DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> 1000mm for $130 Wheeeeeeeee!
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 18 of 18, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 08/15/2008 05:04:33 PM · #1
Well I got my 200-500 tamron adapt-a-matic ad my tamron 2x teleconverter for nikon and went out today and shot this picture. The lense was $95 and the converter was $30.

I know its not great but this was wide open and the bird was over 100 yards away from me. The net effective mm is 1500 with the camera multiplier. ISO 800 1/160 shutter(could have sped it up actually). This shot is a perfectly acceptable bird list shot for me especially when these damn kingfishers are so hard to get close to(as soon as they see you they are gone and they fly really fast).

Kingfisher
This shot was taken yesterday from about 50 to 75 feet using just the 200 to 500(handn't received the converter yet) Its not National Geographic quality buts its not horrible for a $95 lense.

Green Heron

I would love to hear any thoughts.

Message edited by scalvert - Forum rule #5. Please post large images as a link..
 08/15/2008 06:38:35 PM · #2
DOesnt do anything for me.. I am a clarity junkie and these have none.. sorry, but hey, if you are happy then what does it matter what I think eh?
 08/15/2008 07:11:51 PM · #3
Jason, I know what you mean about those pesky Kingfishers - not easy to spot let alone capture. However, I have to agree with Mark and suggest your examples are not very clean shots. I too have to admit to being a clarity junky and have spent more on a polarising filter than your net 1500mm set up (and yes, it doesn't make me a better fotog). In the right conditions however am sure results will be much better?

Originally posted by Simms:
DOesnt do anything for me.. I am a clarity junkie and these have none.. sorry, but hey, if you are happy then what does it matter what I think eh?

08/15/2008 07:43:22 PM · #4
Hey, they won't be winning any challenges, but who cares? It's pretty cool to be able to get a shot of something difficult like that.

Message edited by author 2008-08-15 19:43:37.
 08/15/2008 08:03:53 PM · #5
You did ask for thoughts.

If you really want the truth, I'd say you spent $130 and got photos to prove thats what you paid. The amount of CA, and noise, and well just not very good quality shows what you paid.

Matt
 08/15/2008 08:06:29 PM · #6
Originally posted by Simms:
DOesnt do anything for me.. I am a clarity junkie and these have none.. sorry, but hey, if you are happy then what does it matter what I think eh?


for a shot of a bird the size of a sparrow more than the length of a football field away, you seem to be expecting an awful lot for a 6MP camera with a 30 year old lense, thats a hard shot with a $5000 Nikkor or Cannon lense on a 12MP camera. Look at it this way, I get to learn to use 1500mm lense so when I can finally swing the real thing I will actually be able to take some good shots.
 08/15/2008 08:09:20 PM · #7
Originally posted by MattO:
You did ask for thoughts.

If you really want the truth, I'd say you spent $130 and got photos to prove thats what you paid. The amount of CA, and noise, and well just not very good quality shows what you paid.

Matt


Did i in any way imply that these were"good shots" or that they were opically great? I thought i was pretty clear that they were not. Perhaps you could share some other method of obtaining a shot of a kingfisher at 150yards for under $2000 or $3000 dollars.
 08/15/2008 08:11:22 PM · #8
Originally posted by jhomrighaus:
Originally posted by Simms:
DOesnt do anything for me.. I am a clarity junkie and these have none.. sorry, but hey, if you are happy then what does it matter what I think eh?


for a shot of a bird the size of a sparrow more than the length of a football field away, you seem to be expecting an awful lot for a 6MP camera with a 30 year old lense, thats a hard shot with a $5000 Nikkor or Cannon lense on a 12MP camera. Look at it this way, I get to learn to use 1500mm lense so when I can finally swing the real thing I will actually be able to take some good shots.


Jason, nobody is picking on you as a photographer but the images are poor, a case of you get what you pay for ;)
 08/15/2008 08:26:28 PM · #9
I like the green heron pic but why is it so blue? I'm sure with some pp and some better light you can create some pretty good shots with this lens. Have fun with it and never mind the nay sayers. You're learning and that's what matters.

I used to attach half a binocular (it fell) to my old Pentax zoom lens to try to catch the sparrows in my backyard way back when. Images were crap but man did I have fun with it and discovered a whole new world. I did the same recently for moon shots.
 08/15/2008 08:32:54 PM · #10
Originally posted by jhomrighaus:
Originally posted by MattO:
You did ask for thoughts.

If you really want the truth, I'd say you spent $130 and got photos to prove thats what you paid. The amount of CA, and noise, and well just not very good quality shows what you paid.

Matt


Did i in any way imply that these were"good shots" or that they were opically great? I thought i was pretty clear that they were not. Perhaps you could share some other method of obtaining a shot of a kingfisher at 150yards for under $2000 or $3000 dollars.


wow...you shouldnt ask for thoughts on the shots if you are going to take offense, like was said before, if you are happy with your equipment then thats all that matters....
 08/15/2008 09:03:18 PM · #11
Originally posted by smardaz:
Originally posted by jhomrighaus:
Originally posted by MattO:
You did ask for thoughts.

If you really want the truth, I'd say you spent $130 and got photos to prove thats what you paid. The amount of CA, and noise, and well just not very good quality shows what you paid.

Matt


Did i in any way imply that these were"good shots" or that they were opically great? I thought i was pretty clear that they were not. Perhaps you could share some other method of obtaining a shot of a kingfisher at 150yards for under $2000 or $3000 dollars.


wow...you shouldnt ask for thoughts on the shots if you are going to take offense, like was said before, if you are happy with your equipment then that's all that matters....


I'm not taking offense, It just seemed to me that the comments implied that I was trying to say that these shots were good or something, as if I somehow felt that these were good shots to rival something better, I never implied that nor am i operating under some dillusion that I have somehow cheated the great lense god. My post was intended to share that I was able to assemble a 1000 mm zoom lens for nothing and that it took pictures good enough to identify the subject of the picture(which is what you want if you are doing a bird list) Taking the photo is the hard part in this circumstance, 2 feet of mud in the middle of a swamp with a 20 lb tripod and a 10 lb lens to catch a difficult to photograph pair of birds does not get any easier if you spend 4k on your lens. was kind of my point.

I guess i wasn't clear with my intended message when I posted this.
 08/15/2008 09:06:11 PM · #12
How dare you pollute the artistic purity of my vision and mind with your naive attempt at nature 'photography' ?

;-)
 08/15/2008 09:09:34 PM · #13
In the right conditions, you can likely get some pretty nice shots with the lens. The best situation would be shooting with the sun behind you, or from the side. A lens shade will help some with the contrast.
I have a couple of prime 400mm f5.6 lenses that I paid $ 75 each for. The Sigma is a lot better than the Vivitar, as it is a nice looking IF lens, and has better glass. I use it once in a while, but not very often since I managed to get a 300 4.5 Nikkor ED IF, made in the late 70's or early 80's.
If you want to see the CA levels, try shooting a piece of white lattice with a dark background at 100 yards, using a tripod or sandbag on something solid.
I like older lenses, but have become more picky in finding the better quality older ones at pawn shops, flea markets, and fleaBay.
My best buy so far has been a 180mm f2.8 Nikkor AF ED IF for about $150. The focus was stiff so it sold cheap. I worked some lube into the focus collar, and it works fine in AF now. A perfect 1974, 50mm f1.4 "S" and a 35mm f2 "O" both Nikkor for $40 for both, was another good find for me. The 35 is one of the sharpest lenses in my bag.
Have fun with the new toys. Use them to learn about shooting techniques with long lenses, and don't worry too much about the techy aspect of image quality with them. When you upgrade someday, you will know how to get the shots, and have a good idea about what the field of view and DOF looks like at different ranges and apertures.
 08/15/2008 09:48:36 PM · #14
Originally posted by Jac:
I like the green heron pic but why is it so blue? I'm sure with some pp and some better light you can create some pretty good shots with this lens. Have fun with it and never mind the nay sayers. You're learning and that's what matters.

I used to attach half a binocular (it fell) to my old Pentax zoom lens to try to catch the sparrows in my backyard way back when. Images were crap but man did I have fun with it and discovered a whole new world. I did the same recently for moon shots.


I had the WB set for indoor flourescent, here is the corrected version

Green Heron Adjusted

Here are a couple of shots from this evening. This is a group of three Immature Black Crowned Night Herons(a wow moment in its self, they just kept appearing)

Black Crowned Herons

This is a much closer shot of a Great Blue heron. It was like a heron orgy in this stream inlet in the middle of town, 3 black crowns, 3 Great blues and a Great Egret.

Great Blue Heron

These last 2 shots were both at 1000mm, the three herons were over 100 yards out, the great blue was about 75 feet or so.

Message edited by author 2008-08-15 21:50:14.
 08/15/2008 09:53:29 PM · #15
I say congratulations ! You had a purpose to fill and you did it on a tight budget. We all dream of the great lenses but sometimes you've just got to get a task complete with whats available or affordable.
 08/15/2008 10:11:15 PM · #16
The first time I saw a great blue heron in my local pond, I had my camera. It was dusk, my lens was slow, and it was a b*tch to get to the pond bank. But by god I did it, in horribly smelling muck for about 45 minutes. The pictures were crap, but, it was my first and I loved every minute of it. Would I do it again? In a heart beat, even with the same crappy lens. Sometimes its the hunt that is worth so much more than the end result. I too have hunted birds for a while and often will take what I can get when shooting out in the wild (hell, even shooting them in zoos isn't always easy!)

For DPC and for stock, your images won't get you far. For memories of shooting those birds (with a camera of course), priceless.

Funny thing now, I have a great blue that visits my backyard pond to steal my goldfish. I could get a decent shot with my 28-75. And you never want to see me chasing bunnies and chipmunks in my backyard. Its a sad state of affairs...

Enjoy your lens!

edited the naughty word.

Message edited by author 2008-08-15 22:12:00.
 08/16/2008 02:19:50 AM · #17
The bird looks pretty good in the last shot, but you can clearly see the color fringing from the CA in the bright ripples around the bird. White birds like egrets will show the fringe too if you shoot them against a dark background. They are hard to photograph, even with a top quality lens if the light isn't just right.
Something else you will notice more with the longer lens set up is that the camera has to be very solid when you shoot with it. The tiniest bit of camera motion is enough to make a huge difference in sharpness in the images. I have a 1,000mm f11 Meade mirror lens (reflector telescope) which I use for "orange ball" sunsets once in a while, but it is not as contrasty or as sharp in detail as a crop from a shot with the 300mm F4.5 ED Nikkor.
I enjoy bird shots too. The long lenses are fun. It's a lot like going hunting, but you don't have to clean the prey after you shoot it.
08/16/2008 08:20:08 AM · #18
Originally posted by jhomrighaus:
Originally posted by Jac:
I like the green heron pic but why is it so blue? I'm sure with some pp and some better light you can create some pretty good shots with this lens. Have fun with it and never mind the nay sayers. You're learning and that's what matters.

I used to attach half a binocular (it fell) to my old Pentax zoom lens to try to catch the sparrows in my backyard way back when. Images were crap but man did I have fun with it and discovered a whole new world. I did the same recently for moon shots.


I had the WB set for indoor flourescent, here is the corrected version

Green Heron Adjusted

Here are a couple of shots from this evening. This is a group of three Immature Black Crowned Night Herons(a wow moment in its self, they just kept appearing)

Black Crowned Herons

This is a much closer shot of a Great Blue heron. It was like a heron orgy in this stream inlet in the middle of town, 3 black crowns, 3 Great blues and a Great Egret.

Great Blue Heron

These last 2 shots were both at 1000mm, the three herons were over 100 yards out, the great blue was about 75 feet or so.


The corrected image looks good. Like dahkota has mentioned, it's the thrill of the chase that is sometimes more enjoyable than the end result. Have fun and show us some more of these rare, in my area at least, birds.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 12/27/2025 05:38:51 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 12/27/2025 05:38:51 PM EST.