There are jints of a version II of a current RF lens coming in 2024 [CR2]

[EricN]

They are very nice shots and I and many others would be happy to have them. But, I am not sure they are good examples to use as examples that you can get critically sharp photos of birds at low shutter speeds. For a start, we can't download them and we don't know whether they are 100% crops. Here are a couple of shots of mine from earlier this year of puffins taken with the RF 100-500 at 1/4000s on the R7, one of which with sandeels is very similar to yours. These are 100% crops that can be downloaded for comparison. Are these sharper? My experience is that fast shutter speeds do improve sharpness.

View attachment 211746View attachment 211747

You always have amazing shots.
I agree with what you say. For me, I can get at least some acceptable shots slower than the seconds per focal length ratio, but a faster shutter speed will be much better almost every time. I tend to use a slower speed for something that isn't moving or moving slowly, but I've found after finishing with that subject, it best to adjust to a faster shutter speed. I've missed the chance to get a reasonable attempts at birds in flight or wild deer running in the forest because I failed to remember to do this.

 

[AlanF]

You always have amazing shots.
I agree with what you say. For me, I can get at least some acceptable shots slower than the seconds per focal length ratio, but a faster shutter speed will be much better almost every time. I tend to use a slower speed for something that isn't moving or moving slowly, but I've found after finishing with that subject, it best to adjust to a faster shutter speed. I've missed the chance to get a reasonable attempts at birds in flight or wild deer running in the forest because I failed to remember to do this.

It's much safer to err on the side of high iso with a higher shutter speed than the other way around as noise can be dealt with far more easily than motion blur.

 

[roby17269]

I haven't seen the same issues with my RF100-500.
Both the below puffin shots were handheld and have been cropped a lot.
The first puffin was relatively stationary but the second one in flight is comparably slow showing wing movement but the eye is more than acceptably sharp for me (eye-af is amazing when panning). Puffin wings move up to 400 beat/minute. Maybe I was lucky but so far - so good!

https://flic.kr/p/2nCokKc

400mm 1/500s

https://flic.kr/p/2ojBTyB

180mm 1/200s
I checked and most of my shots on my Flickr page using the RF100-500 are approximately 1/focal length and cropped (sometimes heavily).

Beautiful! I love the first one!

I don't know, maybe it's my technique which is not up to scratch or maybe I was tired because I took the deer and marmot photos during long hard hikes. I'm no spring chicken anymore unfortunately

But to be clear, I am not saying that I cannot get a decent picture at slower than 1/(4*fl), but what I have seen is that the % of misses goes up dramatically, while 1/(4*fl) gives me decent confidence.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I tend to use a slower speed for something that isn't moving or moving slowly, but I've found after finishing with that subject, it best to adjust to a faster shutter speed. I've missed the chance to get a reasonable attempts at birds in flight or wild deer running in the forest because I failed to remember to do this.

One advantage of not having a physical mode dial is that you can assign mode changes to the M.Fn button and restrict the available modes so switching is fast. I have just M and C1-3 available, with C3 set up for fast-moving subjects – 1/2500 s shutter, widest aperture (C-mode set up with an f/1.4 lens mounted), servo with animal eye priority, 30 fps. At most, it's three quick taps of the M.Fn button to get there.

 

[AlanF]

One advantage of not having a physical mode dial is that you can assign mode changes to the M.Fn button and restrict the available modes so switching is fast. I have just M and C1-3 available, with C3 set up for fast-moving subjects – 1/2500 s shutter, widest aperture (C-mode set up with an f/1.4 lens mounted), servo with animal eye priority, 30 fps. At most, it's three quick taps of the M.Fn button to get there.

I love using the M-Fn button to switch through modes. I use a similar trick, and have C1, C2, C3 and the remaining function for Fv, with C2 at 1/3200s widest aperture and auto iso in case I need to quickly get a fast moving subject. I was pretty good on the physical dial and still use it on the R7, but the electronic button is a real plus.

 

[Del Paso]

That's why we need internal zoom for high end lens.

Even internal zooms move air, during zooming and focusing.
And this can also result in dust being sucked in.
But I too woudn't zoom back an external zoom that has become wet. I fear the seals couldn't fully deflect all the humidity.

 

[AlanF]

Beautiful! I love the first one!

I don't know, maybe it's my technique which is not up to scratch or maybe I was tired because I took the deer and marmot photos during long hard hikes. I'm no spring chicken anymore unfortunately

But to be clear, I am not saying that I cannot get a decent picture at slower than 1/(4*fl), but what I have seen is that the % of misses goes up dramatically, while 1/(4*fl) gives me decent confidence.

Ari Hazeghi who is a pro bird photographer doesn't like going below 1/1000s with the 600mm f/4 II because you start getting blurring at low speeds that looks like slight out of focus rather than motion blur, and I like higher speeds: see https://arihazeghiphotography.com/blog/focus-micro-adjustment-is-it-always-needed/

 

[danfaz]

Even internal zooms move air, during zooming and focusing.
And this can also result in dust being sucked in.
But I too woudn't zoom back an external zoom that has become wet. I fear the seals couldn't fully deflect all the humidity.

Yep, just the act of taking the rear cap off and zooming about can suck dust in the lens. Or, you have a dusty cap and zoom your lens about, dust can get inside the lens.
Internal zoom lenses are not not in a vaccum.

I'm really interested to see what this new lens is all about. I do like my current 70-200's size and weight, to be sure. Just wonder what wizardry Canon might come up with...

 

[David - Sydney]

They are very nice shots and I and many others would be happy to have them. But, I am not sure they are good examples to use as examples that you can get critically sharp photos of birds at low shutter speeds. For a start, we can't download them and we don't know whether they are 100% crops. Here are a couple of shots of mine from earlier this year of puffins taken with the RF 100-500 at 1/4000s on the R7, one of which with sandeels is very similar to yours. These are 100% crops that can be downloaded for comparison. Are these sharper? My experience is that fast shutter speeds do improve sharpness.

View attachment 211746View attachment 211747

Appreciate the compliment.
The first is 1251x1251 and greater than 100% crop. The second was close to 100% but attached below @ 100% plus another in profile @1/200s that is also at 100%

I do agree that faster speeds increase the likelihood of improved sharpness assuming correct focus within the DoV until very high ISO limits that sharpness even with noise reduction. At f7.1, 1/4000s, the ISO gets pretty high in overcast conditions. Critical vs acceptable sharpness is the key issue here and I haven't printed them ie just for social media and wall mounted tv screens.

I guess my examples using the R5/RF100-500 combination were that it can achieve acceptable sharpness at lower shutter speeds than 1/4xfocal length including deliberately lower shutter speeds when panning for movement. Maybe I was just lucky that day

 

[David - Sydney]

Beautiful! I love the first one!

I don't know, maybe it's my technique which is not up to scratch or maybe I was tired because I took the deer and marmot photos during long hard hikes. I'm no spring chicken anymore unfortunately

But to be clear, I am not saying that I cannot get a decent picture at slower than 1/(4*fl), but what I have seen is that the % of misses goes up dramatically, while 1/(4*fl) gives me decent confidence.

Thanks... I am not a birder. Not a lot of light that day and cold/very windy with light rain at times. 1/4000s would be okay for bright light but f7.1 would have meant very high ISO.
A lot of serious cropping involved to isolate subjects even though we could get close to them. Pretty excited for first time shooting puffins and so was not always chimping/checking settings. The R5 exceeded my expectations that day

The owner/guide there shoots medium format with GFX50R/120mm and can get very close and also shoots fuji for distance/flying. If interested:
Instagram @2einarrphotography
Puffin photo tour: https://www.fromcoasttomountains.com/

 

[EricN]

One advantage of not having a physical mode dial is that you can assign mode changes to the M.Fn button and restrict the available modes so switching is fast. I have just M and C1-3 available, with C3 set up for fast-moving subjects – 1/2500 s shutter, widest aperture (C-mode set up with an f/1.4 lens mounted), servo with animal eye priority, 30 fps. At most, it's three quick taps of the M.Fn button to get there.

Thanks, I'll start playing more with these settings tomorrow.

 

[EricN]

It's much safer to err on the side of high iso with a higher shutter speed than the other way around as noise can be dealt with far more easily than motion blur.

Even without noise reduction, current cameras are amazing compared to what was available in the past.

 

[Del Paso]

Even without noise reduction, current cameras are amazing compared to what was available in the past.

Even if "in the past" stands for the once great 5 DIII. I played with a rented R3 and compared...A world of difference, especially in DR (are you listening, Sonyfanbois?) but also, of course, in noise.
With the 5 DIII, I never went beyond ISO 800, with newer cameras and AI noise reduction, high ISO settings come without thinking. That's where progress can really be seen!

 

[Del Paso]

I love using the M-Fn button to switch through modes. I use a similar trick, and have C1, C2, C3 and the remaining function for Fv, with C2 at 1/3200s widest aperture and auto iso in case I need to quickly get a fast moving subject. I was pretty good on the physical dial and still use it on the R7, but the electronic button is a real plus.

Good idea!
But maybe it wouldn't work for me, since I'm using many manual lenses, and so have set the M-Fn button on "focus loupe" function.
But I'll test your suggestion anyway, perhaps I'll change my habits, since a rapid mode selection is a huge benefit!

 

[koenkooi]

Even if "in the past" stands for the once great 5 DIII. I played with a rented R3 and compared...A world of difference, especially in DR (are you listening, Sonyfanbois?) but also, of course, in noise.
With the 5 DIII, I never went beyond ISO 800, with newer cameras and AI noise reduction, high ISO settings come without thinking. That's where progress can really be seen!

My most modern EF camera is a 7D1, if you go over ISO400 with that it will sprinkle a lot of green and purple pixels all over the image. My R5 doesn't do that, the high ISO noise is almost purely luma noise. So the noise that you do get is much more visually pleasing than with older bodies. For me, that's a double win.

 

[AlanF]

Good idea!
But maybe it wouldn't work for me, since I'm using many manual lenses, and so have set the M-Fn button on "focus loupe" function.
But I'll test your suggestion anyway, perhaps I'll change my habits, since a rapid mode selection is a huge benefit!

I read that someone had set the loupe function to the SET button. But, I know nothing about how to use loupe. What is useful to remember is that 4th position as you flick through the mode button assigned to the mFn button is the last non-C1,C2,C3 function you used - in my case it's for the settings in Fv so I can twiddle the aperture, shutter, iso etc with the usual buttons, and it will have all of the fps, AF mode etc that you had left with it.

 

[Del Paso]

I read that someone had set the loupe function to the SET button. But, I know nothing about how to use loupe. What is useful to remember is that 4th position as you flick through the mode button assigned to the mFn button is the last non-C1,C2,C3 function you used - in my case it's for the settings in Fv so I can twiddle the aperture, shutter, iso etc with the usual buttons, and it will have all of the fps, AF mode etc that you had left with it.

I'll see to this later.
The reason is that I'm waiting for the R5 II, in order to decide whether to buy it or the extremely tempting R3. (I want AF eye-control).
Then I will check the configuration options, which are a bit more limited on my EOS R. I'll definitely give your M-Fn suggestion a try!

 

[scyrene]

Even if "in the past" stands for the once great 5 DIII. I played with a rented R3 and compared...A world of difference, especially in DR (are you listening, Sonyfanbois?) but also, of course, in noise.
With the 5 DIII, I never went beyond ISO 800, with newer cameras and AI noise reduction, high ISO settings come without thinking. That's where progress can really be seen!

Interesting. On the 5D3 I got occasional usable shots at 12800; on the R6 I might go 1-1.5 stops above that, depending on subject and lighting conditions. Personal preferences!

 

[dolina]

I'd prefer Canon transition all their popular EF lenses to RF mount before releasing a Series II.

 

[EricN]

Appreciate the compliment.
The first is 1251x1251 and greater than 100% crop. The second was close to 100% but attached below @ 100% plus another in profile @1/200s that is also at 100%

I do agree that faster speeds increase the likelihood of improved sharpness assuming correct focus within the DoV until very high ISO limits that sharpness even with noise reduction. At f7.1, 1/4000s, the ISO gets pretty high in overcast conditions. Critical vs acceptable sharpness is the key issue here and I haven't printed them ie just for social media and wall mounted tv screens.

I guess my examples using the R5/RF100-500 combination were that it can achieve acceptable sharpness at lower shutter speeds than 1/4xfocal length including deliberately lower shutter speeds when panning for movement. Maybe I was just lucky that day

I was wondering about the in flight shot, how many did you take vs how many good ones?