Photography
Comments
-
You may want to also consider the Nikkor 200/500.F5.6 at less than £2k seems worth considering if you have not done so.
0 -
A Peacock Moth. The largest moth found in Europe.
1 -
It certainly is worthy of consideration. But, I find the long end is just a tad long, so to speak. I'm using a DX camera body so 500mm equates to 750mm in 35mm speak.
I went for the Nikkor 80-400 in the end. Tad expensive, but an impressive bit of kit. The auto focus is lightning fast, the VR is very effective. So far I have just used it hand held and the results are more than acceptable re hand shake. It does make ones arms ache from the extra weight.
The samples below all hand held, I just threw them through Photoshop. No noise reduction or sharpening etc, just resized. I now feel the need for a mono-pod.
0 -
I have used a monopod for many years, but find it a little cumbersome for wildlife pics, particularly birds in flight. May I suggest you keep your shutter speeds as high as possible for the available light, to find the limits of your lens VR and your trembling arms.
The monopod may then not be needed.
0 -
Hi OP
I have a stack of Sandisk 4G CF cards 30MB/s speed that I have used for many years without any issues, so very content with the brand.
Since I bought the 5D mk4 with the larger file, I have bought 2 SD cards, one Lexar 32G professional 633x and a Sandisk Extreme pro 32G 95 MB/s
The main reason to change was to take advantage of extra speed and memory, but also to use the card slots on my lap tops. This avoids the need for a card reader and seems much faster.
Both cards work well and I have not noticed any difference between them.
I do not at present use the video facility on the camera, so these are fast enough for stills. I have not hit a buffer yet, but only use 7 frames per second in very short bursts if I do not release the shutter quick enough. I have not used the machine gun approach to taking pics yet, prefer to take single shots. I guess this is still ingrained from days of shooting 36 exposure film.
0 -
Fossilised rocks on the beach at Spittal, Berwick on Tweed last autumn.
0 -
OP
Forgot to ask why you asked the question, and did my reply give the info you required.
0 -
BM, how do you find the mk4 ? how is the low light performance/shadow recovery ? did you have the mk3 before ?
0 -
Thanks for the info BL. I received a present of a Lexar Pro 16gb 150Mb/s and starting to wonder if its a fake. the data lock is lose and moves about which is a pain and also the quality of some shots seem very poor even though the circumstances of other shots are exactly the same. Guess I will dump it
0 -
OP
Just had a fiddle with the Lexar, the lock is not overly tight, but not at all loose.
I used some Sandisk bought very cheaply from amazon, always suspected they were fake. Two chipped and one other stopped working within a few months. The rest still work and seem ok.
0 -
Hi Billy
Previously I used 1D Mk3's and although they were great cameras for sport pics used in mags and newspapers, they did not provide the amount of detail I wanted in my retirement with wildlife pics.
The lowlight of the Mk4 is good for focus, I was surprised how low it would focus. However I have not tried out the shadow performance so could not give a worthwhile answer to your question. I have tried to do this, but my version of Lightroom does not support the Mk4 so I have downloaded the Canon DPP to try out but not used it yet. Unfortunately time is not available at present.
The quality of image is excellent and a significant step up from the 1D
20megapixel more to capture the detail with. However the full frame does mean larger crops, so swings and roundabouts. The Owl pics I posted on the What have you seen thread were very pleasing to me, as it was a step up on what I have taken previously in image detail. The pics do not show it on the thread, but if you care to look on Avon Bird website and scroll down, you can see the detail, not perfect, but improving as I get more used to the camera. The focus system is a little tricky to set up, I was unable to achieve any autofocus on a tree branch that has any detail in the background. but I have found a setting that is acceptable in most cases.
Much lighter to carry around than the 1D and a really nice camera.
Oneput used HDEW, and I noticed that they are selling the camera for about £800 less than I paid 4 months ago.
Sorry can't be much more help.
0 -
Currently have a year old Canon 760 but thinking of buying a canon full frame camera this year. Wouldn't be able to justify buying a 5D mark 4, could buy a second hand 5D mark 3 with a low shutter count but what about the Canon 6D. Decisions, decisions but has anyone got any advice? Thanks in advance
0 -
Why do you want a full frame? I borrowed a 6D from work one weekend and took identical photos with my 80D (same MP as your 760 and same digic processor I thin) On 'normal' lighting and subjects and viewing/printing at A4 I could not see any difference the two. In fact the 80D did better due to its higher MP and processor. The only time the 6D did better was in low light due to full frame. Also the 6D is older technology (processor, slower autofocus and tracking) and the rumours are that its going to be replaced soon.
Also do you have EFS lenses? if so they won't mount on the 6D and even those non canon lenses that would fit did you wouldn't get the full image in the viewfinder.
You could always hire one to see the difference for yourself
0 -
HI OP
Having bought the Mk4, a number of conversations has me wondering if I was 100% correct in my choice.
Although I am delighted with the quality of detail compared to my previous 1D Mk3 with 10 megapixels and 1.3 effective crop sensor, the trade off of a higher pixel count of say 20mp and a 1.3 effective crop against a 30mp and no crop is worth consideration.
Several guys would not give up the smaller sensor and 1.3 effective crop as they rarely fill a frame and still crop images.
Others prefer detail when they do fill the frame.
I guess it is a personal choice based on how often you fill the frame against how far away your subject normally.
I believe your camera is pretty high spec with a crop factor of 1.6? (guessing here) if so, a middle option would be the 7D with 20mp (also a guess, check the correct number) and a crop factor of 1.3, available from HDEW for around £800 (how were they by the way)
I know several guys that use one with your lens and extender combination, and they are full of praise.
The consideration is which would give you the results you are looking for, a 20 or 24mp with a 1.3 crop or a 30mp without a crop factor.
It took me a long time to decide (as usual) and I am still undecided which would be best.
Good luck.
0 -
You are spot on with your remarks. Have a read of this:
https://northrup.photo/gear-basics/camera-body-features/sensor-size-crop-factor/
some interesting quotes:
For faraway subjects where you would need to crop 1.6X anyway, the 7D still produces 12 megapixels of visible detail. The 5D Mark III produces only 7.8 megapixels of visible detail. Therefore, the 7D produces 53% more detail than the 5D Mark III, at about 30% the cost.
So, should I get APS-C for the higher pixel density, or go full-frame?
Get APS-C for the higher pixel density if you plan to crop anyway. Realistically, almost all wildlife photography is heavily cropped. Even with super telephotos, even with an APS-C body, most wildlife photographers need to crop almost all of their photos.Outside of captivity, the only times you don’t need to crop wildlife photos are when you’re shooting large mostly tame animals, such as deer, or when you’ve camouflaged yourself and spent hours getting close to your subjects.
In other words, if you’re masking your scent and wearing a ghillie suit, a full frame body for wildlife might be worth the extra money. Otherwise, an APS-C body is probably a better overall value
They do a lot of videos as well google Tony and Chelsea Northrup
0 -
OP
Just had a quick check for my own reminder.
The 7D has 20.2 MP and a crop factor of 1.6.
The advantage is that with this camera as an option, your 400 F5.6 is effectively a 640 F5.6 add the converter and you have an effective 832 F8.
I guess that is why the camera lens converter is so popular, and at £800 seems worth some thought if your main interest is wildlife.
0 -
FWIW I have the 7D mk 2, having previously had the the 7D, and the 5D mk 3. The full frame and crop cameras really are different tools suited to different tasks. The 7D is great for wildlife, especially birds, because of the crop factor, but its low light performance and ultimate image quality is not in the same league as the full frame cameras. If I can get the reach I need with the 5D then I will always use it over the 7D. If you are a landscape/travel etc shooter then the full frame cameras really score, even the 5D mk 2 was a great camera and if were looking for a low cost way into full frame shooting I would be looking at a used 5d mk 2 or 6D.
On lenses IMO the best (sensibly priced lens) for wildlife is the 100-400 either a good mk 1 version or if the budget allows the new mk 2, this coupled with the 7D mk 1 or 2 is a great combination for everything from safari to birds. Despite what Tony Northrup says there have been many occasions in my wildlife photography experience that 400mm on a crop body can be too long particularly as some of my favourite images show the animal in its environment rather than just being another boring close up.
0 -
Went to use my Canon 760D and came up with a code 20 error. Followed the instructions, basically switch on off/take out battery and replace. Charged battery etc., but to no avail. I'll have to ring Canon when we get home but has anyone got any ideas? thanks....
0
