Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums >

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 2, 2011, 5:07 PM   #1
Senior Member
snostorm's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default FA*300/4.5 + Q (10 imgs)

Hi All,

Finally got some sun, but it's getting colder fast. . . I was able to get out to the Nature Center, and shoot the FA* 300 f4.5 with the Q in the same setting as the previous tests. All were shot with this combination, ISO 125, and at f4.5, only the shutter speeds varied between 1/320 and 1/640. All were shot from a lightweight tripod. I used a 3.25 lb Bausch & Lomb Advanced Titanium (essentially the same as a Slik 340DX with the short center column), Vanguard ABH 120K ballhead, and a Wimberley Sidekick with the lens mounted with the tripod ring from a Tamron SP 80-200 f2.8 Adaptall2. I probably could have done as well without the Sidekick. . .

I used my Tasco Red Dot Sight mounted on a Photosolve Xtend-a-Sight to spot the birds on the LCD, and this worked better than expected with the long FL EQ.

For context again, 47mm perspective (so as seen by bare eyes) taken from the same distance.

Here's one I picked to post a downsized original with no PP, the same shot PP'd to taste, and a 100% crop without any PP or downsizing.

Here's the unprocessed, downsized image

This is processed to taste with Denoise and InFocus -- really not much difference. . .

Here's the 100% crop, no downsizing or processing.

The rest are resized in steps only, no processing. As you can see from the sample above, none is really needed.

For me, this confirms what I had guessed would be the case with the Q, that premium SLR lenses would easily have enough resolution to produce high quality images if the Q's sensor did its part -- and IMO, the Q does very well.

Even with MF, these were pretty easy to shoot, and I still have yet to be adept at MF with the LCD. . . The Red Dot Sight makes it very easy to locate subjects, and focusing with this lens was easier than with the zooms because it's sharper with more contrast. I shot 104 frames, and only about 20 were unacceptably out of focus. Another 20 had unacceptable blur because of either subject motion or I moved the camera. This is really an unusually high percentage for me, but the birds were cooperating to some extent.

There's a bit less ultra-fine detail, compared to the best I can do with the K20. K-7, or K-5, but that level of detail is very difficult to achieve, and with the level of technique that I normally use, getting it is more luck than skill, even with a DSLR. I'd be very happy to consistently get this quality from any of my DSLRs.

In my experience, my FA* 300 f2.8 will do even better, but not by a whole lot. I probably won't get to really give it a try until Spring as it's just getting too cold for me. . .

In the meantime, I still have a bunch of lenses to try. . .and it should continue to be interesting -- stay tuned. . .


Last edited by snostorm; Dec 2, 2011 at 5:20 PM.
snostorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 2, 2011, 6:32 PM   #2
Senior Member
Goldwinger's Avatar
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Winter Haven, Florida
Posts: 6,515

Scott, these are really fantastic!
Nice job.

Life's a breeze on a Goldwing...
Goldwinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2011, 7:58 PM   #3
Senior Member
mtngal's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,122

It does look like the better glass makes a difference, good to know the Q's sensor is good enough to take advantage of the better glass (know that's not always the case with some sensors). Very encouraging results.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:43 PM.