BIGMA+Kenko Pro 300 1.4X TC-Surfing

Telecorder · September 7, 2007

Had the opportunity to shoot some D50 images with my Bigma+Kenko Pro DG 300 1.4X TC at Padaro Beach in SoCal (Just south of Santa Barbara, CA) this week and thought some would be interested in a few images of surfers taken from the beach in poor lighting conditions...

Sat on beach and used my Bogen 682B monopod w/its 3232 tilt head...

Not the greatest series of images but fair-good IQ given the lens+TC combo, distance and lighting conditions. Post more to illustrate the reach of the combo and IQ on a monopod in poor lighting/shooting conditions. For the record, the Bigma+Kenko TC combo did AF fairly well given the conditions... All images uncropped, by the by...

2-hours from sunset and shooting West towards incoming foggy marine layer...

Almost Half of a 10...
Exposure Time = 1/640"
F Number = F10 (uncorrected for TC)
Exposure Program = Aperture priority
Exposure Bias Value = ±0EV
Max Aperture Value = F6.28
Metering Mode = CenterWeightedAverage
Focal Length = 420mm x 1.5 x 1.4 = ~880mm EQ

Long Board
Exposure Time = 1/400"
F Number = F10 (uncorrected for TC)
Exposure Program = Aperture priority
Exposure Bias Value = ±0EV
Max Aperture Value = F6.28
Metering Mode = CenterWeightedAverage
Focal Length = 370mm x 1.5 x 1.4 = ~775mm EQ

Going Left
Exposure Time = 1/640"
F Number = F10 (uncorrected for TC)
Exposure Program = Aperture priority
Exposure Bias Value = ±0EV
Max Aperture Value = F6.28
Metering Mode = CenterWeightedAverage
Focal Length = 370mm x 1.5 x 1.4 = ~775mm EQ

For those who are familiar with it... the tracks are once again open after the recent fire...

]

Manfr3d · September 8, 2007

Pretty much anything uncropped will look good in 800x600
or smaler. I think to really see the performance one should
see 100% crops from center and border of the frames.

just my 2 cents of course

Telecorder · September 8, 2007

For Pixel Peepers...

Manfr3d wrote:

Pretty much anything uncropped will look good in 800x600
or smaler. I think to really see the performance one should
see 100% crops from center and border of the frames.

just my 2 cents of course

Of course... FWIW... For those pixel peepers with inquiring minds...

Disclaimer -- I did run the center crops through Neat Image for noise reduction and some minor PP in Picasa2 for all

Center crop followed by left center-edge crop

Above images' Color balance different due to use of NEF and jpg files...

Center crop followed by left center-edge crop; Edge crop not sharpest focus due to angle of wave away from camera; perhaps a bit too aggressive Neat Image on the center crop...

Center crop followed by left center-edge crop

For poor side/back lighting in a late afternoon, setting sun of moving subjects with marine air layer moving in, at 400-500' distance and using a 1.4X teleconverter and monopod, the IQ, IMHO, isn't all that bad for a ~775mm-800mm EQ image... Not too terribly bad, especially for a $660 lens+TC combo.

Granted, I don't think I'd have a 20x30 print made up of these crops but for 8x10 or smaller, I think the uncropped images would hold up fairly good.

My main rationale for posting was to illustrate the FOV reach of the Bigma with a 1.4X Kenko TC. Note that I did stop down to f/10 (uncorrected for TC) and kept the reach at ~ 775-850mm EQ corrected for TC.

Pixel Peeper comments?

Manfr3d · September 8, 2007

Telecorder wrote:

Of course... FWIW... For those pixel peepers with inquiring minds...

Disclaimer -- I did run the center crops through Neat Image for noise reduction and some minor PP in Picasa2 for all

Center crop followed by left center-edge crop
Pixel Peeper comments?

I'd say they look plenty good for a 500mm zoom with a tc

claudermilk · September 10, 2007

I agree, sharpness is darn good considering what is involved. The only quibble I have is the deep DOF from having to stop down to the lens' sweet spot. Another point for the Bigma in my long-tele search. So that's essentially a 1050mm FOV on a FF. Damn.

Telecorder · September 10, 2007

claudermilk wrote:

I agree, sharpness is darn good considering what is involved. The only quibble I have is the deep DOF from having to stop down to the lens' sweet spot. Another point for the Bigma in my long-tele search.

Here's another image with f/6.3 uncorrected for TC at 500mm (1,050mm EQ) (By the by, how does one calculate how much the TC changes the aperture?) <img src="https://us.v-cdn.net/6029383/emoji/headscratch.gif" border="0" alt="" >

DOF calculator indicates the DOF is around 7' for subject at ~300' and f/6.3; ~10' for f/9. In the previous images, the DOF is indicated as between ~20-30'

Here's the Center 100% crop

Left Edge 100% crop

And right edge 100% crop -- I just noticed that there is a minor bit of PF on the right edge's specular highlights -- but, considering this was shooting almost in the sun, not totally surprising... not evident on other specular highlights away from sun's position....

So that's essentially a 1050mm FOV on a FF. Damn.

Not in the previous images... I was at ~420mm x 1.5X crop factor x 1.4X for TC or ~880mm EQ on 35mm film plane... Subjects in previous images were at a more distant point than these images.

I did a rough field shot a while back and came up with the following estimates for guesstimating subject distances based on vertical FOV of 2,000-pixels in a Bigma image...
50' FOV at 500mm = ~20"
100' FOV = 40"
200' FOV = ~72"
300' FOV = ~110"
400' FOV = ~140"
500' FOV = ~175"
600' FOV = ~210" (17.5' = 2,000-Pixels)

The above would be ~300' distance at 1,050mm EQ... (assuming subject's vertical pixel height of ~ 4.5' vs 2,000-pixels = ~ 9' or ~108"

All in all, for a <$700 lens+TC combo, its a great system for getting the reach and still obtaining fairly good IQ-- IMHO <img src="https://us.v-cdn.net/6029383/emoji/wings.gif" border="0" alt="" >

claudermilk · September 11, 2007

Darn impressive.

On TCs, the 1.4x loses one stop, the 2x loses 2 stops, and 3x loses 3 stops. In general you don't want to mess with anything beyond the 1.4x (some Canon L supertele primes might be exceptions). So the f6.3 would be f9, f9 would be f12.5, f10 would be f14--that explains the deep DOFs.

Telecorder · September 11, 2007

claudermilk wrote:

Darn impressive.

On TCs, the 1.4x loses one stop, the 2x loses 2 stops, and 3x loses 3 stops. In general you don't want to mess with anything beyond the 1.4x (some Canon L supertele primes might be exceptions). So the f6.3 would be f9, f9 would be f12.5, f10 would be f14--that explains the deep DOFs.

Thanks, Chris-- Funny thing is that I wasn't totally pleased with the iQ initially until I started doing some minor PP'ing and critical reviews... given the circumstances, distances, lighting etc, I'm beginning to like what can be had with the Kenko TC. I have the Sigma 1.4X TC but it over rides the AF. I guess I'll have to tape the pin to see if its has any better IQ in similar circumstances (I just am not good enough for MF in 'action' shots, as yet.):cry

As to DOF, sometimes its too shallow... 500mm w/o TC...

100% Crop

claudermilk · September 12, 2007

Looks deep enough to me & plenty sharp for that use considering the lens is wide open.

An aside, your copyright statement in those images is technically invalid. The "(c)" is specifically not recognized. You must use either "Copyright" or "©" for it to be valid. Just a helpful FYI.

Kory Lidstrom · September 13, 2007

If I may, I'd like to suggest the use of a polarizer in the surfing shots. Those shots have a lot of reflections in the wter and a polzrizer would help quite a bit, IMHO.

Telecorder · September 13, 2007

NugBlazer wrote:

If I may, I'd like to suggest the use of a polarizer in the surfing shots. Those shots have a lot of reflections in the wter and a polzrizer would help quite a bit, IMHO.

Yes... but... the Bigma has one draw back in that it takes an 86mm filter...:cry

A good multicoated CPL like the Tiffen or Hoya HMC/Pro-1 goes for ~$200-$300... I only paid $535 for the lens so...

...short of a reducer/one of my smaller CPLs and viginetting and/or more $s and even lower shutter speeds... I think I'll live with the minimal issues presented in the problematic light that I was shooting in...

claudermilk · September 14, 2007

86mm filter? That sucks & something to consider on my lens quest. Looks like it's $215 for a B+W KSM CPL at B&H. Based on the price difference for 77mm, I'd expect that to be about $150 at hvstar--just need to email them to special order it for you.

Telecorder · September 14, 2007

claudermilk wrote:

86mm filter? That sucks & something to consider on my lens quest. Looks like it's $215 for a B+W KSM CPL at B&H. Based on the price difference for 77mm, I'd expect that to be about $150 at hvstar--just need to email them to special order it for you.

Yep but most any 500mm lens is going to take a large filter...
The Tamron 200-500 is an 86mm and the 300 f/4 is a 77mm

Generally, a CPL is a good tool to have but, with few exceptions, I haven't really found it to be a critical item in the vast majority of my images--

of course, YMMV...

By the by, where in SoCal are you located, Chris?

BIGMA+Kenko Pro 300 1.4X TC-Surfing

Comments