Birdsasart migrates to Nikon

[reef58]

reef58, I am a relative newcomer to DSLRs and far from an expert. However, I do try hard to be as good as I can and I find it disappointing when someone who is influencing many folk in their photography purchases is not interested in keeping up. I have no right, nor do I care to force anyone to follow my advice relative to 1DX2 AF. However, if I hear of somewhat ignorant criticisms and I know there is a better way, I'm generous in offering what little I can. The 1DX2 ergonomics are not perfect but they still are mind-bogging amazing.

I have absolutely no axe to grind with Artie and in fact I commend him for many positives. Who am I to suggest that a professional photographer with decades of experience should follow my advice! I just thought he'd be interested in knowing.

I heard about BB focus a couple years back and tried it. Ugh, this is tricky, why bother. Then I heard more praise of it and said to myself if I'm going to improve I need to persevere. Now it's trivial and it opens all sorts of options because with the 1DX2 you can have up to 3 buttons functioning as BBs and instantly change AF modes and also the almost complete setup of the camera including shutter speed, without barely thinking, in an instant. Think BIF against blue sky following a stationary shot in the trees.

Jack

I came across Art when I got my 7D2 and was searching for setup of the functions. Art has several videos about setting the functions and one specific to the auto focus case settings including his custom settings. So, he is familiar with setting up the camera and working the autofocus system.

I think he is full of himself and a bit of a pitchman for his products, but that is okay. He switched to Nikon so what. I have never shot Nikon, but I have heard many comments indicating their autofocus is a bit better than Canon. If I had a huge need for autofocus improvement I may look myself.

On the bright side if people keep switching to Sony and Nikon maybe I can get a good deal on a 500F4

 

[Hflm]

The very fact that Arash is changing to Nikon (he is selling his 600 II) while he takes superb flight photos with his Canon equipment says all I need to be certain that there is more to this change that what it is said.

In what way?
Just because you can take excellent shots with one bit of gear does not mean you can't improve with another.
Are you saying the Nikon AF is definitely not superior to the Canon AF?

If he is being sponsored by Nikon, there are three propositions:
he would switch to Nikon anyway for its superior AF and while he is doing so takes advantage of Nikon's generosity (as would you I am sure - I certainly would);
there is no difference in AF and he is changing simply to get free gear
Nikon is inferior and he is moving anyway, sacrificing everything he has aimed for these last years simply for free gear

I favour the first. You?

I don't know whether speculating helps in any way.
I don't know whether it makes sense to switch in such a way and pay a huge surplus for buying the large teles and D5 bodies, accessories, etc., before an 1dx3 is out. Usually you have a leapfrogging contest between Canon and Nikon. The D4s wasn't praised for class-leading AF. The D5 is maybe a bit better for certain types of photography (e.g. BIF) compared to the 1dx2, in other aspects Canon is clearly superior (DPAF, 60fps4k). Canon is certainly evaluating the D5 and Sony A9 and an 1dxiii will (and has to) raise the bar again.

 

[Orangutan]

The very fact that Arash is changing to Nikon (he is selling his 600 II) while he takes superb flight photos with his Canon equipment says all I need to be certain that there is more to this change that what it is said.

In what way?
Just because you can take excellent shots with one bit of gear does not mean you can't improve with another.
Are you saying the Nikon AF is definitely not superior to the Canon AF?

If he is being sponsored by Nikon, there are three propositions:
he would switch to Nikon anyway for its superior AF and while he is doing so takes advantage of Nikon's generosity (as would you I am sure - I certainly would);
there is no difference in AF and he is changing simply to get free gear
Nikon is inferior and he is moving anyway, sacrificing everything he has aimed for these last years simply for free gear

I favour the first. You?

I don't know whether speculating helps in any way.
I don't know whether it makes sense to switch in such a way and pay a huge surplus for buying the large teles and D5 bodies, accessories, etc., before an 1dx3 is out. Usually you have a leapfrogging contest between Canon and Nikon. The D4s wasn't praised for class-leading AF. The D5 is maybe a bit better for certain types of photography (e.g. BIF) compared to the 1dx2, in other aspects Canon is clearly superior (DPAF, 60fps4k). Canon is certainly evaluating the D5 and Sony A9 and an 1dxiii will (and has to) raise the bar again.

I think the lesson here is YMMV, and beware of idol-worship. They're free to make whatever gear decisions they want to suit their needs. It would be unfortunate if they've been disingenuous about their reasons, though. Same goes for people switching from any brand, to any brand.

 

[privatebydesign]

Not that I care one iota, but here is a possible scenario.

Arash tried a Nikon last year and found that for his very very specific uses he personally liked the Nikon AF better, he pontificated but decided he was going to switch. He told Art who has been unhappy that Canon haven't taken his moaning about oil splatter seriously.

Art decided he could monetize this dissatisfaction (views and traffic are money makers) and preempted Arash's considered move with a flamboyant and over the top 'announcement' of his own.

 

[tron]

The very fact that Arash is changing to Nikon (he is selling his 600 II) while he takes superb flight photos with his Canon equipment says all I need to be certain that there is more to this change that what it is said.

In what way?
Just because you can take excellent shots with one bit of gear does not mean you can't improve with another.
Are you saying the Nikon AF is definitely not superior to the Canon AF?

If he is being sponsored by Nikon, there are three propositions:
he would switch to Nikon anyway for its superior AF and while he is doing so takes advantage of Nikon's generosity (as would you I am sure - I certainly would);
there is no difference in AF and he is changing simply to get free gear
Nikon is inferior and he is moving anyway, sacrificing everything he has aimed for these last years simply for free gear

I favour the first. You?

I don't know whether speculating helps in any way.
I don't know whether it makes sense to switch in such a way and pay a huge surplus for buying the large teles and D5 bodies, accessories, etc., before an 1dx3 is out. Usually you have a leapfrogging contest between Canon and Nikon. The D4s wasn't praised for class-leading AF. The D5 is maybe a bit better for certain types of photography (e.g. BIF) compared to the 1dx2, in other aspects Canon is clearly superior (DPAF, 60fps4k). Canon is certainly evaluating the D5 and Sony A9 and an 1dxiii will (and has to) raise the bar again.

I think the lesson here is YMMV, and beware of idol-worship. They're free to make whatever gear decisions they want to suit their needs. It would be unfortunate if they've been disingenuous about their reasons, though. Same goes for people switching from any brand, to any brand.

I believe this answers best to Mikehit.
@Mikehit If the reason is money they should say so. If someone takes excellent pictures they cannot claim they switch to get even better. But they can change to make money sure. So I chose not to believe what they say.

 

[Mikehit]

If someone takes excellent pictures they cannot claim they switch to get even better.

Why not?
I upgraded lenses to get better photos. So if I believed changing brands got me even further, and if I could afford it, why shouldn't I do it?

Anyone who has taken wildlife photography anywhere near seriously knows that feeling of 'I got a great photo but I know I can do better so I will come back tomorrow'. Using gear to get that shot is inseperable from trying to get the shot. The happy people are the ones who say 'yes I know I could get better by spending XXXX on a new lens but it isn't that important' - they are the ones who do not suffer from GAS like I do.

At the moment my personal skills make switching almost irrelevant and that is the key consideration for me.

 

[Talys]

@Mikehit If the reason is money they should say so. If someone takes excellent pictures they cannot claim they switch to get even better. But they can change to make money sure. So I chose not to believe what they say.

There are absolutely stunning bird photographs taken with both Canon and Nikon cameras - like the one on the cover of this month's National Geographic, "Why Birds Matter" issue. There were stunning photos taken many years ago, before 5DIV and D850, too.

So, if those photos are possible with older 1D's and older 5D's and older Nikons, the inability to get stunning shot is not the fault of the equipment. I don't however, have a problem with someone saying that with newer gear, they a higher ratio of amazing shots, as long as they can articulate the reason -- better autofocus, lighter lens (like a 400 DO), better quality optics, whatever.

At the moment my personal skills make switching almost irrelevant and that is the key consideration for me.

For me... At the moment my personal skills make switching almost irrelevant. For the moment, and, for the foreseeable future

 

[Jack Douglas]

Same here. If I had Artie's back yard, I'd get infinitely more opportunities for BIF practice than I get now. One thing though, if you always shoot in the same location with largely the same birds and already have a ton of amazing shots, it's going to get boring or you start pixel peeping fretting (PPF). The perfect solution is travel and photography.

Jack

 

[ethanz]

if you always shoot in the same location with largely the same birds and already have a ton of amazing shots, it's going to get boring or you start pixel peeping fretting (PPF). The perfect solution is travel and photography.

Jack

Or the birds start to recognize you. I have two hawks that live next to my house. I have photographed them so many times, I think they know what I look like and they almost always fly away when I appear with my camera now.

 

[tron]

Please go back to private's post #30 in this thread. I agree with him. I believe Arti's claims target the many honest well intended people that think others are like them. I personally choose not to believe him. YMMV of course.

 

[Don Haines]

if you always shoot in the same location with largely the same birds and already have a ton of amazing shots, it's going to get boring or you start pixel peeping fretting (PPF). The perfect solution is travel and photography.

Jack

Or the birds start to recognize you. I have two hawks that live next to my house. I have photographed them so many times, I think they know what I look like and they almost always fly away when I appear with my camera now.

I have heard that in some city parks, that the birds have become habituated to people, particularly from feeding, and will allow you to approach closer than wild birds will normally allow.....

 

[Jack Douglas]

PBD, Consider this:

Jan 18
Me: While you and I are loving our 400 DO II’s Arash is selling his … or is it a spare? I’d be interested in a comment on the situation.
Jan19
Reply: pps: I will ask Arash about his 400 DO II.
D5 borrowed, help wanted on how to use it
Jan22
Gear Fire Sale and "But for birds in flight Nikon is light years ahead."

You may very well be right on the money. BTW I would not normally give the whole topic more than a few minutes of my time but I coincidentally happened to fall the midst of what was transpiring and it was indeed puzzling!

Jack

 

[Jack Douglas]

Really, Don, what proof do you have? Remember good old Dilbert.

Jack

 

[Talys]

I have heard that in some city parks, that the birds have become habituated to people, particularly from feeding, and will allow you to approach closer than wild birds will normally allow.....

I have stellar's jays that I feed peanuts to. They come up so close to me that I'd need to mount a wide macro to take a photo, lol. And they know that if I come out with a broom, it's to get rid of the squirrels for them

 

[Jack Douglas]

I have heard that in some city parks, that the birds have become habituated to people, particularly from feeding, and will allow you to approach closer than wild birds will normally allow.....

I have stellar's jays that I feed peanuts to. They come up so close to me that I'd need to mount a wide macro to take a photo, lol. And they know that if I come out with a broom, it's to get rid of the squirrels for them

However, if they fly you'll need a Nikon to capture them!

Jack

 

[ethanz]

I have heard that in some city parks, that the birds have become habituated to people, particularly from feeding, and will allow you to approach closer than wild birds will normally allow.....

I have stellar's jays that I feed peanuts to. They come up so close to me that I'd need to mount a wide macro to take a photo, lol. And they know that if I come out with a broom, it's to get rid of the squirrels for them

However, if they fly you'll need a Nikon to capture them!

Jack

I obviously don't feed hawks, so either they resent me for not giving them food or they see I have a Canon and know I won't get any pictures of them so they save me the humiliation of missed shots.

 

[tron]

I have heard that in some city parks, that the birds have become habituated to people, particularly from feeding, and will allow you to approach closer than wild birds will normally allow.....

I have stellar's jays that I feed peanuts to. They come up so close to me that I'd need to mount a wide macro to take a photo, lol. And they know that if I come out with a broom, it's to get rid of the squirrels for them

However, if they fly you'll need a Nikon to capture them!

Jack

I obviously don't feed hawks, so either they resent me for not giving them food or they see I have a Canon and know I won't get any pictures of them so they save me the humiliation of missed shots.

;D ;D ;D

 

[tron]

if you always shoot in the same location with largely the same birds and already have a ton of amazing shots, it's going to get boring or you start pixel peeping fretting (PPF). The perfect solution is travel and photography.

Jack

Or the birds start to recognize you. I have two hawks that live next to my house. I have photographed them so many times, I think they know what I look like and they almost always fly away when I appear with my camera now.

I have heard that in some city parks, that the birds have become habituated to people, particularly from feeding, and will allow you to approach closer than wild birds will normally allow.....

They are staying down so as to be photographed even by people using Canon cameras ;D ;D ;D

 

[JBSF]

Hazeghi is undoubtedly one of the masters of BIF, but don't think some of those birds aren't baited. Diurnal photos of Great Grey Owl are undoubtedly set up using rodents as bait. On the other hand, not many photographers are going to use 1DX2 and 600mm lens with extender handheld, shooting hundreds of frames of a subject to get the perfect shot. He does. What's puzzling is that he has a portfolio of spectacular photos that are perfectly exposed and processed, and he is abandoning the equipment that captured them. Maybe the Nikon will give him a 0.5 percent advantage.

Morris is also a great photographer, but everything he does is motivated by money, or at least that is how he comes across to me. He invites email questions for advice, which I have never tried. However one (former) CR forum contributor submitted a photo to him once, and his response amounted to, "That sucks. You need to enroll in my next $10,000 workshop." When the 7D2 came out, he published a review of it on his website comparing it to 5D3, which was unscientific to say the least. His excuse was that he wasn't very good at understanding equipment, but he would send anybody a raw file for $5. He can't post anything in his blog without reference to the latest piece of used equipment that he has sponsored for one of his acolytes (for a fee). I suppose his methods succeed, so he sticks with them, so all power to him. But they are a turnoff to me, and until I saw this thread, I had not gone to his site for at least two years.

 

[tron]

Hazeghi is undoubtedly one of the masters of BIF, but don't think some of those birds aren't baited. Diurnal photos of Great Grey Owl are undoubtedly set up using rodents as bait. On the other hand, not many photographers are going to use 1DX2 and 600mm lens with extender handheld, shooting hundreds of frames of a subject to get the perfect shot. He does. What's puzzling is that he has a portfolio of spectacular photos that are perfectly exposed and processed, and he is abandoning the equipment that captured them. Maybe the Nikon will give him a 0.5 percent advantage.

Morris is also a great photographer, but everything he does is motivated by money, or at least that is how he comes across to me. He invites email questions for advice, which I have never tried. However one (former) CR forum contributor submitted a photo to him once, and his response amounted to, "That sucks. You need to enroll in my next $10,000 workshop." When the 7D2 came out, he published a review of it on his website comparing it to 5D3, which was unscientific to say the least. His excuse was that he wasn't very good at understanding equipment, but he would send anybody a raw file for $5. He can't post anything in his blog without reference to the latest piece of used equipment that he has sponsored for one of his acolytes (for a fee). I suppose his methods succeed, so he sticks with them, so all power to him. But they are a turnoff to me, and until I saw this thread, I had not gone to his site for at least two years.

I agree 100% with you ( Including the fact that I hadn't visited their site for many months)