Show your Bird Portraits

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

At last I have got close to a bird with the 400mm DO II and 5D IV. Singing is at 1/80 and the other at 1/125s hand held in the gloom. I don't agree with the complaints that the 5D IV is soft. Anyway, I am happy with the lens, its sharpness and IS, and the AF of the 5D IV.

Alan, that is a beautiful result. I too disagree that the images from the 5D IV are soft. It takes a slightly different approach to sharpen the images, though; one that I am still learning.

I think that people expect a huge difference at a pixel level when looking at images from a higher resolution body. When I first looked at images from the 5DsR I was unimpressed; at a pixel level images don't look any sharper. It is the shear NUMBER of pixels that add up amazing sharpness, though, which you see more when you reduce the image dimensions and look again.

 

[AlanF]

Hi Alan.
Very nice shots, looks like the lens is a goodun, pretty good technique too, were you using legs?

Cheers, Graham.

At last I have got close to a bird with the 400mm DO II and 5D IV. Singing is at 1/80 and the other at 1/125s hand held in the gloom. I don't agree with the complaints that the 5D IV is soft. Anyway, I am happy with the lens, its sharpness and IS, and the AF of the 5D IV.

Only my own legs!

Good to see/hear. Please try for some BIF with 800 for me and report your results. I know that's a tall order.

Jack

I went around this morning with the 400mm DO II + 1.4xTC on the 5D IV. The AF is what I was hoping for. It locked on much more precisely than my old 5D III, and current 5DS R and 7D II. The only one worth recording is of a pair of coots landing. It picked them up against the background, and I had time for just one shot.

 

[AlanF]

Thanks Dustin. I haven't got the processing under control yet. I am just using RAW, downloading with DPP 4.5, applying 4, 1, 1, for sharpening and 4, 4 for noise with no other processing. I'll get better noise and sharpness when DxO updates in mid-November.

 

[AlanF]

This is nothing special - it's just to show you can get a useful snap at the limits. The bearded tit is a 770x700 pixel dot from the middle of the 6720x4480 of the 5D IV. The AF picked out the bird from the complex background and the lens and camera gave very acceptable sharpness.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Thanks Alan, all this is positive. Meanwhile, I'll wait patiently for your 800mm BIF, or stills for that matter, since going from 600mm to 560mm was never my primary objective in forking out so much cash on the 400 DO II!

Clearly the 5D4 is a very good camera and I'm glad you're enjoying it.

Jack

 

[AlanF]

Thanks Alan, all this is positive. Meanwhile, I'll wait patiently for your 800mm BIF, or stills for that matter, since going from 600mm to 560mm was never my primary objective in forking out so much cash on the 400 DO II!

Clearly the 5D4 is a very good camera and I'm glad you're enjoying it.

Jack

When the migrating wildfowl start appearing, maybe. My rule of thumb for BIF is 400mm on crop and 600mm on FF for my best compromise on focal length and field of view. I'll be getting more comparisons for stills. The 800 is a definite increase in resolution so far, but that is for situations where features are relatively coarse.

 

[Valvebounce]

Hi Folks.
A couple I took with my new lens. Settings are available on the Flickr pages.

Gull with stolen crab, I saw him steal it but didn't capture the moment.
SE0A8621_DxO by Graham Stretch, on Flickr

Corvid trying to get his crab back, he kept tugging on the gulls tail but the gull wasn't going to give in. The tail tugs were real quick, over and done with in the blink of an eye.
SE0A8624_DxO by Graham Stretch, on Flickr

Cheers, Graham.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Valvebounce, looks like the lens is serving you very well!

Jack

 

[Valvebounce]

Hi Jack.
Thanks. It sure is serving well, straight out of the box I got a shot of a little bird with feather detail which I had never seen on any shot I had taken before.

Cheers, Graham.

Valvebounce, looks like the lens is serving you very well!

Jack

 

[Jack Douglas]

Hi Jack.
Thanks. It sure is serving well, straight out of the box I got a shot of a little bird with feather detail which I had never seen on any shot I had taken before.

Cheers, Graham.

Valvebounce, looks like the lens is serving you very well!

Jack

Careful, that sounds like the beginning of pixel peeping GAS!

Jack

 

[Valvebounce]

Thanks jack, but I think this lens was the result of longing to be able to at least get some way towards what I have seen to be possible from the 7DII body, this lens has shown me that in the right circumstances when Mars and Venus and Pluto and Micky all align I have a chance to get at least half way there! ;D
With the Σ150-500 there was a chance that if Popeye and Olivoil were also aligned with the other celestial bodies it would perform, but I had such a high fail percentage that I started suspecting the body.
Believe me I'm fully aware that this lens is not going to turn me in to a pro photographer, but it is reducing the tilt on the playing field just a bit.
GAS is limited by a finite pot of money and an Angela. :

Cheers, Graham.

Hi Jack.
Thanks. It sure is serving well, straight out of the box I got a shot of a little bird with feather detail which I had never seen on any shot I had taken before.

Cheers, Graham.

Valvebounce, looks like the lens is serving you very well!

Jack

Careful, that sounds like the beginning of pixel peeping GAS!

Jack

 

[dpc]

Broad-winged hawk: I was out on a local walking trail yesterday when I encountered this fellow. He allowed me to get within 3-4 metres before deciding he didn't like my company. I had a Fujifilm X-T10 and a 56mm f/1.2 lens with me, not a telephoto, so I was glad to be able to get these shots.

 

[AlanF]

Graham
I see you use f/8 with the 100-400mm II. I tend to use f/5.6. Do you find f/8 sharper or do you need mored depth of field?

 

[7DmkI]

Juvenile red winged blackbird.

 

[Valvebounce]

Hi dpc.
Very nice shots, how awesome to get that close to such a magnificent creature, I believe you were truly privileged to be allowed that close.

Cheers, Graham.

Broad-winged hawk: I was out on a local walking trail yesterday when I encountered this fellow. He allowed me to get within 3-4 metres before deciding he didn't like my company. I had a Fujifilm X-T10 and a 56mm f/1.2 lens with me, not a telephoto, so I was glad to be able to get these shots.

 

[Valvebounce]

Hi 7DmkI.
Lovely shot. Cute little fellow.

Cheers, Graham.

Juvenile red winged blackbird.

 

[Valvebounce]

Hi Folks.
I know I am a couple of pages late to the sub topic, but the snail went that way!

SE0A8410_DxO by Graham Stretch, on Flickr
;D

Cheers, Graham.

 

[Valvebounce]

Hi Alan.
First, I'm always worried about depth of field, I have put the numbers in a calculator in the past and had it spit out a couple of inches of DOF so if I don't have time to check the calculator I err on the side of caution.
Don't they say f8 and be there?
Second I haven't checked the AFMA yet so I don't know it is correct. As soon as my workshop is free of the current vehicle I'm going to set up and do AFMA.
Third, it was probably set on f8 from having the 1.4xIII on it and I forgot to change it! :
I'm currently running round like a dog with two tails and haven't taken time to do any kind of comparisons for sharpness, I'm already very pleased with the results I'm getting, I do know I have work to do to make the most of this lens.

Cheers, Graham.

Graham
I see you use f/8 with the 100-400mm II. I tend to use f/5.6. Do you find f/8 sharper or do you need mored depth of field?

 

[Click]

Juvenile red winged blackbird.

Nice shot, 7DmkI

 

[7DmkI]

Juvenile red winged blackbird.

Nice shot, 7DmkI

Hi 7DmkI.
Lovely shot. Cute little fellow.

Cheers, Graham.

Thanks, guys.