7d mark II as reviewed by Artie Morris

[jrista]

and to aquire his skills

The only thing that differentiates Art Morris from a million other photographers is opportunity - he has access (by his own admission) yo lots of tame birds, and the time to exploit them.

I'm sorry, but it's more than simply opportunity. Art has decades of experience and insight that far fewer than "millions" of other photographers have. If you actually read his blog on a regular basis, and read his books, you realize the depth of his experience. If I had all of Arties opportunities, I'm certain I would get better photos...however getting excellent photos every single time is another story. There are subtleties within subtleties within subtleties about bird photography that you learn when Art starts critiquing your work (which is something I do, over on BPN.) You start learning how nuanced getting every single aspect of a bird photo, from lighting and composition down to head angle and eye pointing and everything else.


I'm a decent photographer, and one of those "millions" of other photographers out there who don't very often have the opportunities that Art has. I know for a fact, though that even if I had them, I'd be missing a LOT of the subtleties.

+1, he has great compositions and looks to his shots even though many are a little on the high key side to my taste. Reading his comments just from the 7D2 posts on his crop and composition choices shows just how much he considers when taking photos.

Yeah, there is a depth of consideration, for sure. The amazing thing is he seems to consider all those things in seconds or less. He also knows how to rebase his exposure every time he moves the lens or the light changes...and his techniques for doing so are amazing, but remembering to do all those things myself, every time I press the shutter button, is not easy. I still forget to rebase my exposure when pointing from one subject to another, where the lighting has likely changed. That sometimes results in hot or blown highlights that are difficult to recover with good detail. There are thousands of little things, nuances, that you have to think about and get correct, all in the timespan of a bird indicating they are going to do something interesting, pointing the lens, basing then adjusting exposure, and actually taking the shot at the right time such that you get everything right. I cannot think about all those small factors and nail it every time. I don't exactly have a lot of throwaways...however I rarely if ever get a photo I could call "Morris-level quality"...VERY rarely.

 

[Loswr]

...I think Artie Morris is in an excellent position to provide insights and valuable comments - but his position as a salesman of Canon products means we should treat what he says with some degree of caution.

It's important to keep such motivations in mind. For example, his recommendation of the 70-200/2.8L IS II + 2xIII over the 100-400L...it doesn't make much sense from an optical, AF, or handling standpoint…but it makes perfect sense from the standpoint of financial gain for Artie Morris.

My 2cents regarding the DPP question - I have used it a few times (largely in part due to what Artie Morris, amongst others, have written about it) but cannot find any advantage from an image-editing perspective of DPP over ACR (quite the opposite). The only advantage for my workflow that DPP has over ACR is that it shows you where the focus point on the camera was for each shot.

DPP does have a major, albeit temporary, advantage – if you buy a camera body just after it is released, DPP is the only RAW converter that will handle the files. For me, the wait is a little longer since DxO not only has to update their software to handle the new files, they also have to test all the lenses in combination with the new body to generate their lens plus camera specific modules.

Displaying the selected AF point(s) is not unique to DPP. I use Aperture for library management, and it also displays the selected AF point(s).

 

[YuengLinger]

Funny how this thread has become all about Arthur Morris, with a little DPP thrown in. What was the title?

 

[Old Sarge]

...I think Artie Morris is in an excellent position to provide insights and valuable comments - but his position as a salesman of Canon products means we should treat what he says with some degree of caution.

It's important to keep such motivations in mind. For example, his recommendation of the 70-200/2.8L IS II + 2xIII over the 100-400L...it doesn't make much sense from an optical, AF, or handling standpoint…but it makes perfect sense from the standpoint of financial gain for Artie Morris.

I must be having a major comprehension problem today. Why does it make "perfect sense from the standpoint of financial gain for Artie Morris"? What am I missing here? Is it because the combo (70-200+2xIII) makes Canon more profit allowing them to keep Mr. Morris employed?

 

[Vern]

Funny how this thread has become all about Arthur Morris, with a little DPP thrown in. What was the title?

+1, I was actually hoping for a little discussion of his results with the 7D MKII from some well-informed members of the forum.

 

[Loswr]

Funny how this thread has become all about Arthur Morris, with a little DPP thrown in. What was the title?

Given that Arthur Morris is referenced in the title of the thread, and DPP is the only raw converter that works with 7D Mark II files, I'm not sure there has even been a significant digression…

 

[2n10]

and to aquire his skills

The only thing that differentiates Art Morris from a million other photographers is opportunity - he has access (by his own admission) yo lots of tame birds, and the time to exploit them.

I'm sorry, but it's more than simply opportunity. Art has decades of experience and insight that far fewer than "millions" of other photographers have. If you actually read his blog on a regular basis, and read his books, you realize the depth of his experience. If I had all of Arties opportunities, I'm certain I would get better photos...however getting excellent photos every single time is another story. There are subtleties within subtleties within subtleties about bird photography that you learn when Art starts critiquing your work (which is something I do, over on BPN.) You start learning how nuanced getting every single aspect of a bird photo, from lighting and composition down to head angle and eye pointing and everything else.


I'm a decent photographer, and one of those "millions" of other photographers out there who don't very often have the opportunities that Art has. I know for a fact, though that even if I had them, I'd be missing a LOT of the subtleties.

+1, he has great compositions and looks to his shots even though many are a little on the high key side to my taste. Reading his comments just from the 7D2 posts on his crop and composition choices shows just how much he considers when taking photos.

Yeah, there is a depth of consideration, for sure. The amazing thing is he seems to consider all those things in seconds or less. He also knows how to rebase his exposure every time he moves the lens or the light changes...and his techniques for doing so are amazing, but remembering to do all those things myself, every time I press the shutter button, is not easy. I still forget to rebase my exposure when pointing from one subject to another, where the lighting has likely changed. That sometimes results in hot or blown highlights that are difficult to recover with good detail. There are thousands of little things, nuances, that you have to think about and get correct, all in the timespan of a bird indicating they are going to do something interesting, pointing the lens, basing then adjusting exposure, and actually taking the shot at the right time such that you get everything right. I cannot think about all those small factors and nail it every time. I don't exactly have a lot of throwaways...however I rarely if ever get a photo I could call "Morris-level quality"...VERY rarely.

I have the same issues you do. Half the time I am just happy to get a recognizable shot. :-[

 

[Don Haines]

and to aquire his skills

The only thing that differentiates Art Morris from a million other photographers is opportunity - he has access (by his own admission) yo lots of tame birds, and the time to exploit them.

I'm sorry, but it's more than simply opportunity. Art has decades of experience and insight that far fewer than "millions" of other photographers have. If you actually read his blog on a regular basis, and read his books, you realize the depth of his experience. If I had all of Arties opportunities, I'm certain I would get better photos...however getting excellent photos every single time is another story. There are subtleties within subtleties within subtleties about bird photography that you learn when Art starts critiquing your work (which is something I do, over on BPN.) You start learning how nuanced getting every single aspect of a bird photo, from lighting and composition down to head angle and eye pointing and everything else.


I'm a decent photographer, and one of those "millions" of other photographers out there who don't very often have the opportunities that Art has. I know for a fact, though that even if I had them, I'd be missing a LOT of the subtleties.

+1, he has great compositions and looks to his shots even though many are a little on the high key side to my taste. Reading his comments just from the 7D2 posts on his crop and composition choices shows just how much he considers when taking photos.

Yeah, there is a depth of consideration, for sure. The amazing thing is he seems to consider all those things in seconds or less. He also knows how to rebase his exposure every time he moves the lens or the light changes...and his techniques for doing so are amazing, but remembering to do all those things myself, every time I press the shutter button, is not easy. I still forget to rebase my exposure when pointing from one subject to another, where the lighting has likely changed. That sometimes results in hot or blown highlights that are difficult to recover with good detail. There are thousands of little things, nuances, that you have to think about and get correct, all in the timespan of a bird indicating they are going to do something interesting, pointing the lens, basing then adjusting exposure, and actually taking the shot at the right time such that you get everything right. I cannot think about all those small factors and nail it every time. I don't exactly have a lot of throwaways...however I rarely if ever get a photo I could call "Morris-level quality"...VERY rarely.

+1
For me, I get lucky.... for Morris, since every shot can't be getting lucky, there must be a skill involved far beyond my abilities.

 

[Roger Doughty]

I find the "Arti" bashing not only irrelevant to the topic but profoundly disappointing and a disservice to the photography community as a whole. I have spent untold hours implementing both his "free" advice and gladly purchasing his fee based literature. My pictures by any objective measure are light years ahead of where I would be without his help. I for one am grateful for his hard earned and generally freely shared expertise.

He doesn't know me. I have never had the opportunity to take one of his classes. But I gladly make my purchases through him knowing that if enough of us don't support him he can continue making a living and blessing our lives by doing what he loves.

I can only hope he doesn't read this thread.

 

[jrista]

...I think Artie Morris is in an excellent position to provide insights and valuable comments - but his position as a salesman of Canon products means we should treat what he says with some degree of caution.

It's important to keep such motivations in mind. For example, his recommendation of the 70-200/2.8L IS II + 2xIII over the 100-400L...it doesn't make much sense from an optical, AF, or handling standpoint…but it makes perfect sense from the standpoint of financial gain for Artie Morris.

There are plenty of reasons to recommend the 70-200+2x combo over the 100-400L, and making an extra buck off Canon isn't the best, not even remotely. For one, it's more versatile, especially in poorer light (you can pop off the TC and creep up closer, if needed, with an f/2.8 lens instead of being stuck at, AT BEST, f/4.5 @ 100mm).


There is also the whole design aspect. A lot of people, and I would even go so far as to say a majority of people, don't like the 100-400L push/pull design. I personally like it, but it is an oddity overall. I believe lot of people prefer the classic dual ring design, one to focus one to zoom. That alone is probably more than enough reason for Art to recommend the 70-200+2x combo over the 100-400L.


There is minimal to no loss in IQ between the two options. The 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II is a newer lens design, with better IS functional up to -4 stops, vs. the 100-400mm design IS which is at best functional at -2 stops. The MFD of the 70-200 is much closer (47.2" vs. 70.9") than the 100-400mm.


The 70-200mm focal length, especially with the fast max aperture, also makes it a much more versatile general purpose lens than the 100-400mm. You don't see many wedding photographers using the 100-400 (if any), however the 70-200's are a staple. The 70-200 with TCs can nicely round off a kit that is comprised of a fairly minimal set of lenses. Many photographers could get away with nothing other than the 16-35mm, 24-70mm & 70-200mm, or maybe some alternative with a couple wide primes.


The only real major drawback of the 70-200 f/2.8 L II with TCs vs. the 100-400mm is weight. The latter is quite a bit lighter weight than the former (without the TC). Overall, however, the 70-200 is a vastly superior lens. I see absolutely no reason why Art would recommend the 70-200 just to pad his own pockets. He doesn't strike me as that kind of individual...and his reputation is probably one of the most valuable things he has. I don't see him destroying that to make an extra buck from Canon by pushing a more expensive lens. I don't think expense has anything to do with it...I think the simple fact that the 70-200/2.8 II is a better lens period, even with the 2x TC, is the reason he pushes it.

 

[Loswr]

Perhaps I'm being too cynical, but having owned and used both options, while the 70-200 II is excellent and versatile, the 100-400L was a much better option for bird photography IMO.

 

[eninja]

and to aquire his skills

The only thing that differentiates Art Morris from a million other photographers is opportunity - he has access (by his own admission) yo lots of tame birds, and the time to exploit them.

I'm sorry, but it's more than simply opportunity. Art has decades of experience and insight that far fewer than "millions" of other photographers have. If you actually read his blog on a regular basis, and read his books, you realize the depth of his experience. If I had all of Arties opportunities, I'm certain I would get better photos...however getting excellent photos every single time is another story. There are subtleties within subtleties within subtleties about bird photography that you learn when Art starts critiquing your work (which is something I do, over on BPN.) You start learning how nuanced getting every single aspect of a bird photo, from lighting and composition down to head angle and eye pointing and everything else.


I'm a decent photographer, and one of those "millions" of other photographers out there who don't very often have the opportunities that Art has. I know for a fact, though that even if I had them, I'd be missing a LOT of the subtleties.

+1, he has great compositions and looks to his shots even though many are a little on the high key side to my taste. Reading his comments just from the 7D2 posts on his crop and composition choices shows just how much he considers when taking photos.

Yeah, there is a depth of consideration, for sure. The amazing thing is he seems to consider all those things in seconds or less. He also knows how to rebase his exposure every time he moves the lens or the light changes...and his techniques for doing so are amazing, but remembering to do all those things myself, every time I press the shutter button, is not easy. I still forget to rebase my exposure when pointing from one subject to another, where the lighting has likely changed. That sometimes results in hot or blown highlights that are difficult to recover with good detail. There are thousands of little things, nuances, that you have to think about and get correct, all in the timespan of a bird indicating they are going to do something interesting, pointing the lens, basing then adjusting exposure, and actually taking the shot at the right time such that you get everything right. I cannot think about all those small factors and nail it every time. I don't exactly have a lot of throwaways...however I rarely if ever get a photo I could call "Morris-level quality"...VERY rarely.

I have the same issues you do. Half the time I am just happy to get a recognizable shot. :-[

Happy to hear, that photography still about skills. I wonder lately, if just anyone can get the exposure right every time (with regards to covering an event). If yes, I may just forget doing part time taking photo.

I was scolding myself, when I shoot group photos and I forgot to increase aperture value, or my ISO was more than enough, since I want to nail ETTR. Or forgot to increase shutter speed, when its dancing time. Jeez this is basic..

But good the focus still there.