Show your Bird Portraits

pape2

EOS 90D
Mar 19, 2021
105
135
FRamed leg off:LOL:. Ok i guess RF800 small focus area can be problem with big birds. Could use eye af with RP too,cranes moves head fast when looking food :) This time they didnt bothered shutter sound ,prolly when busy with food looking cant listen so good .

kkurki.JPG
 

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
992
1,394
Kentucky, USA
Well, here I will post photos from today (I was busy and these were taken in the UH Campus when I finished today). In PL4 the contrast was at 1 (microcontrast - auto - depends on the ISO!). The "total sharpness" was at 0.66 - these are my very standard settings*. And because in some cases the bird's eyes were in very dark: in the "local adjustments" I pushed the "shades" (for the eyes!) a little bit. And since I have no RF5 and I'm in the "local adjustments" already, I add some little sharpens in the eyes!
*- means that sometimes I'm going to 0.50 (like very stable tripod - I mean it stays on very stable ground! The tripod itself is very stable). In this particular case the tripod was not at all balanced neither on stable ground. And pretty good winds - the non-flying birds were somewhat flying:)!

The idea that the feathers are so soft (because we use(d) them for pillows) is kind of anecdotical at least: what kind of feathers exactly? Are all the bird's feathers so soft, and what kind of bird do you mean?
In the photos below the sharpness of the feathers looks pretty much as I saw it TTL.

View attachment 197050 View attachment 197051 View attachment 197052 View attachment 197053 View attachment 197054 View attachment 197055
Some times, some guys are using to much sharpening, sometimes they use to much contrast and in the worst case - microcontrast. Some (hmm... AI for example) "sharpening" programs are using to much microcontrast (creates a sense for "sharpness" but not a real sharpness) and I definitely don't like them!

And finally - it's a legitimate question and you are very welcome to ask such a questions! Even here:p! What is reasonable is reasonable!!! On other hand - see what was Alan's answer - it makes a lot of sense too!
That's a beautiful amount of closeup detail with nice blurred background, ISv. Lovely photos!
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
7,856
8,914
I had a disappointing morning shooting Grey Herons with the R5/100-500. The Grey Herons were against a grey background of water. The eyeAF wouldn't detect the eye or head at distances where it normally would, and spot AF was inaccurate, and very, very few were sharp. The most successful shots were of one flying. Maybe more contrast with background is needed.

309A9538-DxO_Grey_heron_500_ls2cmc.jpg
309A9493-DxO_Grey_heron_500_flying_side_on_ls2c_vg.jpg
309A9500-DxO_Grey_heron_500_flying_face_on_ls2cmc.jpg
 

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
992
1,394
Kentucky, USA
I had a disappointing morning shooting Grey Herons with the R5/100-500. The Grey Herons were against a grey background of water. The eyeAF wouldn't detect the eye or head at distances where it normally would, and spot AF was inaccurate, and very, very few were sharp. The most successful shots were of one flying. Maybe more contrast with background is needed.

View attachment 197069 View attachment 197070 View attachment 197071
Wow - if that was a "disappointing" morning for you, I'll really enjoy seeing the "exciting" mornings you have to come! (Well done!)

By the way, I often find that the contrast with the background, or the brightness of the background vs subject in (or partially in) shade, to be my main obstacle to a good photo. And I do sometimes find the R5 to have trouble with animal eye (or spot) AF. That's where I'm hoping a future QP AF will fix those issues.
 

Click

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 29, 2012
14,006
2,100
Canada
This is the last of the photos, (hopefully) good enough to show, for that one Winter day.
(some were shown previously as I considered them for the little show I contributed to, but I include them here for completeness)
(R5 & RF 100-500L)


Beautiful pictures.
d055.gif
I really like your shots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: usern4cr

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
7,856
8,914
Great shots alan and user4rc. Af is tricky, dunno if i got wrong settings somewhere when locking tracking to head it soon wanders to body. View attachment 197081
It's always nice to see Cranes in Europe. You have the head of the front one nicely in focus. Depth of field is a problem with birds as large as cranes unless they are very far away when using telephotos.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pape2

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
7,856
8,914
There are a few who post here using the Nikon 500mm f/5.6 PF, which is about as sharp the very expensive Nikon 500mm f/4. I had the chance to test the 500PF on the Nikon D850 against the RF 100-500/R5 as a pair of Mallards settled on my neighbour's lawn and were not disturbed by me. Here are some collages of 100% crops of the heads of the ducks at full size, taken from the full images which are reduced in size here. It's interesting to see how the zoom stacks up against one of the best 500mm primes. Both are really good, but do you think one has the edge (the crops from each camera are one above the other in the same order)? Vanilla output from PL4 with no additional sharpening.

Female_Mallard_full.jpg
Male_Mallard_full.jpg
Female_Mallard_CanonvsNikon.jpg
Male_Mallard_CanonvsNikon.jpg
 

pape2

EOS 90D
Mar 19, 2021
105
135
I think there is way how canon could make RF500 f5,6 what doesnt compete with big L s.
Could add same focus area what rf 800 got and talk mumbojumbo how beginners need intensified focus area for distant small birds etc . :p.
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
7,856
8,914
You can't go wrong with either of those lenses. I think the bare zoom is so close to the bare prime, that the versatility of zoom makes it my first choice for a days shooting but I have to say I am more than happy taking out either. It was same with the 100-400mm II vs the 400mm DO II but the zoom there is so much lighter. The prime pulls ahead with TCs, and a 1000mm f/11 would be a killer plus. However, this time last year at the beginning of lockdown, I was taking every day shots of Longtailed Tits flying into a nest in my garden with insects in their beaks. and I was getting sharp images of those insects using the 500PF. This year I am using the R5/100-500m but no Longtailed Tits. I don't know whether the 100-500mm could match these and would love to be able to find out.


Insects_in_beak1.jpg
 

john1970

EOS R5
CR Pro
Dec 27, 2015
149
157
Northeastern US
AlanF nice comparison. The top image, which I believe is the Nikon 500 mm PF, appears a bit sharper to me, but the 100-500 mm zoom is not bad by any means. I eagerly await the announcement of the RF 500 mm f4 especially if the rumors that it will be significantly lighter and shorter than the current EF version are true.
 

HenryL

EOS R5
CR Pro
Apr 1, 2020
197
453
Hiked a different section of the park this past Saturday, this trail being more densely wooded with pockets of water here and there. Came upon some Snowy Egrets with the sun peaking through the canopy. The stark contrast of the white birds in the dark surroundings really strikes me...and the reflections don't hurt either IMHO. These guys were skittish, and I struggled to find vantage points where reeds don't get in the way without spooking them.


R5_101_9412_DxO.jpg


R5_101_9470_DxO.jpg


R5_101_9538_M_DxO.jpg
 
Last edited:

digigal

Traveling the world one step at a time.
CR Pro
Aug 26, 2014
247
515
Great pictures from you guys recently, Alan, henry, & usern4cr. This is a Snowy that I took last mo in Fla who was defending his nesting site. I just love those guys--they're such divas when they are courting and nesting. Converted it to BW in LR because it got rid of the busy background.
We're leaving this week to photograph courting and nesting flamingo on the Yucatan peninsula (it should be insufferably hot and humid--ugh) so hope to have some of those to post soon. R5 + RF 100-500
Catherine
You, rang?.jpg
 
Last edited:
<-- start Taboola -->