Least Sandpiper Closeups with 1.7x TC, sharpness?

coastalconn · Aug 21, 2013

I shot these with my Tokina 300 F2.8 and my cheap promaster 1.7x TC. This little bird got so close a few times I couldn't focus. The DOF is so thin at these close distances, it's pretty hard to get the eyes in focus. I think I've been pixel peeping too much lately and obsessing about sharpness.. I was wondering how they look to you, especially compared to the big boy lenses... I've also been trying to do less with PP, so I was wondering what you think about overall appearance... Comments are more then welcome... Oh and I hate laying on sandy beaches...

1

Least Sandpiper by krisinct, on Flickr

2 with some kind of invertebrate

Least Sandpiper by krisinct, on Flickr

3

Least Sandpiper MFD by krisinct, on Flickr

4

Least Sandpiper Pose by krisinct, on Flickr

Derrel · Aug 21, 2013

At this size they look fine, sharpness-wise. At least in the central part of these images, where the subject is most focused. Of course, there appears to be only maybe two inches of depth of field, so it's very tough to evaluate the overall imaging quality, since with this kind of a subject, the "sharp" part of the image is smaller than a golf ball in size, at this distance and magnification! I dunno...you're shooting to APS-C...the whole of the frame is probably pretty consistent in terms of resolving power across the DX-sized image area. I think these all look fine.

bc_steve · Aug 21, 2013

I understand the sharpness obsession, these look great though!

Aloicious · Aug 21, 2013

+1, they look great, your eyes may not be perfectly central in the super small plane of focus on a couple, but they're still within the plane overall and I would consider them 'in focus'. I don't see any sharpness issues with these at all, exposure is great too, #1 is my fav of them.

matthewo · Aug 22, 2013

sometimes I will spend time on images I like selective sharping, because OOF areas show much more noise then in focus areas.

not sure how much the images are cropped, but I don't think you can really tell much of the overall sharpness of an image that is well in focus when its downsized for the web. im sure that's something you can tell better when your processing them, and pixel peeping. I guess its somewhat irrelevant if your not printing them large.

but they seem sharp to me, IMO, near MIN focusing distance my large prime seems to perform best, not sure if its because autofocus is more accurate, or if its just optically better there, or if im just not cropping much, or if im filing the frame and seeing more detail in the subject. probably a combo of everything.

you find a way to use the equipment to the best of its ability, usually people complain about lower end equipment and not being able to get good photos. and think having the most expensive equipment will automatically make their photos better, while it helps, it still requires knowing how to use it correctly

BanditPhotographyNW · Aug 22, 2013

I love these.... but my favorite sandpiper pic of yours isn't here....its the one that is kind of hopping or jumping...I love that pic just saw it on your Flickr

Stevepwns · Aug 22, 2013

If I shot these I would be jumping up and down. I think they are great.

Tinderbox (UK) · Aug 22, 2013

Same here i would be over the moon, great work

John.

SCraig · Aug 22, 2013

They look fine to me to. You got the eyes in focus and that's the main thing. My only nit-pick is the cut-off feet in #1, but they may have been "Naturally Cropped" by the water anyway.

While #1 shows the most detail in the bird I think I prefer the others since they show a little bit of water, especially #4.

Well done, as usual.

sm4him · Aug 22, 2013

GOOD Grief. These are so close it looks like the sandpiper must be about to crawl up into your lap.
Now...I'm sorry...what is your concern about them? There's a few feathers you didn't get every detail of?

Yeah, the DOF is really, really shallow. Yeah, with a high-quality 800mm lens, these would have been even sharper.
But...these are incredibly good. Sickeningly good, really. :lol:

I've got about the same reach, without using a TC, and I've never managed to get anything remotely as close to a sandpiper. I think Tennessee sandpipers must be a lot more sensitive to people than Connecticut sandpipers.
The absolute best shots I've gotten, with the 150-500, look like they must have been taken with a p&s compared to these.

#2 and #3 are my favorites. I would pay money to be able to get shots like that!

pixmedic · Aug 22, 2013

as noted, the DOF is very shallow, but other than that, these all look fine.
focus looks sharp on all of them.
a very nice set!

hopdaddy · Aug 22, 2013

SCraig said:
They look fine to me to. You got the eyes in focus and that's the main thing. My only nit-pick is the cut-off feet in #1, but they may have been "Naturally Cropped" by the water anyway.
Well done, as usual.

This sums it up quite well , I recall two "Rules of thumb " 1) if you have Knees you should have feet too . 2) crop, so that if there are natural "Hiding " of the feet , so that there will be virtual feet .In other words, on #1 add some space to the bottom ,for "Virtual" feet . But Again as Mr. Craig has already stated ,This is nit picking ,at some extremely well done photos !Focus looks good enough ,the nostrils seem to be at the center of focus ,which may be what is toughing you off a bit ? still ,looks GREAT ! to me !

matthewo · Aug 22, 2013

Having more DOF is really a pain at min focusing distance And teleconverters dont help as they increase focal distance and keep min focusing distance the same.

I was shooting hummingbirds the other day at f16 - f22 and still couldn't get enough DOF. Lighting really becomes and issue. Also the auto focus block is never exactly in the center of where you point it at it seems. You can put it on the eye but a lot of times it slighty misses and came be very apparent on small subjects at min distance

coastalconn · Aug 22, 2013

Sometimes I just go through these phases I guess.. I just get jealous of all the super exotics. Then I start reading about TC degradation of IQ. Then I start getting paranoid.. Sometimes I just need a different set of eyes from great fellow photographers like we have in this community.. I start thinking everyone else's pictures look so great and mine seem to be lacking... Gear envy is a very bad thing

The first Image is barely cropped on the vertical, just a little from the top. I normally just shoot center focus point and the bird was so close I was just trying to keep it between the eyes. I probably should have turned my camera, but I didn't think about it...

BanditPhotographyNW said:
I love these.... but my favorite sandpiper pic of yours isn't here....its the one that is kind of hopping or jumping...I love that pic just saw it on your Flickr

That is indeed my favorite also. It will be one of my entries in the Audubon magazine contest. The ones in this thread were all shot yesterday morning though..

matthewo said:
sometimes I will spend time on images I like selective sharping, because OOF areas show much more noise then in focus areas.

not sure how much the images are cropped, but I don't think you can really tell much of the overall sharpness of an image that is well in focus when its downsized for the web. im sure that's something you can tell better when your processing them, and pixel peeping. I guess its somewhat irrelevant if your not printing them large.

but they seem sharp to me, IMO, near MIN focusing distance my large prime seems to perform best, not sure if its because autofocus is more accurate, or if its just optically better there, or if im just not cropping much, or if im filing the frame and seeing more detail in the subject. probably a combo of everything.

you find a way to use the equipment to the best of its ability, usually people complain about lower end equipment and not being able to get good photos. and think having the most expensive equipment will automatically make their photos better, while it helps, it still requires knowing how to use it correctly

DOF at min is a major pain. Can't imagine it being even less with a full frame.. The one thing I don't understand though, using a simple DOF calculator if you were laying next to me with a full frame camera and the same lens at the same distance, the DOF calculator says dx is .024 inches and FF is .036 inches.. Guess it has something to do with the circle of confusion thingy... These aren't cropped very much as at all because the sandpiper was getting ready to walk into my lens I think.. It makes sense that the closer it is the more detail you can record since its well closer...

I just uploaded one more without resizing it if anyone wants a pixel peep...

Itchy sandpiper - full size by krisinct, on Flickr

LR sharpening 55 radius 1.4
full size link All sizes | Itchy sandpiper - full size | Flickr - Photo Sharing!