Show your Bird Portraits

Upvote 0
Super impressed with the R3 ability to snap into focus almost instantly. I probably had 0.5-1sec to find the owl when it came out of a gap in the trees and start tracking. It was already fairly dark but the R3 just grabbed onto it immediately
 

Attachments

  • 863B5AB0-63A3-41C3-B177-D855F977E94D.jpeg
    863B5AB0-63A3-41C3-B177-D855F977E94D.jpeg
    4.5 MB · Views: 28
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 13 users
Upvote 0
We went on a 4 hour hike in the RSPB reserve at Minsmere, with his and hers RF 100-400s. I decided to leave the 100-500mm at home to make it easier on my old legs, and I don't regret it. The 100-500mm, especially with the 2xTC would have given me more range and sharper as nothing was really close, but the RF 100-400 on the R5 gives more than good enough record for me. The mobbing sequence in the previous gif was easier at 400mm. The BIF here (a Bittern and Curlew) were far away and needed quick reflexes to get them, and 400mm although requiring 2x upsizing at least enabled me to get them. The Stonechats were an unexpected find and I could get close enough (all shown cropped at actual size).309A2396DxO_Bittern_flying-ls-sm2_00x.jpg309A2521DxO_Bittern_flying-ls-sm2_00x.jpg309A2671DxO_stonechat_flying-lssm.jpg309A2761DxO_Stonechat-ls-st.jpg309A2770DxO_curlews_flying-2_00x-gigapixel.jpg309A2693DxO_female_stonechat_chatting-ls-sd.jpg309A2688DxO_Female_Stonechat-ls-st.jpg
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 19 users
Upvote 0
I thought I'd give the RF 800mm f/11 a whirl on the R6 because it should give the same resolution as the RF 100-500mm on the R5 and the large pixels on the the R6 would not be affected so much by the f/11 diffraction. I thought the high iso performance would be good, but I was bowled over. I was set up for BIF at 1/3200s and suddenly a small bird dropped by for a second, some 15m away in the shade. This is an 800x800 pixel crop from the centre at iso 20,000 of a Whitethroat.

JT9A5197DxO_Whitethroat-0.5-den.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 16 users
Upvote 0
I thought I'd give the RF 800mm f/11 a whirl on the R6 because it should give the same resolution as the RF 100-500mm on the R5 and the large pixels on the the R6 would not be affected so much by the f/11 diffraction. I thought the high iso performance would be good, but I was bowled over. I was set up for BIF at 1/3200s and suddenly a small bird dropped by for a second, some 15m away in the shade. This is an 800x800 pixel crop from the centre at iso 20,000 of a Whitethroat.

View attachment 204442
You know, I love my 5DMkiii, but that noiseless image is something to behold.
I makes me want to beholding an R series...
 
Upvote 0
You know, I love my 5DMkiii, but that noiseless image is something to behold.
I makes me want to beholding an R series...
Using the appropriate software is important. DxO PL5 with Deepprime noise reduction got rid of most of the noise to give a very clean image, and I did a round of Topaz denoise to make it noiseless. What’s important is that the feather detail is still there. The 5DIII images should be good with this treatment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Using the appropriate software is important. DxO PL5 with Deepprime noise reduction got rid of most of the noise to give a very clean image, and I did a round of Topaz denoise to make it noiseless. What’s important is that the feather detail is still there. The 5DIII images should be good with this treatment.
Thanks, AlanF.
 
Upvote 0