Show your Bird Portraits

AlanF

Hands. Face. Space.
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
7,328
7,098
I have taken photos with the R5 and RF 800mm f11 lens, and it can AF just fine with it. :)

When I look at the front DO element, I'm amazed that at first glance it looks like a normal smooth lens. Only when I look closely at it with a strong light reflected off its surface can I notice the very slight edges of the tiny DO "rings" in it. It's amazing that the DO technology of the huge original lighthouse lenses can be shrunk and mass produced to give such good IQ. I know that it can't possibly have the same high quality contrast as a normal high quality lens due to those edges, but the overall IQ is amazing considering what the old lighthouse lenses looked like! :oops:
I am not nitpicking but just want to summarise my attempts to understand the lens technologies. The Fresnel lenses used in lighthouses are a different technology from the DO of Canon and the Phase Fresnel of Nikon. The lighthouse lenses are pure refractive lenses - Fresnel compacted a very thick lens into a thin one made of concentric rings with the same curvature as the thick one, and focuses light by bending it like the thick lens. The DO and Phase Fresnel are pure diffraction. The diffraction lens had its forerunner in the Fresnel Zone Plate, which has concentric rings of light transmitting and absorbing materials that diffract and focus light with about 10% efficiency. Then someone had the bright idea of replacing the absorbing material with rings of transmitting material that retarded the phase by pi, and diffracted the light to the same point and doubled the light. Then in 1961, Miyamamoto invented the Phase Fresnel lens which looks like a micro version of the original lighthouse lens but diffracts with phases differing by modulo 2pi. It acts like an analog zone plate but with near 100% efficiency.
 

usern4cr

EOS RP
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
528
479
Kentucky, USA
I am not nitpicking but just want to summarise my attempts to understand the lens technologies. The Fresnel lenses used in lighthouses are a different technology from the DO of Canon and the Phase Fresnel of Nikon. The lighthouse lenses are pure refractive lenses - Fresnel compacted a very thick lens into a thin one made of concentric rings with the same curvature as the thick one, and focuses light by bending it like the thick lens. The DO and Phase Fresnel are pure diffraction. The diffraction lens had its forerunner in the Fresnel Zone Plate, which has concentric rings of light transmitting and absorbing materials that diffract and focus light with about 10% efficiency. Then someone had the bright idea of replacing the absorbing material with rings of transmitting material that retarded the phase by pi, and diffracted the light to the same point and doubled the light. Then in 1961, Miyamamoto invented the Phase Fresnel lens which looks like a micro version of the original lighthouse lens but diffracts with phases differing by modulo 2pi. It acts like an analog zone plate but with near 100% efficiency.
Thanks, AlanF, for the additional explaination of the DO technology. I wasn't aware of how Canon did its magic, and this seems to make sense. I don't know the efficiency of the lens, but I would hazard a guess that it will have a small but measurable (and probably visible) effect of undesired scattering of light due (at the very least) by what happens at exactly the edges of the noticeable rings. If I can see an effect (seeing the edges clearly) when looking at the lens closely, then I'm sure there will be a scattering effect on the light going through it and thus a reduction in the contrast in the focused image. It's probably somewhat proportional to the very small amount that is visibly noticeable in the reflection I see, which is why its image is so good in the images posted. But I have seen close up views of careful test images from DO lenses vs their best "big whites", and you can clearly see there is a noticeable drop in contrast, while only the slightest drop in resolution. But if the IQ is "good enough", which I think it is, then the drastically smaller and lighter lens and lesser cost make the new DO technology a very welcome addition to the Canon lineup, and I'm glad to have one of the first RF DO lenses and look forward to what future magic Canon can come up with.
 

AlanF

Hands. Face. Space.
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
7,328
7,098
Thanks, AlanF, for the additional explaination of the DO technology. I wasn't aware of how Canon did its magic, and this seems to make sense. I don't know the efficiency of the lens, but I would hazard a guess that it will have a small but measurable (and probably visible) effect of undesired scattering of light due (at the very least) by what happens at exactly the edges of the noticeable rings. If I can see an effect (seeing the edges clearly) when looking at the lens closely, then I'm sure there will be a scattering effect on the light going through it and thus a reduction in the contrast in the focused image. It's probably somewhat proportional to the very small amount that is visibly noticeable in the reflection I see, which is why its image is so good in the images posted. But I have seen close up views of careful test images from DO lenses vs their best "big whites", and you can clearly see there is a noticeable drop in contrast, while only the slightest drop in resolution. But if the IQ is "good enough", which I think it is, then the drastically smaller and lighter lens and lesser cost make the new DO technology a very welcome addition to the Canon lineup, and I'm glad to have one of the first RF DO lenses and look forward to what future magic Canon can come up with.
I think that there is a problem of some "zero order" diffraction where the light goes straight through. Because of this, the DO/PF lens are their weakest when the subject is back lit or has a very bright background and the contrast goes to pot. They are at their best with the sun behind our backs, which is where we want it. I had those problems with my 400mm DO II and now with the 500mm PF, but the other factors of weight and size more than compensated, and with the light not in the wrong position, they are as good as their heavy brothers.
 

ISv

"The equipment that matters, is you"
CR Pro
Apr 30, 2017
1,135
1,973
I've been out of it lately, too many pictures and no editing!!! Shorebird migration in my area was decent this year, with several rare birds coming through and hanging out for awhile. All taken with 7D mkll / EF 600 F4 ll / 1.4x lll.

Jeremy

Buff-breasted Sandpiper
Upland Sandpiper

View attachment 193117View attachment 193118View attachment 193119View attachment 193120View attachment 193121View attachment 193122
Really great shots!!! All together with your next post (I started answering before I looked at the second post). Are you in hide?! Or the birds are in populous area and kind of tame?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmeyer

jmeyer

http://www.jmeyerphotography.net/
CR Pro
Dec 11, 2014
143
685
41
Wisconsin
www.jmeyerphotography.net
Most shorebirds are very tame and I'm sure you know, that if you just sit still on the ground, they will walk right up to you. So the Buff-breasted, although rare to my area, was so close I had to take off my extender for a short time. Most likely a first year bird, with no prior human contact, but hung out at one of our busiest lake shore parks and was very tame. The majority of the others were at a sod farm, where they were between 75'-300'. So it really helps to have the 840mm! It's really tough shooting, because you're constantly fighting heat waves. I was surprised the Upland Sandpiper photos turned out at all, it was hot and humid and distortion was vey high. You can see it in the photos, but a few turned out ok. He was quite far away from the road, at least 75yds at all times Those things just destroy photos! I think we were rather lucky this year at the sod farm, because they turned over a few spots closer to the road. It's a country highway, with light traffic, so I just pull my truck over and shoot from drivers seat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Douglas

ISv

"The equipment that matters, is you"
CR Pro
Apr 30, 2017
1,135
1,973
Most shorebirds are very tame and I'm sure you know, that if you just sit still on the ground, they will walk right up to you. So the Buff-breasted, although rare to my area, was so close I had to take off my extender for a short time. Most likely a first year bird, with no prior human contact, but hung out at one of our busiest lake shore parks and was very tame. The majority of the others were at a sod farm, where they were between 75'-300'. So it really helps to have the 840mm! It's really tough shooting, because you're constantly fighting heat waves. I was surprised the Upland Sandpiper photos turned out at all, it was hot and humid and distortion was vey high. You can see it in the photos, but a few turned out ok. He was quite far away from the road, at least 75yds at all times Those things just destroy photos! I think we were rather lucky this year at the sod farm, because they turned over a few spots closer to the road. It's a country highway, with light traffic, so I just pull my truck over and shoot from drivers seat.
Well, here we have the problem with the Stilts - they use to alarm every body that there is a "monster" around! I have seen them actually chasing the other birds out when I try to approach! Just several seconds later they fly back and land in front of me! Still noisy but in front of me and short distance!!! All other birds (except may be the Rudy Turnstones but by far not always...) are already gone!!! When I came here I was really exited to see them but now they are pure nuisance for me! And they are in the same environment like the most of the rare visitors here... I mean if you want to take good photo of most of the rare migrants here you have to cheat not only the landscape but also the Stilts!!!
 

jmeyer

http://www.jmeyerphotography.net/
CR Pro
Dec 11, 2014
143
685
41
Wisconsin
www.jmeyerphotography.net
Well, here we have the problem with the Stilts - they use to alarm every body that there is a "monster" around! I have seen them actually chasing the other birds out when I try to approach! Just several seconds later they fly back and land in front of me! Still noisy but in front of me and short distance!!! All other birds (except may be the Rudy Turnstones but by far not always...) are already gone!!! When I came here I was really exited to see them but now they are pure nuisance for me! And they are in the same environment like the most of the rare visitors here... I mean if you want to take good photo of most of the rare migrants here you have to cheat not only the landscape but also the Stilts!!!
Yes, we have Black-necked Stilts at Horicon Marsh, and they are loud alarms. Otherwise, more commonly, Killdeer are the nuisance shorebirds that act as alarms for us. It's a real pain and I'd rather not even see those when I go out. I bought a pop up camo blind, but have never used it. I usually just walk around and hope for good views, which I usually get.

Jeremy