Birdsasart migrates to Nikon

[Jack Douglas]

Don, if you had been reading/following the blogs you'd have a bit more information, not that it matters. Artie stated that he's struggled with BIF etc. and didn't do too much of it. It is conceivable that he didn't really have the parameters tuned to advantage, but no matter. So as a not too experienced shooter of BIF he then states:

"But for birds in flight Nikon is light years ahead."

I don't take that literally but wonder how a person who says they are not that good at it can make such a definitive statement. Never the less, I have reason to believe there is some truth to it, and maybe Arash first switched and influenced him.

Now, here's another thing. He's encouraging others to do exactly as he has and to use his links so he makes money. OK, it's not illegal or immoral but I still have to kind of smile when I read such things.

Thankfully we live in free countries and can all do as we please so Artie has my blessing.

Jack

 

[Don Haines]

Don, if you had been reading/following the blogs you'd have a bit more information, not that it matters. Artie stated that he's struggled with BIF etc. and didn't do too much of it. It is conceivable that he didn't really have the parameters tuned to advantage, but no matter. So as a not too experienced shooter of BIF he then states:

"But for birds in flight Nikon is light years ahead."

I don't take that literally but wonder how a person who says they are not that good at it can make such a definitive statement. Never the less, I have reason to believe there is some truth to it, and maybe Arash first switched and influenced him.

Now, here's another thing. He's encouraging others to do exactly as he has and to use his links so he makes money. OK, it's not illegal or immoral but I still have to kind of smile when I read such things.

Thankfully we live in free countries and can all do as we please so Artie has my blessing.

Jack

Yes I certainly get what you are saying.....

BTW, when I got my 7D2, my keeper rate for BIF was pathetic..... the more I used it and played with the settings, the better it got.... you really need to customize the settings for your own use....

 

[unfocused]

...my guess would be that Explorers of Light need to be younger and fully engaged in the latest technology and perhaps Artie didn't fit that profile (anymore).

Looking at the Explores of Light (hate that term, reminds me of that horrible "painter of light" guy) it seems like a mix of a few true superstar photographers: Bruce Dorn, David Hume Kennerly, Douglas Kirkland, Peter Read Miller and Joyce Tenneson who, no doubt Canon courted pretty heavily and who probably get more consideration than others.

The bulk of the photographers seem to be people who are very talented and have been very successful commercially, but aren't likely to earn a place in the history books. A lot of them are Creative Live instructors: Roberto Valenzuela, Lindsey Adler, Sue Bryce, Joel Grimes, Peter Hurley. My guess they earned their spots through a combination of talent, success and teaching abilities. Plus, they are very good at self promotion.

I think I read/heard a few years back that Canon significantly revamped their workshops and other programs and set some pretty aggressive guidelines for what the photographers had to deliver (quotas for workshops, etc.) If I recall correctly, at the time they cleaned house and dropped a lot of people who weren't delivering in their view. Again, if I recall correctly, it created a lot of hard feelings at the time.

It seems like these days, Canon has pretty much gotten out of the traveling workshop business and offers mostly high-end "destination" workshops.

I'm just guessing, but as I say, I think they concentrate on a handful of really high quality legitimate superstars, supplemented by people that have a proven track record as commercial successes.

 

[Jack Douglas]

unfocused, that's interesting. I guess none of this matters in the least, just something to gossip about.

I came into photography as a keen young fellow with an FTb and then an F1 but got so involved with other aspects of life that I never continued with it in spite of my love for it. When I finally bought a DSLR it was a Nikon and I liked it but gave it to my daughter and bought into Canon because of their lenses. As a result I'm very ignorant on many fronts, but it's all interesting. It's amazing how GAS affects us all.

Jack

 

[Mikehit]

Never the less, I have reason to believe there is some truth to it, and maybe Arash first switched and influenced him.

I just found a bit on Fredmiranda saying Arash seems to be selling his Canon gear as well! That is a surprise given his comments about Nikon tcs - and he uses tcs a lot!

 

[Refurb7]

He got dumped by Canon and this is his payback. That's what happens when you're a sponsored photographer and the money dries up. You feel compelled to give your old brand a public trashing. It's like a quasi-religious conversion. One day he wakes up and has an epiphany that the old "faith" was all wrong, and the new faith is the only true one. The message to followers is: take heed of the new faith. If I were Canon I would have dumped him for his web site alone, if for nothing else.

 

[Mikehit]

He got dumped by Canon and this is his payback. That's what happens when you're a sponsored photographer and the money dries up. You feel compelled to give your old brand a public trashing. It's like a quasi-religious conversion. One day he wakes up and has an epiphany that the old "faith" was all wrong, and the new faith is the only true one. The message to followers is: take heed of the new faith. If I were Canon I would have dumped him for his web site alone, if for nothing else.

What is it about internet forums that someone cannot simply change their minds? Why does it have to be 'payback' or 'public trashing'. The money dried up 4 years ago - he has taken a long time to get revenge.

Have you read any of the articles? Can you tell me where he 'trashed' Canon? Where has he said he was 'wrong'? Please be specific?

 

[docsmith]

From the first moment that I acquired focus on a bird in flight three days ago on January 20,

And he started selling all his Canon gear 4 days later? That is either crazy impulsive or something has been brewing for awhile and I do not buy the story. It sounds like some of you know/have met Art, to be clear, I haven't, so I am not trying to cast a negative light. But I know I would have tried things over time, in different settings, etc, before selling my system that had worked so well for me for decades.

Of course, this was from today:
First Nikon System Issue
I encountered some serious problems acquiring focus when using the 200-500 with the TCE 14 and the D5. Strangely enough, those problems exist only with static subjects! I’ve tried group, d9, and single point with similar results. Stranger still is the fact that even when I manually pre-focus and get the AF right on the bird’s eye, the system sometimes searches hopelessly. Even in high contrast situations. Any and all advise or comments are welcome.

 

[Valvebounce]

Hi Folks.
Personally I have trouble taking advice from people who don’t know the difference between advice and advise! :
His switch seems quite reasonable to me though I don’t follow him.
I won’t use an adjustable wrench if I have a ring or crescent that fits, however an adjustable wrench is the tool when nothing else fits tightly.
It seems he is using the right tool for the job! I wish him the best of luck.

Cheers, Graham.

From the first moment that I acquired focus on a bird in flight three days ago on January 20,

And he started selling all his Canon gear 4 days later? That is either crazy impulsive or something has been brewing for awhile and I do not buy the story. It sounds like some of you know/have met Art, to be clear, I haven't, so I am not trying to cast a negative light. But I know I would have tried things over time, in different settings, etc, before selling my system that had worked so well for me for decades.

Of course, this was from today:
First Nikon System Issue
I encountered some serious problems acquiring focus when using the 200-500 with the TCE 14 and the D5. Strangely enough, those problems exist only with static subjects! I’ve tried group, d9, and single point with similar results. Stranger still is the fact that even when I manually pre-focus and get the AF right on the bird’s eye, the system sometimes searches hopelessly. Even in high contrast situations. Any and all advise or comments are welcome.

 

[docsmith]

It seems he is using the right tool for the job! I wish him the best of luck.

Yep...I do occasionally check out his blog and wish him the best of luck as well. It will be interesting to see his experiences, if nothing else.

 

[privatebydesign]

He got dumped by Canon and this is his payback. That's what happens when you're a sponsored photographer and the money dries up. You feel compelled to give your old brand a public trashing. It's like a quasi-religious conversion. One day he wakes up and has an epiphany that the old "faith" was all wrong, and the new faith is the only true one. The message to followers is: take heed of the new faith. If I were Canon I would have dumped him for his web site alone, if for nothing else.

What is it about internet forums that someone cannot simply change their minds? Why does it have to be 'payback' or 'public trashing'. The money dried up 4 years ago - he has taken a long time to get revenge.

Have you read any of the articles? Can you tell me where he 'trashed' Canon? Where has he said he was 'wrong'? Please be specific?

He well understands the game he is playing, he might win and he might lose, and he is being very careful about what he actually writes, but he is interested in generating web hits and traffic.

But anybody that can use a product in their profession for decades and then make a statement like "I tried and failed for decades to create images like this with my Canon gear" about such a comparatively simple image is playing a game.

Do you honestly believe a Canon camera could not take that image? Isn't saying it couldn't unless you had more skill than him, a vocal pro of decades experience, disingenuous? Doesn't that count as 'trashing'? It does in my book. I know I could easily take that image with my camera.

 

[Mikehit]

He got dumped by Canon and this is his payback. That's what happens when you're a sponsored photographer and the money dries up. You feel compelled to give your old brand a public trashing. It's like a quasi-religious conversion. One day he wakes up and has an epiphany that the old "faith" was all wrong, and the new faith is the only true one. The message to followers is: take heed of the new faith. If I were Canon I would have dumped him for his web site alone, if for nothing else.

What is it about internet forums that someone cannot simply change their minds? Why does it have to be 'payback' or 'public trashing'. The money dried up 4 years ago - he has taken a long time to get revenge.

Have you read any of the articles? Can you tell me where he 'trashed' Canon? Where has he said he was 'wrong'? Please be specific?

He well understands the game he is playing, he might win and he might lose, and he is being very careful about what he actually writes, but he is interested in generating web hits and traffic.

But anybody that can use a product in their profession for decades and then make a statement like "I tried and failed for decades to create images like this with my Canon gear" about such a comparatively simple image is playing a game.

Do you honestly believe a Canon camera could not take that image? Isn't saying it couldn't unless you had more skill than him, a vocal pro of decades experience, disingenuous? Doesn't that count as 'trashing'? It does in my book. I know I could easily take that image with my camera.

He admits that his BIF skills are not the highest, but says the D5 makes it easier for him - not that the Canon cannot do it but that in his hands the Canon does not do it as reliably. I have read enough people who use both systems say the same thing about Nikon AF tracking that I have confidence he is right.

The guy is no longer a EoL, he made it clear that he could afford to sell all his Canon gear at fire-sale prices and still afford the Nikon gear (if indeed he bought it - I am not sure at this time if he is sponsored by Nikon). So if he wants to try something different good luck to him. If I could afford 2 high-class systems to compare them I would as well, and I would probably mention it on this forum.

People are ascribing motives like 'revenge' and 'payback' because he blogged it. The fact is he makes a lot of income through his bog (including advertising his trips) and on blogs people keep their followers updated on changes in their lives. Big deal.

 

[privatebydesign]

He got dumped by Canon and this is his payback. That's what happens when you're a sponsored photographer and the money dries up. You feel compelled to give your old brand a public trashing. It's like a quasi-religious conversion. One day he wakes up and has an epiphany that the old "faith" was all wrong, and the new faith is the only true one. The message to followers is: take heed of the new faith. If I were Canon I would have dumped him for his web site alone, if for nothing else.

What is it about internet forums that someone cannot simply change their minds? Why does it have to be 'payback' or 'public trashing'. The money dried up 4 years ago - he has taken a long time to get revenge.

Have you read any of the articles? Can you tell me where he 'trashed' Canon? Where has he said he was 'wrong'? Please be specific?

He well understands the game he is playing, he might win and he might lose, and he is being very careful about what he actually writes, but he is interested in generating web hits and traffic.

But anybody that can use a product in their profession for decades and then make a statement like "I tried and failed for decades to create images like this with my Canon gear" about such a comparatively simple image is playing a game.

Do you honestly believe a Canon camera could not take that image? Isn't saying it couldn't unless you had more skill than him, a vocal pro of decades experience, disingenuous? Doesn't that count as 'trashing'? It does in my book. I know I could easily take that image with my camera.

He admits that his BIF skills are not the highest, but says the D5 makes it easier for him - not that the Canon cannot do it but that in his hands the Canon does not do it as reliably. I have read enough people who use both systems say the same thing about Nikon AF tracking that I have confidence he is right.

The guy is no longer a EoL, he made it clear that he could afford to sell all his Canon gear at fire-sale prices and still afford the Nikon gear (if indeed he bought it - I am not sure at this time if he is sponsored by Nikon). So if he wants to try something different good luck to him. If I could afford 2 high-class systems to compare them I would as well, and I would probably mention it on this forum.

People are ascribing motives like 'revenge' and 'payback' because he blogged it. The fact is he makes a lot of income through his bog (including advertising his trips) and on blogs people keep their followers updated on changes in their lives. Big deal.

You asked "Can you tell me where he 'trashed' Canon? Where has he said he was 'wrong'? Please be specific?"

I showed you.

Anybody that can say a Canon camera couldn't take that image with decades of experience is lying. In that one statement he trashed Canon, but he did it in a way it can be claimed he is being humble or non derogatory, put in the context of his experience it is nothing but a cheap shot.

It's funny because there is another wildlife photographer I respect way more the Morris who went the other way. Andy Rouse, who made his name as a wildlife photographer and now does aviation as well. Years ago he was a Canon shooter but had a massive and very public falling out with them over his 1D MkIII AF issues so he moved, very acrimoniously and publicly to Nikon. After testing a 1DX and the latest super teles for some of his workshop attendees he swapped back to Canon specifically because the AF for moving wildlife images was so much more accomplished than the Nikon equivalent.

 

[privatebydesign]

P.S. Don't forget we are talking about a pelican on take off here, not a raptor in open flight with a camouflaged and confusing background, or an erratic song bird darting between branches!

 

[neuroanatomist]

He well understands the game he is playing, he might win and he might lose, and he is being very careful about what he actually writes, but he is interested in generating web hits and traffic.

But anybody that can use a product in their profession for decades and then make a statement like "I tried and failed for decades to create images like this with my Canon gear" about such a comparatively simple image is playing a game.

Do you honestly believe a Canon camera could not take that image? Isn't saying it couldn't unless you had more skill than him, a vocal pro of decades experience, disingenuous? Doesn't that count as 'trashing'? It does in my book. I know I could easily take that image with my camera.

I'd agree with the above (although I'm not sure it rises to the level of trashing, but it's certainly disingenuous). I've had plenty of success shooting BIF on a Canon gear, and I'm far from an expert. Especially given that it's a picture of a pelican – given their typical flight pattern, I wouldn't consider them a particularly difficult BIF subject. If he showed a series of in-focus shots of flying swallows, I'd be more inclined to believe him...

I noticed that he complains of Canon cameras frequently shifting to focus on the background instead of the bird. Here's an example from several years ago (full image and 100% crop), one of a series of shots where the camera tracked the dark grackle just fine as it passed over alternating light and dark patches of forest. Not a great image becuase of the high noise (it was a 7D at ISO 2000).

Incidentally, the lens used was that quintessential briding lens, the 85mm f/1.2L II.

People are ascribing motives like 'revenge' and 'payback' because he blogged it. The fact is he makes a lot of income through his bog (including advertising his trips) and on blogs people keep their followers updated on changes in their lives. Big deal.

Exactly – he makes money off his blog. Why is the newest camera, regardless of manufacturer, touted by the likes of Northrup and Rockwell? Because click-though purchases mean income. If that revenue stream has been drying up of late for Morris, pushing his fans/followers to switch from Canon to Nikon could be rather lucrative. Not 'revenge' or 'payback'...

 

[Refurb7]

He got dumped by Canon and this is his payback. That's what happens when you're a sponsored photographer and the money dries up. You feel compelled to give your old brand a public trashing. It's like a quasi-religious conversion. One day he wakes up and has an epiphany that the old "faith" was all wrong, and the new faith is the only true one. The message to followers is: take heed of the new faith. If I were Canon I would have dumped him for his web site alone, if for nothing else.

What is it about internet forums that someone cannot simply change their minds? Why does it have to be 'payback' or 'public trashing'. The money dried up 4 years ago - he has taken a long time to get revenge.

Have you read any of the articles? Can you tell me where he 'trashed' Canon? Where has he said he was 'wrong'? Please be specific?

He talks about his Canon getting 50% of shots out of focus. And he presents the pelican shot as being near impossible for Canon. Really? That pelican taking off from the ground, because a waive hit?!! The system he promoted for years is now somehow so crummy that it can't do even basic things. That sounds like a trashing to me. I'm not naive enough to believe that nonsense.

 

[AlanF]

Both he and Hazeghi are saying that Canon is still great for static shots but Nikon wins for BIF. The Nikon AF on the D5 and D500 does have an incredible reputation. But, to sell all of ones Canon gear in a self-proclaimed fire sale stretches incredulity. If one believed that Canon was better in a large set of aspects and one hadn't a long experience with Nikon, the seemingly rational solution is to buy a Nikon and lens, try it out for an extended period and then phase in to Nikon and sell off not at fire sale prices. As it is, they appear to have ditched their Canon gear for a Nikon and one lens each.

 

[Talys]

But anybody that can use a product in their profession for decades and then make a statement like "I tried and failed for decades to create images like this with my Canon gear" about such a comparatively simple image is playing a game.

Do you honestly believe a Canon camera could not take that image? Isn't saying it couldn't unless you had more skill than him, a vocal pro of decades experience, disingenuous? Doesn't that count as 'trashing'? It does in my book. I know I could easily take that image with my camera.

It's a ridiculous statement. You could take that photo with a t2i... or a 30 year old film camera.

I mean, seriously, what do you need to take it? The right focal length/aperture. A fast-ish shutter. A camera.

Photographing waterfowl taking of a rock requires a camera with enough reach... and the rest of it is just an exercise of getting to the right spot so that you get good lighting while the bird is on the rock, and patiently waiting for the bird to move and then click click click click click. It isn't magic, and if anything, big, slow-moving waterfowl is way, way easier to capture launches of, then, say, little songbirds.

Both he and Hazeghi are saying that Canon is still great for static shots but Nikon wins for BIF.

It's perfectly fair for him to assert that on a Nikon he gets him more in-focus shots (not that this is necessarily the case for others, of course). But it's pretty hard to believe his claim that despite trying for decades, for he's never been able to get an in-focus profile shot of a pelican launching from a rock.

 

[Mikehit]

You asked "Can you tell me where he 'trashed' Canon? Where has he said he was 'wrong'? Please be specific?"

I showed you.

Anybody that can say a Canon camera couldn't take that image with decades of experience is lying. In that one statement he trashed Canon, but he did it in a way it can be claimed he is being humble or non derogatory, put in the context of his experience it is nothing but a cheap shot.

So the part where he said "Do understand that many others, more skilled than I, have made images with their Canon gear." (that quote is above the picture you cut into this thread) didn't register?
It is quite clear he is blaming himself but finds that Nikon makes it easier. I think ascribing 'cheap shots' to a quite clearly stated reason is really pushing it.
By your reckoning 'I prefer Range Rover for its ability to travel over rough ground and carry the dogs' is a cheap shot aimed at Jeeps.

 

[Mikehit]

And he presents the pelican shot as being near impossible for Canon.

No he doesn't.
You can get perfectly sharp portraits at a party with a Canon but some people bought Sony because the eye AF makes it easier. Doesn't mean Canon is a bad camera.