Show your Bird Portraits

[bhf3737]

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).

Your photos are really beautiful, too, particularly the colors in the first one!

I wasn't planning on getting a RF 2x TC for the 100-500, but rather rely on cropping. Are you happy with your results (and on-off use) of the TC? It's always good to hear from those using it. I'm curious - when you zoom the 100-500 back towards 300mm and reach the TC, is it a gentle stop from a rubber interface or a more jarring stop of hard metal/plastic?

Thanks usern4cr.
I tried to use RF extenders on RF100-500mm lens and compare the results with RF800mm to make a final decision on purchasing them.
with the RF100-500mm and extenders, the widest aperture available at 300mm is f/5.6 and this remains with the Extenders fitted, so:
With the RF 1.4x Extender we go from f/8, through f/9 to f/10 and effective focal length is 420mm to 700mm.
With the RF 2x Extender it starts with f/11 and ends with to f/14 with effective focal length of 600mm to 1000mm.
I guess R5 with RF 2x touches the diffraction all the way through, but image quality is good enough for 600-1000mm results.

I think at the back of the 100-500mm there is a moving round plastic part that moves inside the barrel with the back glass element but when the lens is at 300mm or more it stays in place. The extender touches that piece and does not touch the glass. But how strong it is and whether you can carry the lens and extender in the backpack, I don't know. It would have been better if there was a lock there.

 

[AlanF]

No just the D850 and 600 f4 because that is her current wildlife setup.

I wouldn't argue with her as I couldn't hand hold that lens. Clearly, behind every successful Tony Northrop there is a strong woman.

 

[privatebydesign]

I wouldn't argue with her as I couldn't hand hold that lens. Clearly, behind every successful Tony Northrop there is a strong woman.

I understand it is very difficult to see past the douchiness sometimes, how many shots do we have to see of that @!ing BMW? But she was asking a question a lot of people are asking themselves at the moment, can MILC’s replace DSLR’s for general use (resounding yes) and specialist applications, in her case big tele wildlife? Again the answer is yes. The R5 and EF600 f4 easily outperformed the D850 and the Nikon 600 f4 but the availability and usability of the RF800 f11 gave the R5 a distinct advantage over the other systems.

In a nutshell, to prevent anybody having to watch her repeatedly bang lenses against the trunk sill and opening:-
1/ D850 and 600f4, her current wildlife kit, falls down on size and weight and the AF is not up to current standards.
2/ Sony α7R IV and 200-600 and 600 f4, get DR (seriously!) very slow fps, very bad buffer speed and camera lockup while buffering. EVF is very laggy with. Noticeable blackout. 600 f4 very expensive, 200-600 not her preferred wildlife range, AF not as good as other options.
3/ R5 with EF600f4 and RF 800 f11. Perfect combination of AF, image quality, lens options and usability. Still derides DR (seriously!) and battery life, but if you are using a 600mm f4 without a grip I think you need to expect that! She actually preferred the RF 800 f11 over the Sony 200-600 primarily because of the focal length and the usability of the thing, she pointed out you can easily take it on a casual walk and get very good images with it.

 

[AlanF]

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 and EF 600 f4 III. You might find it an interesting post - I certainly did.

Here's the link:

I eventually watched it, and have some comments to make. Firstly, the Sony birds in flight shooters don't favour the A7RIV because it is laggy and there is an AF problem with it and the 200-600mm. They use the Sony A9 or A9II, which has a slight edge on the R5 for AF and tracking but has inferior resolution. It works very well with the 200-600mm. The 800mm is a fantastic lens for the price and weight. But, it's not the first choice for me for BIF as I find 800mm gives too narrow a field of view and I can handle only distant slow moving moving birds with it. I am finding the R5 with the 400mm DO II a really good combination for BIF as the AF is so fast and precise and the IQ so good. The R5 is also excellent with the 100-400mm II and from what I have seen with the 100-500mm.

 

[AlanF]

I understand it is very difficult to see past the douchiness sometimes, how many shots do we have to see of that @!ing BMW? But she was asking a question a lot of people are asking themselves at the moment, can MILC’s replace DSLR’s for general use (resounding yes) and specialist applications, in her case big tele wildlife? Again the answer is yes. The R5 and EF600 f4 easily outperformed the D850 and the Nikon 600 f4 but the availability and usability of the RF800 f11 gave the R5 a distinct advantage over the other systems.

In a nutshell, to prevent anybody having to watch her repeatedly bang lenses against the trunk sill and opening:-
1/ D850 and 600f4, her current wildlife kit, falls down on size and weight and the AF is not up to current standards.
2/ Sony α7R IV and 200-600 and 600 f4, get DR (seriously!) very slow fps, very bad buffer speed and camera lockup while buffering. 600 f4 very expensive, 200-600 not her preferred wildlife range, AF not as good as other options.
3/ R5 with EF600f4 and RF 800 f11. Perfect combination of AF, image quality, lens options and usability. Still derides DR (seriously!) and battery life, but if you are using a 600mm f4 without a grip I think you need to expect that! She actually preferred the RF 800 f11 over the Sony 200-600 primarily because of the focal length and the usability of the thing, she pointed out you can easily take it on a casual walk and get very good images with it.

Our posts crossed in the ether, and I'll comment further on what you recounted she made.
Her comments on the Nikon are based on using a 600 f/4 lens. The D850 with the 500PF is a better combination than with the 600 f4 for enthusiasts like me and superior to the A7RIV +200-600mm because the lens is much lighter than the Sony 200-600mm and the AF is better. On the D500 there is basically unlimited buffer. Choose the right lens and Nikon is still up there. The keen guys, as I wrote, use the A9 not the A7RIV for BIF but the pixels are too few.
I am getting excellent battery life with the R5, and carrying spare batteries is no big deal. The DR of the R5 is excellent.
The R5 with EF600f4 and RF 800 f11 is not the perfect combination of AF, image quality, lens options and usability. For most people, the 800 plus a zoom is far more flexible, cheaper and lighter. For me, the 400 f/4 plus TCs is more flexible than the 800mm - but at a very large cost is cash and weight.

 

[privatebydesign]

Our posts crossed in the ether, and I'll comment further on what you recounted she made.
Her comments on the Nikon are based on using a 600 f/4 lens. The D850 with the 500PF is a better combination than with the 600 f4 for enthusiasts like me and superior to the A7RIV +200-600mm because the lens is much lighter than the Sony 200-600mm and the AF is better. On the D500 there is basically unlimited buffer. Choose the right lens and Nikon is still up there. The keen guys, as I wrote, use the A9 not the A7RIV for BIF but the pixels are too few.
I am getting excellent battery life with the R5, and carrying spare batteries is no big deal. The DR of the R5 is excellent.
The R5 with EF600f4 and RF 800 f11 is not the perfect combination of AF, image quality, lens options and usability. For most people, the 800 plus a zoom is far more flexible, cheaper and lighter. For me, the 400 f/4 plus TCs is more flexible than the 800mm - but at a very large cost is cash and weight.

Of course these things end up being so personal it is almost freakish if you find somebody with the same equipment and the same shooting scenarios as yourself. Pointing out the D500 and 500PF would be better for her than the D850 and 600 f4 is obvious, but so would be her retort, iso performance with a crop sensor, which as we all know is moot if you end up cropping your ff capture anyway!

 

[AlanF]

Of course these things end up being so personal it is almost freakish if you find somebody with the same equipment and the same shooting scenarios as yourself. Pointing out the D500 and 500PF would be better for her than the D850 and 600 f4 is obvious, but so would be her retort, iso performance with a crop sensor, which as we all know is moot if you end up cropping your ff capture anyway!

I did say first the D850 + 500PF so it was FF vs FF there. But, agreed on other points. Her comparisons were even more arbitrary - the A7RIV (with its known faults) and the 200-600mm zoom vs the R5 with a fixed 800/11 lens. These YouTubes are not proper well-researched comparisons but fragments thrown out to keep people watching advertising.

 

[ERHP]

Still lugging the R5/600 II combo around with this last weekend being out in the local Cuyamaca range. On my way to try catching some bucks I came across a dozen or so tom turkeys and decided to see how close I could get. They were interested in feeding in the vicinity of a fallen pine and I managed to get into the shadow of a standing pine. After an hour and a half, the sun finally began to drop behind the mountains and my 'cover' was gone, lol, but not before I took too many turkey shots. Strangely I kept thinking about the 1st season South Park episode with the genetically altered turkey horde...

R5 600 II w/1.4X III 1/2000 : f/8 : ISO 1000

 

[Click]

Beautiful picture. Well done, ERHP.

 

[ERHP]

Thanks Click!

 

[ISv]

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.

" I've seen a few Buffleheads in posts recently and I'd love to see them in the flesh" - and you probably would like to see them in breeding plumage (like on the photo posted from bhf3737). When they come here for wintering (in non-breeding plumage, +/- regularly but in very small ##) they are still cute little ducks but far from the beauty of the male breeders...

 

[ISv]

Didn't have an opportunity for real shooting today. These are from the very neighborhood (both camera and the photog should go at least once a week for practice or they get rusty). Common Waxbill and Red-crested Cardinal - so busy feeding in the grass to realy pay attention to me (no complains off course!).

 

[Click]

Very nice shots, ISv.

 

[Jack Douglas]

View attachment 194048View attachment 194049View attachment 194050

...three successive images (each 0.167 second apart; 6 fps I guess)--processed to brighten the hungry cedar waxing shown in each pic.

I've seen this several times with more than one species--the berry is in the bird's mouth before being flipped in the air and then captured again mid-air before it disappears.

Thanks for this little corner of the internet. The entertainment value during these COVID times is terrific...and I often learn a thing or two as well! Bravo

I thought I was so lucky with this but I'm learning it's a common occurrence. I have two shots perfectly mid-beak so far. Of course it was pure luck because I only saw it after downloading the files.

Jack

 

[Jack Douglas]

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.

View attachment 194068

I was almost certain you had sold it?? How do you get this display with the bird in exactly the same position?

Jack

 

[Jack Douglas]

And ... I'm still constantly finding this thread in Spam, using Firefox. I have repeatedly indicated it's not spam and even put the thread address in my saved addresses. Can anyone suggest a sure fire solution?

Jack

 

[Click]

Beautiful picture. Well done, Jack.

 

[ISv]

And ... I'm still constantly finding this thread in Spam, using Firefox. I have repeatedly indicated it's not spam and even put the thread address in my saved addresses. Can anyone suggest a sure fire solution?

Jack

I'm not the right person to answer your question but I'm using Firefox too (Windows 10) - and no problems at all?!

 

[AlanF]

I was almost certain you had sold it?? How do you get this display with the bird in exactly the same position?

Jack

Your memory is still functioning correctly, I had. This is a used one I bought from our top on-line dealer who is running a 45 day no quibble return. It is a very sharp copy at 800mm and it looks like a keeper despite my weight reservations. The AF at 800mm f/8 on my DSLRs used to be erratic. On the R5 it’s very precise and fast. You will enjoy yours. I cropped the pigeon to be in the dead centre manually.

 

[josephandrews222]

In Feb of 2017 I posted some cedar waxwing pix. After a hint from Alan F, I was motivated to look back at these images and see if any were suitable for .gif treatment.

Here goes (first effort)...