Kingfishers, 80-400mm+1.4TC and 2 cameras used for comparison

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rudi

Good shots Grahame,
My first idea was that n1 was a bit out of focus and n2 properly focused. But that answer seems to be too easy ??:)

---

Thanks Rudi,

If that rig is front focusing in AF that could be the answer:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IzzieK

Not having used a teleconverter before, I was wondering if that made the difference too...anyway, it will be nice to see more of your experiment on other shots too. How is your rickety internet going over your part of the pond?

---

Hi Izzie,

There will be some degradation in theory with the TC but both cameras would have been subject to it. It will be fun trying to reach a conclusion:)

Our internet is a bit more stable now and we are getting power most of the time so things are good. All we need now is some days without rain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dem

The lens+teleconverter combo projects the same image on either a 36 Mpx full frame or a 12 Mpx APS-C sensor. The pixel size (area) of the D800 is smaller than that of the D300 by about 20%, so one would expect a slightly higher resolving power from the D800. In both cases the pixels are too big to worry about diffraction softening at a given aperture.

---

My thinking is that we should be able to get almost equal results from the two rigs when viewed at around the size posted (1400px width) on a screen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dem

So why did the D800 produce a softer image? The camera shake seems to be unlikely as D800 was fired at a higher shutter speed than the D300. The ISO of 900 on the D800 is still quite low to worry about it. The D800 might have a back/front focusing issue with this lens+teleconverter combo, but as others said, more tests are needed.

---

Dem, I'll post the progress on my findings, hopefully tomorrow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stagecoach

My thinking is that we should be able to get almost equal results from the two rigs when viewed at around the size posted (1400px width) on a screen.



Dem, I'll post the progress on my findings, hopefully tomorrow.

---

Compare them both on 100% of the original. Now you've a same frame with the same amount of pixels. You compare 2 camera's with 2 different PP. Try to get rid off that PP part. I would suggest to crop out the right bird. You'll have 2 equal images with different sizes, but no PP.
In general if the pixel size is x% smaller, then your shutterspeed must be x% faster to maintain the same (un)sharpness, Viewed at 100%.

I'm aware and you too, this is not a scientific comparison between 2 camera's.

George

Very nice images , I like the compositions :) D300 seems better .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by george013

Compare them both on 100% of the original. Now you've a same frame with the same amount of pixels. You compare 2 camera's with 2 different PP. Try to get rid off that PP part. I would suggest to crop out the right bird. You'll have 2 equal images with different sizes, but no PP.
In general if the pixel size is x% smaller, then your shutterspeed must be x% faster to maintain the same (un)sharpness, Viewed at 100%.

I'm aware and you too, this is not a scientific comparison between 2 camera's.

George

---

George,

I agree that what I am doing is not, and not intended to be, a scientific comparison between two cameras/rigs.

For this reason I see little point in making comparisons at 100% of originals of the images posted, my interest is in final viewing results (e.g. 1400px width on a monitor) and real world capability of a rig.

The PP undertaken for each image which only consisted of sharpening on these (ignoring WB equalising) was exactly the same as I undertake on almost 99% of images shot with these two cameras using this lens and others.

My way of thinking is that the achieved result of that image taken with the D300 rig (as finally presented) when considering all shooting parameters is good with respect to its IQ.

The achieved result of that image taken with the D800 rig (as finally presented) when considering all shooting parameters is not as good with respect to its IQ as the D300 one (and no amount of pp would make it as good).

This then raises one question, could I have got better results from the D800 rig of that specific subject/frame?

Investigations to determine this would include, focus, speeds, ISO, rig support and hopefully a conclusion that confirms real world 'capability'.

Grahame

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stagecoach

George,

I agree that what I am doing is not, and not intended to be, a scientific comparison between two cameras/rigs.

For this reason I see little point in making comparisons at 100% of originals of the images posted, my interest is in final viewing results (e.g. 1400px width on a monitor) and real world capability of a rig.

The PP undertaken for each image which only consisted of sharpening on these (ignoring WB equalising) was exactly the same as I undertake on almost 99% of images shot with these two cameras using this lens and others.

My way of thinking is that the achieved result of that image taken with the D300 rig (as finally presented) when considering all shooting parameters is good with respect to its IQ.

The achieved result of that image taken with the D800 rig (as finally presented) when considering all shooting parameters is not as good with respect to its IQ as the D300 one (and no amount of pp would make it as good).

This then raises one question, could I have got better results from the D800 rig of that specific subject/frame?

Investigations to determine this would include, focus, speeds, ISO, rig support and hopefully a conclusion that confirms real world 'capability'.

Grahame

---

Could be motion blur. If you want to know you must do some tests.

George

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bnnrcn

Very nice images , I like the compositions :) D300 seems better .

---

Thanks Binnur,

Shooting way up from the window I'm pretty restricted with compositional choice, I just wished that one had chosen not to have his back to me:)

With the regularity they are here each day now in the early morning I'm determined to get closer, I just need to get my four legged friend to keep out of the way:D

He seems very nice with his back to us and I don't think his posture spoils the composition. You are lucky that they are with you every morning and you have the opportunity for better shots. It is so nice to have four legged friends ,but yes, sometimes they have to be kept away :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stagecoach

Thanks Binnur,

Shooting way up from the window I'm pretty restricted with compositional choice, I just wished that one had chosen not to have his back to me:)

With the regularity they are here each day now in the early morning I'm determined to get closer, I just need to get my four legged friend to keep out of the way:D

---

Hope to see you back soon -- we missed you and David at the Insect posts.:p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stagecoach

Hi Izzie,

There will be some degradation in theory with the TC but both cameras would have been subject to it. It will be fun trying to reach a conclusion:)

Our internet is a bit more stable now and we are getting power most of the time so things are good. All we need now is some days without rain.

---