Can one get sharp images handheld with long lens?

[tduell]

Hello All,
My normal bird shooting, until recently, has been with 150-450mm lens on Pentax K-3 II (apsc crop sensor), and I have generally been getting nice sharp images at 450mm handheld with camera shake reduction ON.
In the usual quest to get closer to some of the little blighters I recently added a 1.4x rear converter, so the max focal length is now 945mm (35mm equivalent).
I know this is getting a bit problematic for handheld shooting. I have previously tried using a monopod but found it a hindrance much of the time when wandering about the bush. It is OK if I prop in one spot and wait for birds to appear, but it doesn't work for me when walking about.
I guess I'm not the only one in this situation, so I'm looking for advice on whether it's possible to get sharp images shooting as I do, and how to do that, i.e. technique, camera settings, etc.

Cheers,
Terry

[antongorlin]

I read sometime ago about techniques and they worked actually. You should lean against something or lay down or put your elbow (of the hand which holds the lens) on your knee. Also, I assume you know about the correlation between focal range and shutter speed.

[tduell]

I read sometime ago about techniques and they worked actually. You should lean against something or lay down or put your elbow (of the hand which holds the lens) on your knee. Also, I assume you know about the correlation between focal range and shutter speed.

Hello CB,
Yes, I'm aware of the shutter speed rule.
Thanks for your comments.

Cheers,
Terry

[Cage]

When I was using Pentax (K20D and K5) I found that I couldn't use the in-built image stabilisation when mounted on a monopod. The images were very blurred.

Terry, unless you have the steadiest hands on the planet, getting sharp images hand-held at 945mm is nigh on impossible. Even tripod mounted you will need good technique to get acceptable results.

[Lance B]

It definitely is possible to get sharp shots handheld at that focal length, albeit you will need faster shutter speeds as your subject movement is the issue as much as camera shake even if you have Shake Reduction as this only stops camera movement, not subject movement. I have been using my Nikon 400mm f2.8E FL VR lens plus 2x teleconverter handheld with no issues. These have also been cropped about 25% meaning the effective focal length is more like 1,000mm.

D810 + 400 f2.8 + 2x TC, 1/800sec, f8

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/162245611/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/162262949/original.jpg

D810 + 400 f2.8 + 2x TC, 1/800sec, f8, cropped about 15%

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/162049023/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/image/160404546/original.jpg

[Cage]

@ Lance ....

Along with your steady grip the VR in your 400mm f2.8 is obviously very, very good. :nod:

[tduell]

It definitely is possible to get sharp shots handheld at that focal length, albeit you will need faster shutter speeds as your subject movement is the issue as much as camera shake even if you have Shake Reduction as this only stops camera movement, not subject movement. I have been using my Nikon 400mm f2.8E FL VR lens plus 2x teleconverter handheld with no issues. These have also been cropped about 25% meaning the effective focal length is more like 1,000mm

Hello Lance,
Well those images are about as sharp as they get, and certainly prove that it can be done.
Thanks for your comments and the stunning examples...I'm off now to have another try.

Cheers,
Terry

[arthurking83]

Hello All,
My normal bird shooting, until recently, has been with 150-450mm lens on Pentax K-3 II (apsc crop sensor), and I have generally been getting nice sharp images at 450mm handheld with camera shake reduction ON.

.... I recently added a 1.4x rear converter, so the max focal length is now 945mm (35mm equivalent).

I think the problem is one of fighting a losing battle(in a sense).

The issue is really about aperture.

It's all well and good to say increase shutter speed, but when your aperture value at it's maximum is f/8, coupled to a teleconverter you're IQ will almost certainly be degraded at this 'wide open' aperture value. So with the generally accepted principle of one or two stops down to improve IQ in mind .. your real wide open aperture value is f/11.
You need to be in very good light to use such a very small aperture value efficiently.
While it's easy to compensate with higher ISO values, doing so obviously degrades IQ to a certain degree too.

If you take Lances images as some examples, some of his images were shot at ISO3200(on a supremely capable camera in the D810 at that ISO level) f/8 and 1/400s.
If you were to shoot in those same conditions, taking into account that Lances 400/2.8 and 2x TC(which I assume is the Nikon TC-20E III) are two of Nikon's finest image capture products(with exception initial IQ capabilities) .. using your gear (say)at two stops from wide open .. ie. f/16(for best image rendering) .. you need about 1/500s at a minimum, maybe 1/1000s and hence ISO 12800(min) probably ISO 25600 or so in reality.

In theory, it's more than possible to get nice sharp images from your camera/lens/TC combo

.. but like the Johnny Nash alluded too in I Can See Clearly Now .. "it's gonna (got to!) be a bright sun shiny day" :p

[ameerat42]

TD. I usually manage, though I now hardly use the 2X on the 50-500 ONLY BECAUSE it takes away auto-focus.
Mind you that the 2x does eat into the N number of stabilisation stops the lens is capable of by 2 stops. When using it, I
"BRACE! BRACE! BRACE!" myself (or is that "Bruce":rolleyes:) against anything I can, like gates, fences, walls. With just the 50-500
I usually manage the moon shots straight hand-held (still:D)

[tduell]

I think the problem is one of fighting a losing battle(in a sense).

The issue is really about aperture.


Hello Arthur,
Yes, I do realise I'm up against it compared to Lance's gear, in respect of aperture, so using the TC in less than good light will be problematic.
Thanks.

Cheers,
Terry

- - - Updated - - -


TD. I usually manage, though I now hardly use the 2X on the 50-500 ONLY BECAUSE it takes away auto-focus.
Mind you that the 2x does eat into the N number of stabilisation stops the lens is capable of by 2 stops. When using it, I
"BRACE! BRACE! BRACE!" myself (or is that "Bruce":rolleyes:) against anything I can, like gates, fences, walls. With just the 50-500
I usually manage the moon shots straight hand-held (still:D)

Hello Am,
I think the bird's name is Bruce :D.
Bracing against whatever is available is certainly a good idea. I should pull my monopod out again and persevere with it a bit more, it may help...but may also remind me why I stopped using it!

Cheers,
Terry

[Lance B]

Hello Lance,
Well those images are about as sharp as they get, and certainly prove that it can be done.
Thanks for your comments and the stunning examples...I'm off now to have another try.

Cheers,
Terry

Thank you very much for your kind comments, Terry. Much appreciated! :)

[Mark L]

I'm lucky to have reasonably steady hands for the 400mm focal length I have, and the way I have to crop some photo they may be the equivalent of your focal length without cropping. So make sure you get photos you don't have to crop.:D
I think the monopod has to come into the equation now. You just have to find a way to use it that isn't a PITA for you. If it means sharper photos it may just be worth taking the time to practice ways to use it.

[enseth]

I'm a strong advocate for using a monopod. Fitting a ball head mount or equivalent swivel mount to it is IMO is almost essential for birding.

[tduell]

Hello enseth,
My monopod has a ball head, and that bit of the equation works well.
I was comfortable using the monopod when I could park myself comfortably in a good spot, set the height, and wait for the birds.
Unfortunately that didn't provide many opportunities, so reverted to my normal handheld practice of walking through the bush. This gave me many more opportunities but the monopod was awkward and a real hindrance when the bird is up in the tree...I would have the damned thing dangling while trying to aim and shoot.
I am 6'4" in old money, which means the monopod is near full stretch for walking and shooting, but as Mark says, it is worth persevering to find ways of using it that suit me, and work.

Cheers,
Terry

[Cage]

I use one of these on my monopod ..... https://www.kirkphoto.com/Kirk_MPA-2_Monopod_Head.html

You can adjust the clamp to mount either your camera or lens and the locking mechanism is strong enough to hold your gear without drooping while still enabling you to swivel upwards. It comfortably holds my gear which is close to 3kg.

I did try the Sirui job, very well made, but it wasn't quite up to the task re holding the weight without slipping.

PS: Wow, that 150-450 is a beast at 2kg.

[enseth]

when the bird is up in the tree...........I am 6'4" in old money

Crickey, at 6'4" you must be nearly at eye level when they're perched in a tree. :)

[tduell]

Crickey, at 6'4" you must be nearly at eye level when they're perched in a tree. :)

We have some pretty big trees around here :D

Cheers,
Terry

[cupic]

Lance I will take you up on a shoot in the future BUT the 400 might go missing ....at least for a while. :scrtch::music05:
cheers