Super shots of a beautiful bird! You are right - that 100-500mm is so easy to carry around and is pretty close to that wonderful 500 of yours in sharpness. And yes, a bit of stopping down does help with these birds as they are not 2-dimensional.The most beautiful specimen of Cattle Egret I was able to capture up to date - full breading plumage.
Unfortunately I was very restricted in means of framing (I have no idea how many times something in my brain was asking "why didn't you take the zoom?". But just the word "zoom" was causing some slight pain in my shoulders: Nikon 200-500 - I have really good copy (IQ) and as heavy as all other copies...). Canon guys with their 100-500 Rf should be very happy (well, I read somewhere here that that lens is "crippled" - because of the f7.1 on the long end!). At close to ~medium distances I usually shoot at f8, rarely at f7.1 (at 500mm) but it could be just me... On other hands I have to recognize that if you are going after some "special" effects or shooting from longer distances it could be +/- problem (I avoid shooting from long distances - at least on my location you are getting to much disturbed air between the lens and the object!).
Anyway - here is my Cattle Egret:
View attachment 203179View attachment 203180View attachment 203181View attachment 203182View attachment 203183View attachment 203184
"...but this time I had a shot with a little help from my wife - I asked her to go around and to point my binoculars in the direction of the treeBrown creeper (Certhia americana)
One of the birds that is always on the other side, but this time I had a shot with a little help from my wife - I asked her to go around and to point my binoculars in the direction of the tree
View attachment 203230
"
!
Thanks Alan! I suspect your very kind words are (well, at least partly
) influenced by my opinion about Canon 100-500 Rf
but I didn't say anything that I don't really think! Even my 200-500 would be better for the framing in that event (and it's really very good between 200-400mm) without that much of visible lost of IQ. For such a situations when you are strongly restricted in your choice of the point of shooting or when you are shooting relatively big birds from rather close distance I always would prefer the zoom! For small birds the prime (500 PF) is hands down better... Or for shooting biger birds from some distance! Yours 100-500 is extremely versatile lens (incl. that amazing MFD for insects or any other closeups)!
Hey - I really like these photos a lot: you don't choose where your bird is used to feed or where it will land! Off course sitting on a branch with clear/separating background the photos will look much better but you have to wait for such a chance (with some rare seed-eaters you may wait for years...)!
Nice shots ISv.The most beautiful specimen of Cattle Egret I was able to capture up to date - full breading plumage.
Unfortunately I was very restricted in means of framing (I have no idea how many times something in my brain was asking "why didn't you take the zoom?". But just the word "zoom" was causing some slight pain in my shoulders: Nikon 200-500 - I have really good copy (IQ) and as heavy as all other copies...). Canon guys with their 100-500 Rf should be very happy (well, I read somewhere here that that lens is "crippled" - because of the f7.1 on the long end
Anyway - here is my Cattle Egret:
View attachment 203179View attachment 203180View attachment 203181View attachment 203182View attachment 203183View attachment 203184
Nice shot ERHP.A California Quail mid serenade. I've tried a number of blinds and find being still works almost as well, even using the mechanical shutter.
R5 RF600 w/1.4X 1/2000 : f/8 : ISO 800
