Show your Bird Portraits

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
1,210
2,073
Kentucky, USA
Question for DxO users: Is the DeepPrime in DxO PhotoLab the same as the DxO PureRaw? I'm trying to justify the $129 price tag on DxO PureRaw after using the 30 day trial. I thought it was a great tool to reduce noise and provide a much more clear image in Lightroom. It seems you get a lot more with PhotoLab but if the DeepPrime denoise tools are available in PhotoLab I don't understand why one would spend the same amount of money on PureRaw.
I don't know anything about PureRaw. Maybe it's there just as a plug-in for Lightroom? (I'm just guessing here). I do enjoy DXO PL4 very much as I'm not an Adobe user. But I have seen it bog down if you work on a folder with a really high number of images (for those cases I use FastRaw Viewer to rank & reduce the # of photos first), but I still end up using PL4 and am quite happy with it. I guess the question might be whether you want to consider an alternate post path instead of staying with Adobe?
 
Last edited:

Click

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 29, 2012
14,770
3,628
Canada
A loon kept me company, swimming close by my kayak.
Loon.jpg
 

macrunning

Enjoying the Ride
Feb 12, 2021
173
444
WA
I don't anything about PureRaw. Maybe it's there just as a plug-in for Lightroom? (I'm just guessing here). I do enjoy DXO PL4 very much as I'm not an Adobe user. But I have seen it bog down if you work on a folder with a really high number of images (for those cases I use FastRaw Viewer to rank & reduce the # of photos first), but I still end up using PL4 and am quite happy with it. I guess the question might be whether you want to consider an alternate post path instead of staying with Adobe?
No, I'm definitely staying with Adobe. I've been using Photoshop for 20+ years now! I also use Illustrator and Lightroom more recently. Was a web developer/designer fo 17 years too so Dreamweaver got heavy use as well and Adobe XD more recently. PureRaw is it's own application and provides a much cleaner .dng file to work with in Lightroom. Lightroom and Canon do not seem to be on the same page and the .CR3 files are very noisy! So what I found was I would use DxO PureRaw (with DeepPrime settings) for high ISO images and then import them into LIghtroom to make some moderate adjustments. I then bring them into Photoshop and depending on what I plan on doing may either work the image into a composite or what I found is I would still go into Topaz Denoise on those high ISO images to still clear out some of the noise and adjust colors/sharpness from there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: usern4cr

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,695
11,722
Some comments on the RF 800 f/11 versus the 100-500mm. I picked up a used but absolutely mint copy of the 800 that I have tested in the field on birds and at home with charts. I do like the lens very much. To summarise briefly, it outresolves the 100-500mm + RF 1.4x at 700mm. Put the RF 2x TC on the 100-500 and the situation changes. At 1000mm, the 100-500mm outresolves the bare 800mm f/11 on charts and in the in field. Put the RF 1.4x on the 800 to give 1120mm, the two lenses are very well matched - the 1120mm may resolve a teeny bit more on charts but the 1000mm seems slightly sharper in the field. Putting the 2xTC on the 800mm to give 1600/22 is a waste of time compared with the 1.4x. The big downside for me is the 6m mfd of the 800mm, which hinders my photographing dragonflies and butterflies. If you don't have the 100-500mm, then the 800mm f/11 is a very cheap way of getting a prime that matches the 100-500mm at long focal lengths. If you do have a 100-500mm, then you have to weigh up how much you would use the prime. So, I now have the dilemma of whether to keep it or sell it on.
 

bhf3737

---
CR Pro
Sep 9, 2015
673
1,552
Calgary, Canada
www.flickr.com
Some comments on the RF 800 f/11 versus the 100-500mm. I picked up a used but absolutely mint copy of the 800 that I have tested in the field on birds and at home with charts. I do like the lens very much. To summarise briefly, it outresolves the 100-500mm + RF 1.4x at 700mm. Put the RF 2x TC on the 100-500 and the situation changes. At 1000mm, the 100-500mm outresolves the bare 800mm f/11 on charts and in the in field. Put the RF 1.4x on the 800 to give 1120mm, the two lenses are very well matched - the 1120mm may resolve a teeny bit more on charts but the 1000mm seems slightly sharper in the field. Putting the 2xTC on the 800mm to give 1600/22 is a waste of time compared with the 1.4x. The big downside for me is the 6m mfd of the 800mm, which hinders my photographing dragonflies and butterflies. If you don't have the 100-500mm, then the 800mm f/11 is a very cheap way of getting a prime that matches the 100-500mm at long focal lengths. If you do have a 100-500mm, then you have to weigh up how much you would use the prime. So, I now have the dilemma of whether to keep it or sell it on.
Another point with RF800 seems to be the build quality. After moderate use, my RF800 now shows softness on the left side of the pictures, for no apparent reason that I can think of. Primes should be more resilient to mechanical misalignment than zooms, I guess. No weather sealing may be another issue with RF800 down the road. I'll send it to be repaired now. For the image quality, weight and price, it is still a bargain.
 

HenryL

EOS R5
CR Pro
Apr 1, 2020
289
749
I recently rented the 2xTC to try with my 100-500, and also rented the RF800 for a comparison. I agree with the previous assessments. RF800 picture quality is impressive on it's own and a worthwhile addition to ones arsenal if the 100-500 is out of reach for ones budget. Choosing between the two options was easy for me, though. I found the RF800 focus speed lacking even without a TC attached. For static targets (or very slow moving), it was surprisingly good. Osprey aren't especially speedy, but the RF800 didn't keep up. The 100-500 + either converter focused significantly faster, and tracked better, than the 800 across the board. Haven't ordered the 2xTC yet, probably will have it by next weekend. I mean, why put off the inevitable? ;)
 

ISv

"The equipment that matters, is you"
CR Pro
Apr 30, 2017
1,473
3,372
Some comments on the RF 800 f/11 versus the 100-500mm. I picked up a used but absolutely mint copy of the 800 that I have tested in the field on birds and at home with charts. I do like the lens very much. To summarise briefly, it outresolves the 100-500mm + RF 1.4x at 700mm. Put the RF 2x TC on the 100-500 and the situation changes. At 1000mm, the 100-500mm outresolves the bare 800mm f/11 on charts and in the in field. Put the RF 1.4x on the 800 to give 1120mm, the two lenses are very well matched - the 1120mm may resolve a teeny bit more on charts but the 1000mm seems slightly sharper in the field. Putting the 2xTC on the 800mm to give 1600/22 is a waste of time compared with the 1.4x. The big downside for me is the 6m mfd of the 800mm, which hinders my photographing dragonflies and butterflies. If you don't have the 100-500mm, then the 800mm f/11 is a very cheap way of getting a prime that matches the 100-500mm at long focal lengths. If you do have a 100-500mm, then you have to weigh up how much you would use the prime. So, I now have the dilemma of whether to keep it or sell it on.
"If you don't have the 100-500mm, then the 800mm f/11 is a very cheap way of getting a prime that matches the 100-500mm at long focal lengths." - I think this is an answer to your question - you would miss the flexibility of 100-500. On other hand you know better - you have all these lenses (incl. 100-400) in your hands! Actually I have no idea what you still have in your collection - you went over a lot of choices. I mean you are like an encyclopedia about all this stuff:), and I think if you preserve your cold approach (instead of "OMG - I just want it!!!) you have an obvious choice...
I know it's a hard choice: If I go to Europe next year I have to figure out what are my priorities at first: small birds (or medium sized birds from longer distances) = 500 prime.
Or Butterflies/Insects, bigger birds (but also birds listed above - in somewhat reasonably closer distances) = 200-500!
500 prime is hands down better for BIF and for small birds/ or medium sized from longer distances. Just lacks the flexibility.
I'm not going to drag both lenses in a trip to Europe, I have to grab one of them:(! But honestly I would like to have both of them + one more (for landscape!). Go figure :sick:!
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,695
11,722
"If you don't have the 100-500mm, then the 800mm f/11 is a very cheap way of getting a prime that matches the 100-500mm at long focal lengths." - I think this is an answer to your question - you would miss the flexibility of 100-500. On other hand you know better - you have all these lenses (incl. 100-400) in your hands! Actually I have no idea what you still have in your collection - you went over a lot of choices. I mean you are like an encyclopedia about all this stuff:), and I think if you preserve your cold approach (instead of "OMG - I just want it!!!) you have an obvious choice...
I know it's a hard choice: If I go to Europe next year I have to figure out what are my priorities at first: small birds (or medium sized birds from longer distances) = 500 prime.
Or Butterflies/Insects, bigger birds (but also birds listed above - in somewhat reasonably closer distances) = 200-500!
500 prime is hands down better for BIF and for small birds/ or medium sized from longer distances. Just lacks the flexibility.
I'm not going to drag both lenses in a trip to Europe, I have to grab one of them:(! But honestly I would like to have both of them + one more (for landscape!). Go figure :sick:!
For our last three major birding holidays abroad, my wife and I took a 100-400mm zoom each and I left the 400mm DO II prime at home - after the experience gained from the trips before that, based on flexibility of use and weight - a highly personal decision of course. The situation with the 500 PF is different, it is so light and so sharp at its mfd of 3m that I can use it for insects and birds and I would have travelled with that. I have sold off all the other telephotos I rarely used and the 800mm will join them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ISv and jprusa

ISv

"The equipment that matters, is you"
CR Pro
Apr 30, 2017
1,473
3,372
For our last three major birding holidays abroad, my wife and I took a 100-400mm zoom each and I left the 400mm DO II prime at home - after the experience gained from the trips before that, based on flexibility of use and weight - a highly personal decision of course. The situation with the 500 PF is different, it is so light and so sharp at its mfd of 3m that I can use it for insects and birds and I would have travelled with that. I have sold off all the other telephotos I rarely used and the 800mm will join them.
OK, all this makes sense! The Only problem is that my 200-500 is giving me consistently better results at it's MFD than the 500 prime (MFD)! Even at 500mm! The difference is getting more than obvious with some bigger objects (like some medium to larger butterflies/dragonflies) when you can zoom down to 350-450 mm. I think it's because of these ~80cm MF distance and the air between. In colder climates it may not make that big difference. On other hand - yeah, 500mm prime is much lighter and it makes significantly better photos with small to medium sized birds (I still have to find a bigger size bird to check it from appropriate distance - I mean to get it in frame:)).

Huh!!! Now I recall that I may have some such photos (and a lot of them!!!). And that bird is known (size e.t.c.) to a lot of folks! Distance ~13 meters.

DSC_0629_DxO.jpg
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,695
11,722
OK, all this makes sense! The Only problem is that my 200-500 is giving me consistently better results at it's MFD than the 500 prime (MFD)! Even at 500mm! The difference is getting more than obvious with some bigger objects (like some medium to larger butterflies/dragonflies) when you can zoom down to 350-450 mm. I think it's because of these ~80cm MF distance and the air between. In colder climates it may not make that big difference. On other hand - yeah, 500mm prime is much lighter and it makes significantly better photos with small to medium sized birds (I still have to find a bigger size bird to check it from appropriate distance - I mean to get it in frame:)).

Huh!!! Now I recall that I may have some such photos (and a lot of them!!!). And that bird is known (size e.t.c.) to a lot of folks! Distance ~13 meters.

View attachment 198236
I am sure he can swallow that! The 100-500mm is a game changer for me because it’s nearly as sharp as the 500 PF and just as light, and it’s still very sharp at 1000mm with the 2x TC.
 

ISv

"The equipment that matters, is you"
CR Pro
Apr 30, 2017
1,473
3,372
I am sure he can swallow that! The 100-500mm is a game changer for me because it’s nearly as sharp as the 500 PF and just as light, and it’s still very sharp at 1000mm with the 2x TC.
It did!
Well, it seems you got your dream (for now:p!) lens! I wouldn't be surprised if Canon puts on the market something new and better than Nikon's 500 PF - they are really good in this game!
Any way - 100-500 will have it's place just because of it's flexibility (and really good IQ - not only by your words but also the photos posted around)! One day it most probably will be outperformed by another Canon zoom of that class and... so on. It's how they keep us on the hook (personally I have nothing against that development!).
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,695
11,722
It did!
Well, it seems you got your dream (for now:p!) lens! I wouldn't be surprised if Canon puts on the market something new and better than Nikon's 500 PF - they are really good in this game!
Any way - 100-500 will have it's place just because of it's flexibility (and really good IQ - not only by your words but also the photos posted around)! One day it most probably will be outperformed by another Canon zoom of that class and... so on. It's how they keep us on the hook (personally I have nothing against that development!).
Absolutely! I have worked my way through a series of ever better zoom and prime lenses and have had great fun with each, all sold on for others to enjoy. And, I would have been happy to have continued using them except that temptation came along...
 
  • Like
Reactions: ISv

Click

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 29, 2012
14,770
3,628
Canada
While my focus of the last couple of weeks has been on a much larger bird's nest and its recently fledged occupants, I did manage to slip in some of the smaller birds. Here is a male Western Bluebird in one of the still budding out Black Oak trees.
Beautiful shot, ERHP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ERHP