It's slightly complex. I need two cameras, one for me and one for my wife when we go out together. A couple of years ago it was the 7DII and 5DIII, and I sold the 7DII when the 5DSR came out, which may have been a mistake. The 5DIV was then an upgrade over the 5DIII. I was very happy using the 5DIV + 400mm DO II + TCs while she used the 5DSR and 100-400mm II. The 5DIV + 400mm DO II at 400mm has the edge on AF for BIF, and a real edge in capturing bursts and speed of writing to card. However, on our recent Tanzania trip my wife took many of the same shots with the 5DSR + 100-400mm II + 1.4xTC while I was using the 5DIV + 400mm DO II + 2xTC and hers were invariably slightly sharper. I also frequently had to grab her camera as I needed the zoom on my side of the landcruiser. On this Florida trip, we travelled lighter as we are doing several hours hiking a day and I am using the 5DSR + 100-400mm II and leaving the heavier prime at home and she is carrying the Sony RX10IV. All in all, the 5DSR is giving superb image quality and is pretty good for BIF (I'll be posting several when I get back) and the zoom is a real boon. Frankly, the 5DSR at the isos I use most (640-1600, typically) has the best IQ of any FF available from any manufacturer, and the 100-400mm II is by far and away the best zoom available (apart from maybe the Sony) for IQ and AF - I can get very sharp shots of birds in flight at the edge of the frame as I track fast moving ones that are difficult to keep in the frame centre. For most of my shots, resolution is limiting.Alan I'm curious, given your love of the 5DSR, why you purchased the 5D4. I presume it's better high ISO but when downsizing don't you overcome most of that with the 5DSR. Is FPS a big factor? I'm trying to identify objectively just what I need/want in my next camera that was supposed to have already been a 6D2 when I sold the 6D. From being impatient to now being quite the opposite.
Alan, I took your previous comments seriously a while back and investigated that camera. Pretty impressive but there were a few things that just made me shy away. Can't recall off hand - view finder?? It does have a lot going for it though.Jack, the Sony RX10IV etc already do 24 fps with AF.
Here's a Hamerkop my wife took in the wild in Tanzania in November with the 5DSR and 100-400mm II at 560mm. We have had a wow of a time travelling since my very delayed retirement!Well, as usually a lot of very nice to great shots when I have no time for stopping here... I have some favorites but it's not going to be fair do bring them forward: every one has his own taste and in many cases the difference is just tiny!
Yesterday I got an opportunity to go out and shoot. First stop was around the local Zoo and I got just few Yellow-faced Canary. Second - in the Zoo: I was informed that they have new bird there and I was very curious - Hamerkop, single representative of a genus and even entire family... In the second shot it's trying to hide that faulty beak
Thanks Click!Very nice series, ISv.
Alan I must live in the twilight zone because allowing for some shutter speed for motion and at least F5.6 due to lens and 1.4X or even 2X, I practically am never below 800 ISO. I'd say that my common ISO with the 6D was 1250 and now with the 1DX2 I'll go maybe 2500 without too much noise, so for birds, especially small ones with cropping, I probably wouldn't be too happy.It is amazingly sharp all the way from 24-600mm, and in the corners. It has about the same resolution at "600mm" as the 100-400mm II at 400mm on the 5DIV. But, it has all the disadvantages of a 1" sensor - great for well-lit scenes and portraits, and wildlife, but when it gets darker, I wouldn't use it above iso 800 as the noise becomes intrusive when cropping. I simply can't believe what the Zeiss lens can do - it ourtesolves EF-M lenses on my M5 at equivalent focal lengths.
It has an f/4 lens, and f/4 at iso 800 is equivalent to f/5.6 iso 1600, which covers your 6D at its usual 1250 iso and f/5.6. For me, the RX10IV is not intended to replace a 5D series but to complement it. Different cameras have different advantages. The 2.7 crop factor means that at f/4, the lens has the depth of field of a FF f/11 lens, which is very good for having groups of birds or animals in focus whereas the FF picks out one subject from the background at f/4 with a nice bokeh. Here is an example. We spotted a hyena devouring a wildebeest surrounded by a group of vultures. My 5DIV had the 400mm DO II + 2xTC on it, and was unsuitable. So I grabbed the Sony RX10 zoomed to a focal length equivalent of about 400mm, and fired a burst of shots at 1/1000s, f/4 iso 200, got the whole group in focus and one where the wildebeest had its legs lifted into the air. For such safari work, the large zoom range and depth of field are very useful, and the light tends to be good. For a small bird on a tree or in poor light, the Canon wins easily.Alan I must live in the twilight zone because allowing for some shutter speed for motion and at least F5.6 due to lens and 1.4X or even 2X, I practically am never below 800 ISO. I'd say that my common ISO with the 6D was 1250 and now with the 1DX2 I'll go maybe 2500 without too much noise, so for birds, especially small ones with cropping, I probably wouldn't be too happy.
However, that's not to say it isn't an amazing camera. And very handy.
BTW it sounds like retirement is a blast. Look after your health.
Alan it looks like you had a great time in my back yard! What did you end up doing as an itinerary because it seems like you were very productive. Nice work!