I meant NOT make things personal of course!
On 26 November 2010 10:45, Alistair McKeough <>wrote:
> Akos
>
> That's a complete (and I suspect deliberate) misinterpreation of what Dave
> said. Of course technique is essential, whatever gear you're using.
>
> I've very much enjoyed many of your photos, and well as Dave's, and it's
> pretty obvious you both know how to extract the best from your gear.
>
> What both Dave and I were saying about 2x converters is that - even with
> good technique - neither of us are particularly happy with them. That
> applies to me both with Nikon and Canon gear incidentally. 1.4x I routinely
> use, but 2x I find degrades the quality of the image unacceptably for me.
>
> It's all subjective of course, but let's now make things personal!
>
> Al
>
>
>
> On 26 November 2010 10:36, "Ákos Lumnitzer" <>wrote:
>
>> HI Dave et al.
>>
>> Firstly, it would be a good idea to not assume that all my images are
>> posted on web forums only. Many of those forums are littered with people
>> who have all the best gear and could not take a photo of a tree to save
>> themselves.
>>
>> I never said the 2x will equal a bare lens. Of course there is a
>> difference at 100% using bare lens, 1.4x and 2x; but that is not the
>> point. The point is that if needed, the 2x in the right hand is a great
>> tool. Maybe I am just lucky and have "the" right hand or a very good
>> converter as said. The end buyers/users don't sit and fuss over pixels
>> and/or what converters are used and looking at 100% view. As long as the
>> image meets their needs and is sharp enough for the purpose, which is
>> perfectly achievable, then that is all that matters in the end. :)
>>
>> What is surprising that Dave mentions technique not being a contributor to
>> final image quality. I am glad you didn't teach me about photography mate!
>> :)
>>
>> People looking for info read all this tech talk about poorer quality this
>> and that and will shy away from using some equipment based on what other
>> say just because they want to pixel peep and complain about soft this and
>> soft that! People need to get out and actually take photos! Thank God I
>> don't listen to everything I read on the net. :)
>>
>> And Arthur Morris (amongst a few others) is still my number one
>> inspiration! :)
>>
>> Cheers guys...
>> Akos
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, November 26, 2010 8:22 am, David Stowe wrote:
>> > Akos
>> > The 500mm is such a sharp lens that you get used to a certain level of
>> > quality. With a 1.4x I don't really notice the difference, whereas with
>> a
>> > 2x I do notice a difference in quality. Nothing to do with technique. I
>> > also have reasonable shots with stacked converters but you could never
>> say
>> > they are as sharp as the 500mm by itself.
>> > Obviously its easy to make these images look sharp when resizing for web
>> > forums and adding sharpening etc, but at 100% i personally find a
>> > difference.
>> > Cheers
>> > Dave
>> >
>> > On 26/11/2010, at 7:43 AM, Ákos Lumnitzer wrote:
>> >
>> > David
>> >
>> > I have to disagree about the Canon EF 2x. Maybe you have a bad copy or I
>> > have a fabulous one. Under the right circumstances and using solid
>> > technique I most certainly get more than good enough quality images and
>> I
>> > don't even use a 500/4L yet. Even stacking a 1.4x and a 2x I can get
>> very
>> > good results (hand holding!). Just food for thought. I admit, I am no
>> > pixel peeper, but certainly have a very good grasp of this funny thing
>> > called photography and professional nature photographers world-wide like
>> > what I am capable of producing. :) What my point is that there are many
>> > factors to consider with converters; light, lens, technique, converter
>> > quality (individuals most likely differ) and so on. I won't even touch
>> the
>> > subject of cropping (excessively) as many now do because they have 15+
>> > megapixel cameras.
>> >
>> > respectfully yours
>> >
>> > Akos
>> > (just an amateur in many worlds) :)
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ákos Lumnitzer
>> http://www.amatteroflight.com
>>
>>
>
==============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
http://birding-aus.org
=============================
|
