Show your Bird Portraits

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,843
12,088
A couple of Gadwalls 65m away taken with RF 100-400mm on R5. Usual heavy crop.

309A0784-DxO_gadwalls.jpg
 

tron

EOS R5
CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
4,984
1,344
Alan for the result is more than excellent!

Now half-joking, heavy crop or not, are you sure that at 65m that these photos aren't taken with the RF100-500 and the RF2X ? :D

Fully joking: Doubled with Topaz- Gigapixel :ROFLMAO:

You have certainly put the new 100-400 to good use...
 
  • Haha
Reactions: EricN

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,843
12,088
Alan for the result is more than excellent!

Now half-joking, heavy crop or not, are you sure that at 65m that these photos aren't taken with the RF100-500 and the RF2X ? :D

Fully joking: Doubled with Topaz- Gigapixel :ROFLMAO:

You have certainly put the new 100-400 to good use...
Here is the full image and a screen shot showing the distance. OK, I exaggerated: it was only 64.33m not 65. DxO Deepprime noise reduction and default settings for sharpening.

309A0784-DxO_gadwalls-full_small.jpg
Screenshot 2021-11-15 at 20.42.13.png
 

tron

EOS R5
CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
4,984
1,344
Here is the full image and a screen shot showing the distance. OK, I exaggerated: it was only 64.33m not 65. DxO Deepprime noise reduction and default settings for sharpening.

View attachment 201210 View attachment 201211
Excellent photo as always Alan. Coming back from the second consecutive excursion I feel I want to rest (and PP my photos) so the
Here is the full image and a screen shot showing the distance. OK, I exaggerated: it was only 64.33m not 65. DxO Deepprime noise reduction and default settings for sharpening.

View attachment 201210 View attachment 201211
Thanks! I guess I had a wrong impression of the distance. I started searching dng images for metadata info about distance and I found a Pelican I shot at 75m at 500mm and I made sense of the distance.

Here at 100% crop
crop100-1.jpg

and here the full frame:
full-frame.jpg


So thanks for that. I was under the impression that the distances had to be closer. I had to read it to believe it was 75.
 
Last edited:

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,843
12,088
Excellent photo as always Alan. Coming back from the second consecutive excursion I feel I want to rest (and PP my photos) so the

Thanks! I guess I had a wrong impression of the distance. I started searching dng images for metadata info about distance and I found a Pelican I shot at 75m at 500mm and I made sense of the distance.

Here at 100% crop View attachment 201214
and here the full frame:
View attachment 201213

So thanks for that. I was under the impression that the distances had to be closer. I had to read it to believe it was 75.
I like the full frame.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EricN and tron

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,843
12,088
Some bright sun early this morning, and I decided to wheel out the RF 800 (I was on my bike). I have mixed feelings about the lens. Even though it's lighter than the RF 100-500mm + TC, it feels a lot heavier to hand hold steady as the weight is further forward, and the IS is not as good. But, it delivers the goods and I was able to frame and get a sharp shot of a Starling in an autumnal setting (heavily cropped).

309A0852-DxO_RF800_Starling.jpg
 

ISv

"The equipment that matters, is you"
CR Pro
Apr 30, 2017
1,511
3,512
Excellent photo as always Alan. Coming back from the second consecutive excursion I feel I want to rest (and PP my photos) so the

Thanks! I guess I had a wrong impression of the distance. I started searching dng images for metadata info about distance and I found a Pelican I shot at 75m at 500mm and I made sense of the distance.

Here at 100% crop View attachment 201214
and here the full frame:
View attachment 201213

So thanks for that. I was under the impression that the distances had to be closer. I had to read it to believe it was 75.

You may get the sense of the distance but you hardly can get a sense for the real conditions between the object and your lens: The temperature of the ground/water and the difference between that temperature and the temperature of the air above are of the most important variables of what I call "air quality". It's a complex of variables but these are the most important to me. Even at 20-30 meters distance with the same lens/camera you may get rather different (I mean very bad...) results at worst conditions. And even 6-10 meters in extreme conditions are something you simply can't (completely) eliminate no meter of what lens you are using! On other hand - at that long distances even not that big disturbance in the air could have a devastating effect on your photos - too much disturbed air between the object and the lens.
My point is that for these distances yours and Alan's photos are reasonable good but you hardly can expect the same results at different conditions (and it's not necessarily your lens foul).
 
  • Like
Reactions: tron and EricN

tron

EOS R5
CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
4,984
1,344
You may get the sense of the distance but you hardly can get a sense for the real conditions between the object and your lens: The temperature of the ground/water and the difference between that temperature and the temperature of the air above are of the most important variables of what I call "air quality". It's a complex of variables but these are the most important to me. Even at 20-30 meters distance with the same lens/camera you may get rather different (I mean very bad...) results at worst conditions. And even 6-10 meters in extreme conditions are something you simply can't (completely) eliminate no meter of what lens you are using! On other hand - at that long distances even not that big disturbance in the air could have a devastating effect on your photos - too much disturbed air between the object and the lens.
My point is that for these distances yours and Alan's photos are reasonable good but you hardly can expect the same results at different conditions (and it's not necessarily your lens foul).
I remember 5.5 years ago I took some shots at noon and all my gear seemed like garbage. I used it in the afternoon and all was well :)

That comes back as an issue sometimes because I cannot always shoot only in the morning and/or in the afternoon.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JPAZ and EricN

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,843
12,088
Another autumnal shot, this time back with the RF 100-500mm + 2xTC. Chaffinches have been rare this year and last, but this male was on my apple tree for quite a while, allowing me to change lenses and compare with the RF 800mm and RF 800mm + 1.4xTC. Not much to choose between them in practice.

309A1560_DxO_chaffinch_autumnal_1_SHls-1.jpg