Wonder about the value of High Resolution

I thought nothing of using 1.4x. 2x was a different animal. But this S version seems good. I need to test it more.

Btw, I received the Nikon Z7II today. Will find sometime to use it soon.

I was thinking of a problem like computer-driven cars. Will they be able to intuit a kid running out into the street between two parked cars just noticing that the kid is chasing a ball on the sidewalk that he missed catching? When I drive, have driven so long and I'm sure I'm not alone in this, I automatically can tell when another driver is about to screw up. It may be a look in his eye or the way the car is slowing down, that tells me there's a good chance he doesn't;t see you. Things like that. Are computers really up to that task?

Nearly all of the accidents reported with self-driving cars are attributed to other drivers doing irrational things. In the last snow storm (Chicago) nearly half the cars I saw in the ditch were SUVs (4WD vehicles can go faster, but all cars have 4W brakes. Knowing a ball between parked cars will be followed by a kid would be a good thing in AI. At the same time a dash cam video would be a good thing to have when the tailgaiter/phone operator behind you doesn't stop. It would seem more AI rather than less is the answer to these shortcomings.

AI in cameras, for auto focus and exposure, has made enormous strides in the last 3-4 years. The Sony A9 was highly regarded when it was introduced, but took good knowledge of its operation to select the right AF options. With the A7Riii it became hard to make the wrong decision, and the A7iii, A7Siii and A7Riv are better yet. Face-priority for AE makes it hard to get a poor exposure, even under theatrical lighting.

My main use of my TC1.4E ii is to maintain the close-focus distance of my 200-500mm but increase the magnification for butterfly hunting.

 

I need to stop down to f11/16 anyway and the VR helps a lot with camera shake.

 

It maintains a very good working distance with good IQ. The only downside is not being able to look straight down on a bug... I'm not tall enough!

Which camera do you use with the 200-500 + 1.4X? How do you focus that rig? I had difficulties making the 200-500 focus on small subjects (flowers) in forests without including the TC. I have considerable difficulty focusing the 500 PF with TC-14 E III in general but especially at close distances where the camera doesn't seem to see at all where there might be a subject if I am changing subjects from one distance to another significantly different distance (near the closest distance capability of the lens). This problem doesn't seem to exist with shorter lenses such as the 300 PF which snaps into focus even at close distances.

Which camera do you use with the 200-500 + 1.4X?

Usually my D500 and/or D850 on centre point AF-C.

I've mentioned before that my 200-500mm is sharp up to ~420mm and then goes quite soft. I suppose that makes mine a 590mm combo.

I guess the (your) AF might be having trouble locking onto a slightly 'soft' and optically dark subject? I assume it's operating at f8

Like many long lenses, they seem to need manual help sometimes to lock focus at minimum, but I guess i get used to tweaking the focus ring with my thumb and little finger.

I have considerable difficulty focusing the 500 PF with TC-14 E III in general but especially at close distances where the camera doesn't seem to see at all where there might be a subject

Good to know as I was considering selling some of my 'spare' gear for a 500mm PF to do just what you're trying to do!

I guess the (your) AF might be having trouble locking onto a slightly 'soft' and optically dark subject? I assume it's operating at f8

Well it is typically a small bird in a snowy landscape. Not necessarily a dark subject but darker than the surroundings.

Like many long lenses, they seem to need manual help sometimes to lock focus at minimum, but I guess i get used to tweaking the focus ring with my thumb and little finger.

Manual focus does helo also in my case, but I'm not used to having to do it. I guess this is something that is sometimes needed at close distances.

Good to know as I was considering selling some of my 'spare' gear for a 500mm PF to do just what you're trying to do!

The 500 PF does have excellent AF on its own but with the TC, AF is problematic. It is possible that a Z camera would focus it better with the f/8 maximum aperture as some users report this.

:D Not gonna do it but I think you have a point. I have boxes of slides from film days stored in slide-holder pages. I can eyeball them, pick out which I would like to scan to high-res digital with my LS-5000 when I want to do so. But these boxes occupy space and they are heavy! Prints, especially, are extremely heavy.

1) I'm scanning my 60+ rolls of slides on a Nikon Coolscan IV. I marvel at pros who gather 1000's of images in a single outing, whereas my whole lifetime output of slides is just a couple of thousands. What do the pros do with their 000s of images? Do they hire assistants to cull? Do they toss filled-up SD cards in a bin? In fact, because digital produced so many non-significant images, I think I gradually lost interest in purposeful photography as a hobby (as against taking random shots at meetings).

2) Regarding size, my Coolscan gives files of over 50 MB at 2900 ppi, and a Coolscan V would give double that at 4000 ppi. I downsize these to 1000 by 600 pixels JPGs for uploading to Flickr- each a few 100's KB, for crying out loud! So 50 MP resolution may not be so unmanageable? On a positive note, I am regaining an interest through revisiting my slides. Challenge is, how to exercise the restraint and devotion we used to have with film, on the do-anything at-any-speed digital altar?

Challenge is, how to exercise the restraint and devotion we used to have with film, on the do-anything at-any-speed digital altar?

And there's the issue.

So much depends on what you shoot.

If you're into birding and capturing BIF, with a modest DSLR or Mirrorless, you might rattle off 30 frames to get the wings just so (etc) The harder bit is viewing them and deciding which to keep.

What I'd like is an Intelligent (!) bit of software that could be told to locate and asses the same feature that I'd selected in the following 30 images.... with BIF they won't all be centre frame and they won't all be sharp. Some programs have a 'comparator' feature, but most of the ones I've used weren't up to it. Things may have changed, if so please pop the details here!

Anyone remember Nikon's Museum Mode, that had a subset of Best Shot Selector. You held the shutter down and it took 'some' pictures and an algorithm sorted through and kept the best one. The clue was in the name, Museum Mode, where you weren't allowed flash or a tripod (and ISO performance was rubbish) and they kept the light low. Fundamentally, it kept the one with least camera shake and best focus, so probably some kind of micro-contrast edge detect thinking.

Sometimes it enabled handheld 2 second frames and that was before VR or OS. It was the best of 60 frames, so maybe at the 'dead zone' at the end of a slow sway between heartbeats kinda thing. The other 59 were rubbish and it deleted them automatically.

I quite liked it as a feature in cameras gone by....:D

Challenge is, how to exercise the restraint and devotion we used to have with film, on the do-anything at-any-speed digital altar?

Self-control my friend, self-control and discipline!

Although the freedom to experiment, without monetary and with little time cost, shouldn't be underestimated either.

Challenge is, how to exercise the restraint and devotion we used to have with film, on the do-anything at-any-speed digital altar?

Be discriminating and stingy with your camera and energy unless it's for documentation - something you want to shoot no matter what.

Evaluate the situation before shooting. Lift your camera only when it's worth spending your time on. For example, it's not worth wasting resource when your subject is in poor lighting, awkward position, against an undesirable background or foreground, or if it's impossible to have a good composition, or it's difficult to make your vision stand out.

1) I'm scanning my 60+ rolls of slides on a Nikon Coolscan IV. I marvel at pros who gather 1000's of images in a single outing, whereas my whole lifetime output of slides is just a couple of thousands. What do the pros do with their 000s of images? Do they hire assistants to cull? ....

I am sure most anyone, pro or otherwise, would admit that they are hoarding more images than they really need to. Think the key is to get rid of the bad ones immediately.

For my slides, while they can still stay for now I would scan only the ones I really want. One day I will use the slide stacker of the LS-5000 to mass-scan. Dunno when that day will come. ;)

I'm scanning my 60+ rolls of slides

I recall that I exposed some 80 rolls of slide film on a 6-week road trip through the Western United States in 1993. I had started out with 20 rolls - they lasted from Denver to Richland, WA, two weeks into the trip (after visiting Badlands, Yellowstone, Grand Teton, Glacier, and a whole lot of country in between).

For my slides, while they can still stay for now I would scan only the ones I really want...Dunno when that day will come.

I purchased a slide scanner in 2006 - haven't scanned a single of my slides yet. Doubt I'll get that scanner to work now anyway.

Challenge is, how to exercise the restraint and devotion we used to have with film, on the do-anything at-any-speed digital altar?

I rather not come back from a trip or an outing and wish I had taken the shots that I sacrificed because I was stingy.