Gray Ghost v Red Tail Hawk

[Brian Sump]

186347

Alright, so yesterday was a bittersweet day. I went up to a spot where I know a Harrier couple reside and took my new Sigma 1.4 TC a first test run. There was some amazing frames, however I am deeply saddened to say that the TC had to be faulty as 4/5 shots ended up with weird mushy appearance (and blur) and some odd bkg noise; basically they were no good. While I did notice the unit made an odd noise when tilted during install, I thought it was maybe how they came l and I couldn't the full extent of the poor quality in view finder and continued shooting.

The second valuable lesson I learned yesterday is to remember when you raise your EV to 1.7/2 while shooting in the sky so that you can lower it when you shoot a mostly white bird against a normal bkg :-/

Anyway, I know this is a forum about honesty, not grace, but the image was too cool not to share. Certainly not tack sharp but I'm hoping I salvaged it. There was a couple of the male himself that I will post later, hoping they are presentable.

STORY - this RTH came through the marsh and the Gray Ghost avidly defended his turf. Think the female was out hunting.

I chose a vertical crop to showcase the vertical levels of the birds. Not sure it's copacetic. You can see the nictitating membrane protecting the RTH eyes for an attack though, which is cool.

Nikon D850
Sigma 500mm f4
Handheld

ISO 1800
1/4000
f5.6
700mm
~ 55% crop

Post in C1P and PS. Took out and smooth some bkg striations.

[Randy Stout]

Brian:

Thanks for your detailed explanation, always helps the viewer understand the backstory of the image creation.

The story telling/interaction is great. Timing excellent. The Harrier is rather soft, esp. the critical head area. But the image is so neat, that I would def. revisit it to see if there is more to be had. The contrast on the Harrier is also fairly low, and perhaps you can tease out a bit more apparent sharpness by some contrast tweaking.

Cheers

Randy

[dankearl]

A friend of mine put a TC on a Sigma just this morning and had same bad results.
For a 55% crop of D850 this is pretty poor IQ.
Birds are just soft and it seems really noisy for iso1800 on D850. I delete nictitating membrane photos, cannot save them.

[Colin Driscoll]

That's a good demonstration of the size difference between the two species.
Challenging to get both birds in focus given their separation, apart from the challenge of the poor TC.

[Brian Sump]

Brian:

Thanks for your detailed explanation, always helps the viewer understand the backstory of the image creation.

The story telling/interaction is great. Timing excellent. The Harrier is rather soft, esp. the critical head area. But the image is so neat, that I would def. revisit it to see if there is more to be had. The contrast on the Harrier is also fairly low, and perhaps you can tease out a bit more apparent sharpness by some contrast tweaking.

Cheers

Randy

Thanks for the thoughts Randy. I'll play with it and see what I can do.

[Brian Sump]

A friend of mine put a TC on a Sigma just this morning and had same bad results.
For a 55% crop of D850 this is pretty poor IQ.
Birds are just soft and it seems really noisy for iso1800 on D850. I delete nictitating membrane photos, cannot save them.

Dan, I would be curious if you can find out which? I was testing the TC-1401 with 500mm f4. The reviews were 4.5/5 on most sites, the bad ones pre-2018 when Sigma launched a firmware update.

I ordered a second today, this time from Adorama. If it's crap then I need to rethink my gear. I can only get 500mm as this is the only TC that mates well....

[dankearl]

Same as yours.
You are getting good result with you 500 sigma, he does too.
Not with extender, at least not today...
For the money, I would have got a 300 f2.8 with extenders or 500 pf.
Just my opinion.
A 500pf with a 1.4 tc is 4K. With the light you have, that is a better combo at 700mm.
Is there a reason you did not get a 500 pf?
Are they still hard to get?
If you have good light, they are excellent. Where I live I can do better with 300 f2.8 and extenders
because of low light I can shoot a stop lower , which matters, You have dream light in Colorado.
I have the same opinion of D850, great camera for landscape people, we have a nice group
of photographers where I live. The person with the D850 is shooting half speed in our group.
Your opinion may vary, this is my advice.

[Brian Sump]

Same as yours.
You are getting good result with you 500 sigma, he does too.
Not with extender, at least not today...
For the money, I would have got a 300 f2.8 with extenders or 500 pf.
Just my opinion.
A 500pf with a 1.4 tc is 4K. With the light you have, that is a better combo at 700mm.
Is there a reason you did not get a 500 pf?
Are they still hard to get?
If you have good light, they are excellent. Where I live I can do better with 300 f2.8 and extenders
because of low light I can shoot a stop lower , which matters, You have dream light in Colorado.
Your opinion may vary, this is my advice.

Dan, I can still return my Sigma 500 to Amazon but I was talking to Arash about it and he suggested never swapping lenses down in aperture. In other words, keeping my Sigma. He suggested the sharpness might not be quite as good but overall I'd have better results.

I haven't been shooting very long and as I was looking at 400mm and 500mm lenses, the Sigma seemed to be excellent for the money. The shots I have been getting (and presumably your friend) are fairly appreciable I think. When you compare the Sigma with the $9-10k Nikon 500mm f4, it seemed like the right fit. I just didn't realized I would want a TC when I bought the 500mm and now I'm in a pickle because I think it's going to be a big deal for the shots I am aiming for.

If I get rid of the Sigma there's really only one option for me I think - perhaps a gently used Nikon 500mm f4 E FL. I have already peeled off a lot this year and that would be a significant investment, for, nominal noticeable difference, however I'd be able to at least bump to 700mm.

[dankearl]

Brian, I understand, I cannot afford the equipment I want.
I have lived with the 300 f2.8 with extenders. I would rather have that than
a 500 f4.
I know hardly anyone uses it, but I shoot 500mm at f4.8 or 420mm at f4 or 300 f2.8 to shoot flowers with.
I have the 500 pf and the 300 f2.8 with the old 1.7 tc at 500mm is better.
The 300 f2.8 is the best sharpest lens I have every seen. I have the 70-200 f2.8, not even close.
I use the 500 pf to travel and goof off with the 1.4t at f8 which I can hardly ever use where I live.
My real world shoot everyday opinion.
My friend likes his Sigma.

[Brian Sump]

Brian, I understand, I cannot afford the equipment I want.
I have lived with the 300 f2.8 with extenders. I would rather have that than
a 500 f4.
I know hardly anyone uses it, but I shoot 500mm at f4.8 or 420mm at f4 or 300 f2.8 to shoot flowers with.
I have the 500 pf and the 300 f2.8 with the old 1.7 tc at 500mm is better.
The 300 f2.8 is the best sharpest lens I have every seen. I have the 70-200 f2.8, not even close.
I use the 500 pf to travel and goof off with the 1.4t at f8 which I can hardly ever use where I live.
My real world shoot everyday opinion.
My friend likes his Sigma.

Very helpful Dan. I hate that I am searching 500mm Nikon lenses online right now.....

Ordered one more TC-1401, this time from Adorama. If I don't get good results I have until May 31 to return the Sigma. That would bum me out but might be the best thing long-term.

I have heard very good things about the 400mm f2.8 also, for a bit lower than the 500.

[dankearl]

400mm f2.8 is awesome and weighs a lot.
If you can hand hold that. Congrats.
A friend uses it to shoot Owls in dark woods on Tripod.
The big primes are expensive. Your Sigma very good choice at 500mm.
Same for my 300 f2.8 w/1.7 at 500mm.
It costs $10,000 to get big primes.
You pay for what you get. Going over 500mm fast at quality is a huge jump.
No shortcut, just make the best at what you have. You seem to be doing well.

[Brian Sump]

400mm f2.8 is awesome and weighs a lot.
If you can hand hold that. Congrats.
A friend uses it to shoot Owls in dark woods on Tripod.
The big primes are expensive. Your Sigma very good choice at 500mm.
Same for my 300 f2.8 w/1.7 at 500mm.
It costs $10,000 to get big primes.
You pay for what you get. Going over 500mm fast at quality is a huge jump.
No shortcut, just make the best at what you have. You seem to be doing well.

Appreciate the encouragement Dan...

[Alex Becker]

Awesome action, albeit the image quality has suffered as discussed above. Some good thoughts above on many fronts, but is it possible the image was a victim of heat shimmer and not faulty optics? It has that look to my eye, with the 'streaks' in the background and your description, especially the "weird mushy appearance (and blur) and some odd bkg noise" matches pretty well. I wouldn't be surprised to see heat shimmer in a field / marsh where harriers hunt even on an overcast day. The distortion will be more noticeable with the TC on than without as you are compressing more air with the longer focal length assuming the subject was indeed further away. I have many many frames of harriers spoiled by atmospheric issues. Just a thought.

[Arthur Morris]

As for nictitating membranes: if you have another frame of the RT with the eye sharopand open it is easy to learn to replace the "bad" eye.

I will answer your e-mail in the next pane :)

with love, artie

[Arthur Morris]

Brian wrote via e-mail:


In my recent post (Gray Ghost vs RTH) you will see an exchange between Dan and I that raises a notable concern. I like my Sigma 500mm f4, as does his friend, but it seems there are no reliable TC options to extend range. Bummer. I had some exchange with Ari a week ago about Nikon vs Sigma and he said I might not see quite the sharpness as a Nikon. I pondered the 500 PF but he suggested not dropping down in aperture lenses. And that ultimately, most great bird photographers would own a 600mm f4E. That got me thinking.... With the Signa TC considerations (or lack of) I can return my Sigma until May 31. Do I reach for a gently used 500mm f4E paired with Nikon 1.4x or reach another $1k+ for a 600mm?

Hey again Brian, Not shocked by poor off-brand performance with a TC. I am curious: were you using the TC-E14?

I have been using and loving the 600mm f/4 lenses for well more than 25 years; I cannot live without one. And I have used all thre: Canon, Nikon, and now Sigma. I would return the Sigma in 1.6 seconds and go for a Nikon 600 f/4 if you are sure you wish to pursue this. Your early efforts have neen quite excellent. Another lesson from the blog and the books: the size of the bird in the frame is a function of the square of the focal length; i.e., six squared is 36, five squared is 25. So the size of the bird in the frame with a 600 is 9/25 greater than with a 500, i.e., 36% larger in the frame ...

I should have a near-mint Nikon 600 f/4 within a week as per my e-mail.

with love, and thanks for your membership support.

ps: the neear-wing position on the red-tail is an image wrecker on itsown.

[Brian Sump]

Awesome action, albeit the image quality has suffered as discussed above. Some good thoughts above on many fronts, but is it possible the image was a victim of heat shimmer and not faulty optics? It has that look to my eye, with the 'streaks' in the background and your description, especially the "weird mushy appearance (and blur) and some odd bkg noise" matches pretty well. I wouldn't be surprised to see heat shimmer in a field / marsh where harriers hunt even on an overcast day. The distortion will be more noticeable with the TC on than without as you are compressing more air with the longer focal length assuming the subject was indeed further away. I have many many frames of harriers spoiled by atmospheric issues. Just a thought.

Alex, fantastic consideration. Guess I shouldn't jump to conclusions, although I pondered the same thing because, frankly, in the distance that is exactly what it looks like.

However, a couple things - first, it was about 50 degrees and overcast. Not impossible but not the most likely scenario for bad heat shimmer as in a 70-90 degree day?

Plus, many shots were at least 20-30ft in the sky or more and often they are probably miles from the nearest background (i.e. mountains). And thus, I would assume that would have less impact? Maybe not.

Last, the whole subjects were not sharp over and over, 600 or 700 shots out of probably 900 or so in a myriad of positions in the horizon.

With Mod permission I will post another shot or two that better describe the issues.... I deleted most, but kept a few.

~ 45% crop, no other edits - center of frame right on my group AF points. I had lock as this was in a series of about 10-12 shots, all with similar quality

186352

~ 45% crop, no other edits - again, center of frame right where my group AF point was and also in a series of 8 shots, all similar.

186353

[John Mack]

A neat frame for sure with a nice interaction. The technical side has already been covered.

[arash_hazeghi]

I am late to this thread this is a very good capture , the RTH is reasonably sharp but the harrier is a touch soft. there isn't much you could do except for hoping that they would be on the same plane.

cheers