Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 25 of 25

Thread: TC or ET for close up?

  1. #21
    William W's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Sraylya
    Posts
    4,941
    Real Name
    William (call me Bill)

    Re: TC or ET for close up?

    Quote Originally Posted by xpatUSA View Post
    Bill, the ratio you are seeking is (background minus focusing distance) over background distance. The blur size is directly proportional to that, all other things being equal.

    For a camera perfectly focused on the background, blur is therefore zero (ignoring diffraction, aberrations, shaky hands, etc).

    For a camera very close to a subject with a far background, the blur size starts to approach the aperture diameter and could even exceed it if we get into macro territory (m greater than 1).

    As to Grahame's specific comparison, I think that the only way to quantify the bokeh difference would be by ray-tracing through all the lens elements at their actual distances and thicknesses, like here , and I certainly can't do that. My calc is only for a perfect thin lens.

    HTH ...
    Thank you. I have not checked my old notes and I assume that the ratio you cited is correct. (i.e. regarding to it being the precise ratio of the mathematical relationship).

    [Aside - I have used the Ratio of Camera to Subject Distance :: Subject to Background Distnce so often in practical examples to show how one can attain 'nice' Bokeh with 'slow' Lenses, I reckon that I have forgotten the actual Mathematics. I admit, I had to look up the formula for Exposure Compensation when using Extension Tubes: twenty years ago I knew all that stuff by rote. We're spoilt with our TTL Metering these days.]

    However, my point remains the same (taking the ratio you cited) there is still very little difference in that ratio - and - (more importantly) all other things are not equal: the light path and elements through which the light travels are considerably different.

    As you stated an accurate way would be to map the ray traces, I am disappointed that you've not taken up that challenge - there will be no Walker Texas Ranger Award for you this week (I'm joking of course).

    I reckon that there could be more practical field work done and I am setting a task for myself.

    Still thinking. Very Interesting.

    WW

  2. #22
    Stagecoach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Suva, Fiji
    Posts
    7,076
    Real Name
    Grahame

    Re: TC or ET for close up?

    Quote Originally Posted by billtils View Post
    Grahame, thanks for posting the results of this much more rigorous experiment.

    Overall it looks like it doesn't matter much in regard to image quality so it comes down to other factors, and the tubes lose out there.
    It may also be that using the TC with your 'prime' 300mm gives improved IQ than when used with a zoom.

    One thing I did find with my 1.4 TC was that AF required a significant fine adjustment.

    When I undertook the IQ comparison test I wish I had also taken a shot with the tube at minimum focus distance to assess it's magnification benefit. I suspect 20mm on a 300m lens is not going to really give much advantage.

  3. #23
    billtils's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    2,875
    Real Name
    Bill

    Re: TC or ET for close up?

    Quote Originally Posted by Stagecoach View Post
    ... One thing I did find with my 1.4 TC was that AF required a significant fine adjustment.
    ... I suspect 20mm on a 300m lens is not going to really give much advantage.
    Grahame, I calibrate all my lenses with the Reikan software and have the AFT adjustments loaded for each +/- the TC.

    Yes, you are probably correct on the limited impact of the 20mm tube but went with it as the least complicated option for what was something stimulated more by idle curiosty than anything else, as it's the middle size of the set of three. However, if the weather holds over the next few days I may look at other combinations.
    Last edited by billtils; 26th June 2020 at 02:31 PM.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,956
    Real Name
    Ted

    Re: TC or ET for close up?

    Quote Originally Posted by William W View Post
    Thank you. I have not checked my old notes and I assume that the ratio you cited is correct. (i.e. regarding to it being the precise ratio of the mathematical relationship).
    <>
    However, my point remains the same (taking the ratio you cited) there is still very little difference in that ratio
    Yes, agreed for the close-up shots in this thread.

    - and - (more importantly) all other things are not equal: the light path and elements through which the light travels are considerably different.
    Agreed also that all other things are not equal but, regrettably, we don't know how close they are either.

    As you stated, an accurate way would be to map the ray traces. I am disappointed that you've not taken up that challenge - there will be no Walker Texas Ranger Award for you this week (I'm joking of course).
    Grump!

    I reckon that there could be more practical field work done and I am setting a task for myself.

    Still thinking. Very Interesting.

    WW
    Later Bill,
    Last edited by xpatUSA; 26th June 2020 at 02:31 PM.

  5. #25
    William W's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Sraylya
    Posts
    4,941
    Real Name
    William (call me Bill)

    Re: TC or ET for close up?

    Quote Originally Posted by billtils View Post
    . . . However, if the weather holds over the next few days I may look at other combinations.
    Good ho!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •