Show your Bird Portraits

Bert63

What’s in da box?
CR Pro
Dec 3, 2017
1,060
2,332
This is all for the day, I promise.

Like me, an old crow or three.

R5 with 100-400L II and 1.4X III in crop mode.

262A0251 DxO.jpg


262A0261 DxO.jpg


262A0276 DxO.jpg


262A0244 DxO.jpg
 

HenryL

EOS R5
CR Pro
Apr 1, 2020
289
749
First shots out of the R5. Sorry they’re nothing spectacular but the weather up here has been typical for this region at this time of the year - high winds and rain.

Love this camera. Still no DxO support but Alan and a couple of guys gave me some ideas for work-arounds so good enough for now.

This White Crown Sparrow (?) was loving the seeds, and a little shot of the first of the three storms that have been rolling through here over the last week or so. This one had gusts to 70 so it was nice to see it departing.

View attachment 193340

View attachment 193341

View attachment 193342

View attachment 193343

View attachment 193344
Well done, Bert. Nice images! Glad you finally got your camera and are putting it to very good use!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bert63

Bert63

What’s in da box?
CR Pro
Dec 3, 2017
1,060
2,332
I do not shoot birds but insects and flowers. Normaly none of them is exotic but I like to get a new view of the common.

Perfect description. I love to look at the little details, whatever they may be, that are unnoticed from afar. The feathers and eyes and beaks and dinosaur feet lol..

The same with insects and flowers as well. Freeze an instant in time to enjoy forever.
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,692
11,716
I sometimes post some shots to test gear. Here's a Little Owl, which I couldn't get near to, shot on the R5 with 2xTC + 100-400mm II at f/11, iso640 and 1/160s, hand held without resting the lens on anything. It was processed by the converting the RAW to jpeg with no post processing and no sharpening or noise reduction. It was then minimally sharpened with Topaz AI, doubled in size by Topaz Gigapixel and then minimum denoising by Topaz. First the full, reduced, then the doubled-up crop. Given the distance etc, there is still a fair amount of detail resolved by the 100-400mm at 800mm.

309A2920_little_owl_full_reduced.jpg
309A2920_little_owl_adobe-ss2_00x-dd_CR.jpg
 

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,847
2,464
Alberta, Canada
I sometimes post some shots to test gear. Here's a Little Owl, which I couldn't get near to, shot on the R5 with 2xTC + 100-400mm II at f/11, iso640 and 1/160s, hand held without resting the lens on anything. It was processed by the converting the RAW to jpeg with no post processing and no sharpening or noise reduction. It was then minimally sharpened with Topaz AI, doubled in size by Topaz Gigapixel and then minimum denoising by Topaz. First the full, reduced, then the doubled-up crop. Given the distance etc, there is still a fair amount of detail resolved by the 100-400mm at 800mm.

View attachment 193396 View attachment 193398
800 mm @160 is not something I can do.

Jack
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,692
11,716
800 mm @160 is not something I can do.

Jack
You could, Jack, with the R5 in burst mode - one shot is bound to be shake-free! All of mine were pretty good. I prefer to be at 1/320s or faster at this focal length and upped the iso 3x for another set of shots but it wasn't necessary. The take home message for me, personally, is that as I have a good 100-400mm II and TCs, there is no point in my considering an 800mm f/11 as I don't think it will be sufficiently sharper to warrant a second lens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Douglas

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,847
2,464
Alberta, Canada
You could, Jack, with the R5 in burst mode - one shot is bound to be shake-free! All of mine were pretty good. I prefer to be at 1/320s or faster at this focal length and upped the iso 3x for another set of shots but it wasn't necessary. The take home message for me, personally, is that as I have a good 100-400mm II and TCs, there is no point in my considering an 800mm f/11 as I don't think it will be sufficiently sharper to warrant a second lens.
So, now what are your thoughts regarding the R5 and zoom lens vs the D500 and 500 PF? I'm really curious, since I will get the R5 (my funds are building nicely) whether I'll be satisfied with the 400 DO X2 (I'm confident there won't be an issue with X1.4).

Jack
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,692
11,716
So, now what are your thoughts regarding the R5 and zoom lens vs the D500 and 500 PF? I'm really curious, since I will get the R5 (my funds are building nicely) whether I'll be satisfied with the 400 DO X2 (I'm confident there won't be an issue with X1.4).

Jack
From my comparisons at 20m, the Nikon D850 + 500mm PF + 1.4xTC at 700mm resolves more and has more contrast than the 100-400mm II + 2xTC on the R5. At close distances, the Nikon outresolves and has better contrast still with the various combinations of TCs at similar magnifications. Whether that makes enough difference in practice, is another matter. It's not enough for me to use one or the other exclusively. When looking at really fine details, like insects or small fish in birds beaks, then you will see a difference.

Regarding the 400mm DO II + 2xTC on the R5, there has been some discussion on the FM site, with mixed views. However, if you want to sell yours cheap, I'll send you my address.
 

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,847
2,464
Alberta, Canada
From my comparisons at 20m, the Nikon D850 + 500mm PF + 1.4xTC at 700mm resolves more and has more contrast than the 100-400mm II + 2xTC on the R5. At close distances, the Nikon outresolves and has better contrast still with the various combinations of TCs at similar magnifications. Whether that makes enough difference in practice, is another matter. It's not enough for me to use one or the other exclusively. When looking at really fine details, like insects or small fish in birds beaks, then you will see a difference.

Regarding the 400mm DO II + 2xTC on the R5, there has been some discussion on the FM site, with mixed views. However, if you want to sell yours cheap, I'll send you my address.
But it's too heavy for you and it doesn't zoom.

Jack
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,692
11,716
But it's too heavy for you and it doesn't zoom.

Jack
I took out the D850 + 500PF, after weeks of not using them, for a brief walk around a local field, where I usually see nothing other than crows or pigeons. Suddenly, a pair of Green Woodpeckers started flying. There was no time to carefully track as they were flying low and very fast against a background but the DSLR locked on immediately. Here they are, upresolved by a factor of two because the images were only about 300-400 pixels long. I am not sure the R5 would have been able to capture these as they were so small, and the sharpness of the prime was needed to get a reasonable image at this size. But, maybe the R5 could.

DSC_9727-DxO_green_woodpeckers_flying_full.jpg
DSC_9727-DxO_green_woodpeckers_flying-ss-2_00x.jpg
DSC_9700-DxO_green_woodpecker_flying-ss_SH-gigapixel-scale-2_00x.jpg
DSC_9734-DxO_green_woodpecker_flying-ss-2_00x.jpg
 
Last edited:

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,847
2,464
Alberta, Canada
I took out the D850 + 500PF, after weeks of not using them, for a brief walk around a local field, where I usually see nothing other than crows or pigeons. Suddenly, a pair of Green Woodpeckers started flying. There was no time to carefully track as they were flying low and very fast against a background but the DSLR locked on immediately. Here they are, upresolved by a factor of two because the images were only about 300-400 pixels long. I am not sure the R5 would have been able to capture these as they were so small, and the sharpness of the prime was needed to get a reasonable image at this size. View attachment 193400 View attachment 193401 View attachment 193402 View attachment 193403
That is impressive. So the question then is, why do you now have the R5? Is there a significant weight difference?

Jack
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,692
11,716
That is impressive. So the question then is, why do you now have the R5? Is there a significant weight difference?

Jack
The R5 is up there with the best of the mirrorless and its eyeAF make it better than a DSLR in quite a few situations, and Canon has great lightweight zooms. The D850 and D500 are the best DSLRs in their class and have the 500mm PF, which make for a great DSLR viewing experience for looking at wildlife. For reliable locking on to a small bird in foliage, a DSLR with point focus is difficult to beat whereas mirrorless can get distracted. On the other hand, once the R5 locks on, it sticks like glue when the bird hops around or takes off.
There's little weight difference between the two systems. If Canon would get a lightweight 500/5.6 of comparable quality to the Nikon, I'd go back exclusively to Canon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Douglas

ISv

"The equipment that matters, is you"
CR Pro
Apr 30, 2017
1,473
3,364
:LOL::ROFLMAO::LOL: - OK, I will use the opportunity, Bert63 is to blame;), not me - never:ROFLMAO:!
" That's me man - it doesn't have to be exotic for me to enjoy it - especially the birds. I know some folks prefer the things you don't see every single day but I'm happy just to look. "

I went out yesterday in search of the Solitary Sandpiper that was seen at the same spot for ~2 weeks if not more. I was really busy and didn't succeed to get there in the days everybody was enjoying the rare visitor ... How rare? Up to date 6 birds, first encounter in year 1907 - count now...
Didn't see it. It's not "exotic" bird for most of the North America (especially during the migration) but here it is!
Instead I got these... not because I don't enjoy them (huh - when there is nothing else? And they are cute anytime - almost;)) but just compare it with the opportunity to see and take even crap shots of bird #7 counted from 1907!!!!
Bert63 - nothing personal, I'm just using what you have written to spill my disappointment... Otherwise I agree with you and I usually feel the same (obviously not always:mad:).
But damn it - I missed that bird:cry:!!!! On other hand (OK here I'm going wildly optimistic) it could be just temporary "absentee" (ha, ha even I don't believe myself:cry:)!

DSC_4834_DxO.jpg
DSC_4838_DxO.jpg
 
Last edited: