Dying sun in the evening with no birds as usual and me with the 400 DO on the R5, and a pigeon wheels past. 400mm on FF is my favourite for BIF because of the field of view. I'm leaning to keeping this lens.
If you mean Feral Pigeon - nope, this is the Wood Pigeon. Increasing in numbers in some parts of Europe (mostly the Northern parts and England) but hardly "rats".Rats in flight?
Agreed. I look upon them as flying fast food for Peregrine Falcons and so don't mind them fattening themselves on my birdseed.If you mean Feral Pigeon - nope, this is the Wood Pigeon. Increasing in numbers in some parts of Europe (mostly the Northern parts and England) but hardly "rats".
I certainly enjoy reading these kinds of comments here...from people who have real-world experience with gear I have (or would like to have).Photographic quality, yes. It's a good copy of the 400mm DO II lens - they do vary - and it produces good sharp images at 800mm. Unlike on my 5DSR, 5DIV and 90D, where the AF at 800mm f/8 was erratic, it's very precise and fast on the R5. The problem for me is that it is just above my comfort zone for weight. I feel it on my shoulder with the BlackRapid strap and I find it difficult to hand-hold steady pointing at a small bird.
I just use an on-line gif maker. The M-series are too small in my experience to handle with the 100-400mm II and are unbalanced. You need high shutter speeds for hand-held telephotos.I certainly enjoy reading these kinds of comments here...from people who have real-world experience with gear I have (or would like to have).
With my 5DIII, I find the 100-400 II to be easily handheld (both weight-wise and volume-wise). It turns out that, to my eyes, the 1.4x III teleconverter, when added to the 5Diii/100-400 II combination, yields images that retain a whole lot of detail. So occasionally I set up this way.
But in order to get the best images, in my hands, with the 5DIII/100-400 II/1.4x III trio...I really need to carry a monopod!
And I can't explain it...it just isn't the weight. The whole package just doesn't feel quite right...and after a few minutes it definitely affects my ability to acquire good images.
It is the same sort of thing with our family of M's. Using a tripod, I was able to acquire good-enough-for-us images of the total eclipse a few years ago...with an M10/EF-EFM adapter/100-400 II trio...but the tripod was essential. The 100-400 II...on any M...with the necessary converter...just doesn't feel right.
But my-oh-my, the M6 II, when connected to the 70-300 II via the EF-EFM adapter...that 'system' feels great, handles well with the M-series and is capable of acquiring very very good images (not quite as good as the 100-400 II but is much smaller-and-lighter and does carry-on easy-peezy).
I could go on and on...but thanks for posting, AlanF.
And what software did you use to generate the quite-large gif file?
I will gladly stand corrected then; thank you!If you mean Feral Pigeon - nope, this is the Wood Pigeon. Increasing in numbers in some parts of Europe (mostly the Northern parts and England) but hardly "rats".
Beautiful shots. I've seen a few Buffleheads in posts recently and I'd love to see them in the flesh. It's also good seeing the 100-500mm works well with the 2xTC. Is the 800mm f/11 noticeably lighter on the arm? Also, if I had one, I would have to take a 100-400 or 100-500 as well with me.Bufflehead duck: R5 with RF100-500mm L + EXTENDER RF2x.
View attachment 194087
Pied-billed Grebe: R5 with RF800mm F11 IS STM
View attachment 194088
I think the quality of images are somehow comparable, and 800mm F/11 is much lighter on the arm and pocket.
I'll forgive you but if I was a priest I'd make you say a few Hail Marys. Did she test the Nikon Z7II or Z6II?I hope you'll forgive me for posting a link to a youtube video from Chelsea Northrup, but it compares Nikon, Sony & Canon bodies, and also various long lenses for birding, including Canons 800mm f11. The R5 bodies turned out to be very well received by her, as did the 800mm f11. You might find it an interesting post - I certainly did.
Here's the link:
Thanks, bhf3737, for the comparison photos of the 2 long RF lens options. I'm still waiting on my RF 100-500 but I do have the 800 f11, and it's absolutely amazing how this "pirate lens" (I like to call it due to its shape and pull out style) is so light and so (relatively) sharp, and so inexpensive (especially for a new RF lens near R5 launch).Bufflehead duck: R5 with RF100-500mm L + EXTENDER RF2x.
View attachment 194087
Pied-billed Grebe: R5 with RF800mm F11 IS STM
View attachment 194088
I think the quality of images are somehow comparable, and 800mm F/11 is much lighter on the arm and pocket.
No just the D850 and 600 f4 because that is her current wildlife setup.I'll forgive you but if I was a priest I'd make you say a few Hail Marys. Did she test the Nikon Z7II or Z6II?
OK - I'll say a couple "Hail Murrays!"I'll forgive you but if I was a priest I'd make you say a few Hail Marys. Did she test the Nikon Z7II or Z6II?
Thanks Alan. Buffleheads are really small and beautiful, specially the male ones. We are lucky to have quite a lot of them here in winter.Beautiful shots. I've seen a few Buffleheads in posts recently and I'd love to see them in the flesh. It's also good seeing the 100-500mm works well with the 2xTC. Is the 800mm f/11 noticeably lighter on the arm? Also, if I had one, I would have to take a 100-400 or 100-500 as well with me.