much, I don't know.

Will

[wingman]

Re: Need Expert Advise on 500mm Lense Set-up

Will, what kind of sharpening are you applying in post processing? The U-2 is hopeless, but the other two both seem quite sharp to me.

Neal

[RAD2LTR]

Re: Need Expert Advise on 500mm Lense Set-up

Agreed, the U2 is the issue that I was fighting, the other two are pretty sharp. I use a touch of a sharpening mask, (5 or 6 at most in LR), and usually bump the detail sharpness from 25 up to 30. I try not to use it much since it makes the pic really grainy, and I have to push the luminescence noise reduction up removing detail.


So I finally had a chance to look through the stuff I shot at Santa Rosa last weekend. Aside from obviously blown shots, I only saw a few out of focus shots. I did however shoot several frames of Spam Can with propcicles... The horror! I feel so ashamed. The pic however is tack sharp, right down the the ability to read the stenciling on the prop. There are very few garbage shots, a few that are boring and will end up in the trash, a couple that are totally blurred out of focus (I took the shot without remembering to focus the camera first) The poorly framed stuff looks sharp. Apparently I just decided to have a bad shooting weekend at Reno. (Trying too hard perhaps?) I will admit, I was trying to push my limits as a photographer at Reno, so that could be part of it. I think I still shot a good amount of good shots for the weekend. Eh, I have a year to get better with the lens. I'll post some of the SR pics in a few weeks after I'm done with the Reno stuff.

Will

[wingman]

Re: Need Expert Advise on 500mm Lense Set-up

Will, it still sounds to me like your issues with Reno are more with your expectations than with your results. Pylon work is challenging. I've seen more than one "big time pro" from other photographic genres humbled (or humiliated) by the Reno pylons.

I've pointed out that my percentage on the pylons is low -- and would be unacceptable to me in any other shooting I've ever done. That's with 30 years of experience on the pylons and with considerably better equipment than you're using.

If you got a selection of sharp shots of each airplane you needed, you're doing great. That's why you shoot a lot of pictures. If you shoot 100 frames of Voodoo and get 6 or 8 great shots for your editor to choose from you've done your job (and your tools have done their job). Nobody ever has to know (including your editor) that you shot 90 plus crap shots of Voodoo. It's nobody's business, and the editor's not going to care anyway -- you've given him what he needs, which is all that matters.

People used to laugh at the idea that a big shot National Geographic pro would go on assignment and shoot 250 rolls of film in 3 weeks for a ten page article using 15 photos. But that's how it's done. Neither the editor nor the photographer nor the reader cared about the hundreds or thousands of slides ended up in the wastebasket, or in file cabinets never to be seen again. The article would have 15 flawless and arresting photos. That's all that counts.

Having said that, I do think your camera body is likely a bigger issue than your lens. The D600 is a fine little camera, but it does not have a terribly sophisticated or capable autofocus system by modern professional standards. It's a very nice high end consumer grade camera, but not something you'd ever see a pro at the Olympics or a Formula One auto race using.

Neal