Wildlife photography with an 800mm F/4? 

Honestly speaking, considering how many people believe "MFT and APS-C gives you more reach", i'm sure many people forget that they loose resolution and can just crop in post, but i definitely agree it's biggest benefit is in the viewfinder or screen experience.

i mean, it's not the case. The camera doesnt have to AF though the viewfinder. It uses the data directly from the sensor, and the only difference it makes is that in crop mode it ignores most of the pixels... well, just like a reduced af area would do. If the subject is 100 pixels on the sensor, it's still 100 pixels when you use crop mode. it doesnt change anything.

@@andreas_rr Thanks for the clarification. That makes sense. I use an R7, which is "permanently" in APSC crop mode, with 32MP on the sensor, and I am impressed by the AF performance. I may have been inadvertently extrapolating from my experience with the 1.4x TC, which does increase the image size on the sensor and (anecdotally) seems to improve the AF.

@@wellingtoncrescent2480 yes absolutely. The TC can improve the AF in terms of reliability etc, as the subject appears larger, but at the same time it comes with the downside that the camera communicates with the TC, which in it's turn communicates with the lens, thus slowing down the AF a little bit (it might not make a huge difference, but when you're shooting at lets say 40FPS, each frame has ideally 25ms to compute the AF, communicate it to the lens and then mechanically move the lenses. That's why at those high FPS it gets tight and a TC can get noticeable, even if it's "only" a delay of one or two ms. And this additional lag is typically the reason why the TC is considered to worsen the AF.

@@andreas_rr That makes sense. I try to avoid the maximum frame rate of 30 fps with the R7, which is only available with the electronic shutter (ES). This has to do mostly with the rolling shutter, which is striking with the ES (sensor readout 42 mS). So I try to restrict myself to electronic first curtain or mechanical shutter, where the maximum frame rates is 15 fps. In fact, I often shoot at 5-7 fps because I don't like sorting in post :). At these frame rates, the AF performance with the TC doesn't appear to suffer.

It allows you to visualize the image better. As others have mentioned, I like to "see" what I am photographing better. When a subject "looks" far away and small in the viewfinder it makes it more difficult to pre-visualize the final image. It becomes easier to miss behavioral nuances, facial expressions, movements that might be minute. Sure, I can digitally crop in post, but as he said, if I know I'm going to crop anyway, sometimes it can be advantagious to see the subject better in the camera. For some of us, getting a closeup view at the time is half the fun.

@@alansach8437 i mean, for the convenience, you're right, but that doesnt invalidate @edkaminski6355's very appropriate critique. Mix-matching physical units with "pretend" units should not be done and is very far from nescessary to make the point "crop mode can be more convenient in some situations".

Totally agree!. Those who claim crop mode extends reach do not understand optical zoom versus digital crop. Look out a window with multiple panes. Does just looking out a single pane zoom in the view? No, it's just a crop.

Definitely give it a try and see if it works out for you! But also, we're actually in Scotland right now, so no fire danger here, lol. And we live in Silver City, which is like 4 hours from ruidoso, so we're all good at home too... for now.

@@BrentHall Good!

It's always an option. For me, personally, though, the R7 was more frustrating than anything else. I had it for quite a while before finally selling it and going back to my R5.

I usually have the 1.4 tc on and am in crop mode on top of that, for 1120mm effective focal length, always handheld. Just lots of practice I guess. You get used to it. As for your crop mode for astro question, same answer applies. If I know I'm going to crop anyway, and crop mode won't mess up my composition, then sure, I might use it for astro as well. I think I did actually do that in a video a while back but I don't remember which one, only that I was using my 70-200, probably for a smaller nebula or something and I knew I needed all the reach I could get.

yea it doesnt. All it changes is the area which the AF is searching the subject inside. And that can be done just as much by using a limited AF area, it should make the same effect. The only thing i can think of is that the processor is ignoring >50% of the pixels might free up some computing power that benefits the AF, but i hardly believe that would make a noticeable difference, as that would mean any high MP cameras (like 61MP) would have a noticeably slower AF than a low MP camera (like a 20MP), if they use the same processor.

the only 2 benefits of in-camera cropping are: 1. convenience of seeing a larger subject in the viewfinder 2. less data and everything that comes with (buffer gets filled more slowly and so on) Neither of the two are wrong, and i wouldnt even go so far to say it's differing preferences. I would say a good photographer should understand the benefits and problems and know when to make the trade-ofs. If he needs to see the subject larger in the frame and is 100% sure that giving up the outer pixels won't be missed, even Simon would accept that a crop-mode might be beneficial. It might not be worth the effort for him to go in the settings and change it for a single shot, but it's just a scale how much the different benefits are valued, and there's a, even if very slim, point, at which he'd change to crop mode. Let me give you a very specific situation, so that you can think of it for yourself: You've been watching a bird for hours or days, waiting for the perfect shot of your life, that you're sure of it will bring you the first place in the competition you've dreamed of since your childhood. You know exactly how the bird behaves, and you know exactly where and when to make the shot. The only issue: you cant get close enough to see the bird very well. You forgot or left your TC at home (not knowing this situation will arise), which is 500km away, so that's not an option either. So, here's your choice: Have a mediocre vision on the bird but save some unnescessary peripheral pixels, or use crop mode, have a much better vision on the bird so that you wont miss the perfect moment, but you loose some peripheral pixels. What do you do? i'm sure 99,99% of Photographers realise that the crop-mode has it's benefits in this situation. And yes, having the possibility to zoom in the viewfinder while keeping the full sensor readout would probably be even better, but that's not how it is, and you have to live with the options you have. Crop mode is an option, with drawbacks and benefits, and even if the benefits are small, there can always be a situation where it's worth it. And noone can tell you, whats right or wrong. They can only help you understand what the benefits and risks are, so that you can make the right decisions yourself.

Yeah, that was definitely coincidental, because I filmed, uploaded and scheduled this video over 3 weeks ago, before Simon's video came out. I had no idea he was doing his. On another note concerning him saying the opposite about crop mode, just keep in mind, he said that with his own style of photography in mind, or at least as someone who wants to have the absolute best way of getting more reach with maximum benefits and minimum IQ loss. Not everyone shoots with that same intention, and everyone has different levels of acceptance for final image quality. So while he's certainly not wrong with anything he said in his video, he's also not completely right either, because not everyone wants the same results with their photography. All I'm trying to say in this video is when and why I personally use crop mode (and that I'm happy with my own results even at the expense of the downsides), and that you shouldn't be afraid to try it yourself and see if you're personally happy with the results you can get from it.

You are wrong. The aperture does not change. The depth of field seems deeper- by about one stop. The total amount of light on the entire sensor does not matter. Wat matters is the light intensity - the amount of light per unit surface area. Thst remsins the same. And that is why we use the Fstop scheme

@@gerhardbotha7336 You are right, but by the same logic, the focal length does not change either, it is equivalent to cropping your image. What I'm saying is that if you want to use focal length equivalent to describe your reduced field of view, you also need to use the f/ratio equivalent. The f stop scheme describes the ratio between the focal length and the physical aperture. The aperture of the 500mm f/4 IS 125mm. If you want to pretend it's a 1000mm because you crop, you have to pretend the ratio is now f/8

@@gerhardbotha7336 photonics expert here (=graduated electrical engineer with a focus in photonics). @pocpoc47 is right. Please dont tell people they're wrong when you dont have the expertise in that subject. Photographers use Fstops because it's convenient, not because it's physically accurate. Because it's not. The total amount of light maters. fact. The amount per area doesnt. fact. the amount per pixel matters. and it matters werther you add pixels together. And to open up a rabbit hole that i'm not willing to go further into, ISO is physically not compareable from one camera to the other; it masks the reasons why it ends up being the same brightness on the screen; and most important of all ISO is very, very, very far from having any physical coherent meaning.

@@pocpoc47 very well said. Only correction i'd make is a TC does make it overall 1000mm, just a 1000mm F/8 (which is exactly what the camera sais though). You're adding lenses, thus increasing the physical focal length, while keeping the same 125mm=1000mm/8 aperture / front element.

@@andreas_rr ISO is basically signal amplification, which can be analog or digital, and is indeen another can of worms :p Very interesting though when you do astrophotography and need to optimize SNR

YAAASSS! 😁

Good tips Brent. I’ve sorta forgotten about crop mode but I’m going to give it a try at AirVenture air show in a few weeks. Have a great trip.

Good tips Brent. I’ve sorta forgotten about crop mode but I’m going to give it a try at AirVenture air show in a few weeks. Have a great trip.

Or sell your house and buy one.

For the loce of God stop talking shit. If you shoot at F4 in FF, and you crop, does the image go darker? No.

@daran0815 THANK YOU

@@gerhardbotha7336 for the love of god, stop talking shit YOURSELF. Your argument is extremely poor. Does the focal length change when cropping? No. do you know what the F in F/4 is? no. does the apperture (diameter of the front lens) change? No. The aperture of a 500mm F/4 is 500mm divided by 4, which is 125mm. this does not change though cropping. repeat after me: this. does. not. change. though. cropping. Now repeat it again: this. does. not. change. though. cropping. If you have no idea of what you are talking about, FOR THE FKING LOVE OF GOD SHUT THE F*CK UP AND DONT INSULT SOMEONE WHO KNOWS HIS STUFF

​@@gerhardbotha7336 No one said it would turn darker. Since you don't understand lens equivalence, feel free to look it up. E.g. google "What is equivalence and why should I care"