Show your Bird Portraits

Today I spent to much time chasing geckos... Only these birds: for the Blue-billed White tern I wasn't prepared when it started flying around - too close distance! And Spotted dove.DSC_4071_DxO.jpgDSC_4096_DxO.jpgDSC_4120_DxO.jpgDSC_4123_DxO.jpgDSC_4225_DxO.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8 users
Upvote 0
It's always exciting for us to see the first Cuckoo of the year - they are very elusive and they are easily heard but not seen. Ours was yesterday. I am posting the not at all exciting images of a very far away bird to show that the R7 + RF 100-400mm used by wife (the first shot) gives results hardly distinguishable from that of my much more expensive and heavier R5ii + RF 100-500mm (both very heavily cropped and not reduced in size). At that distance and image size, you are looking at pixel-peeping resolution.


3R3A8788-DxO_Cuckoo.jpg6L8A0308-DxO_Cuckoo.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Upvote 0
It's always exciting for us to see the first Cuckoo of the year - they are very elusive and they are easily heard but not seen. Ours was yesterday. I am posting the not at all exciting images of a very far away bird to show that the R7 + RF 100-400mm used by wife (the first shot) gives results hardly distinguishable from that of my much more expensive and heavier R5ii + RF 100-500mm (both very heavily cropped and not reduced in size). At that distance and image size, you are looking at pixel-peeping resolution.


View attachment 229268View attachment 229269
The 100-400 even holds up pretty well with the R7 and 1.4 extender. Some diffraction loss, but otherwise decent and sooooo light.
 
Upvote 0
It's always exciting for us to see the first Cuckoo of the year - they are very elusive and they are easily heard but not seen. Ours was yesterday. I am posting the not at all exciting images of a very far away bird to show that the R7 + RF 100-400mm used by wife (the first shot) gives results hardly distinguishable from that of my much more expensive and heavier R5ii + RF 100-500mm (both very heavily cropped and not reduced in size). At that distance and image size, you are looking at pixel-peeping resolution.


View attachment 229268View attachment 229269
These are very difficult to approach...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
It's always exciting for us to see the first Cuckoo of the year - they are very elusive and they are easily heard but not seen. Ours was yesterday. I am posting the not at all exciting images of a very far away bird to show that the R7 + RF 100-400mm used by wife (the first shot) gives results hardly distinguishable from that of my much more expensive and heavier R5ii + RF 100-500mm (both very heavily cropped and not reduced in size). At that distance and image size, you are looking at pixel-peeping resolution.


View attachment 229268View attachment 229269
Thanks for that direct, in-the-field, comparison! It's always great to have good data like this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Do you think we should complain to Canon that our well-used 200-800s haven't broken in two?
Even though the RF 200-800mm is not an L lens, it is well built and mine has survived a lot of rough handling and inclement weather in the years that I have had it. However, I always retract the lens and tighten the zoom ring when I am not actively photographing.
 
Upvote 0
A sereies of yellowhammers (Emberiza citrinella).
R6m2+100-500+2x@1000mm.
I blame the extender for the loss of detail. It's on its way to Canon Service now.
The photos in the tree were taken with 1/6400 and leaning against the roof of my car. No chance for blur because of shake.

kestrel_2026_02.JPGkestrel_2026_03.JPGkestrel_2026_04.JPGkestrel_2026_05.JPG
 
Upvote 0