วีดีโอ

Is that just because 800mm is just too long, so more chance of heat haze? Or the 800mm is not as good quality as the 400?

Yeah I was referring to there being none of these boat trips in Kent. You just have to go on a boat trip to see wrecks or seals, and hope you see some birds.

Ah ok. 👍🏼

There is an argument that things like the 100-500 is sharper, but you can’t argue with an 800mm reach

Much appreciated

This video was about the practicalities of the 800mm prime. It’s going to be when you are sat somewhere for a while, like a hide. For quick walks, a hike where you need versatility, the 200-800mm is the best option.

Yes they’ve been resident there as long as I’ve been going

Very good idea. I was 99% photos before this lens, now I’m 50%. Might have to ho your route.

I am referring to everything in-between you and the subject, not just near the lens. Nothing you can do about heat haze, smoke, mist etc no matter how good your lens is

I had a Sigma 150-600mm when I went. So wish I had 800mm in Costa Rica. The majority of birds in the wild are always far away, so ultimately I would always suggest the longest lens you have. The 100-500mm will give you sharper images of closer wildlife, but I always lean towards % of wildlife that are distant, which like I’ve said is most.

@@stormcabbirds Thanks for your advice ! I feel in the densely populated Europe, birds are indeed skittish and reach is king! But on Bali and certainly Iceland they were much more approachable. And the rainforest could be rather dark, so I was interested in your experience. When you were using the Sigma on your R7, it should have a similar light sensitivity as my longest combo. So I'll take both long zooms ;-) Next month on the isle Lunga, I'll also need the 100-500 for the puffins, but for the ospreys and otters on isle of Mull I'll grab the 200-800 (and maybe the 1.4x) But sometimes wildlife can surprise us. Last month we were searching foxes in the dunes near Amsterdam. Because of distance I used the 200-800 .. but then a baby fox approached me closer than the MFD at 200mm 🙈

Think Canon said June?

It’s a chest harness. Means my hands are free. Amazon “DSLR chest harness”

Yeah my video was using my experience of taking hundreds of thousands of photos, and knowing a fixed focal length, especially that long, would get limited use, unless you were sat in a hide or somewhere else stationary.

My points still stand as a more practical lens. In all my points. Weight, length, not able to get closer subjects, fitting in cabin bag etc.

@stormcabbirds If you are doing professional work those are non arguments. Image quality takes precedence. There is a reason people use the prime, and it is not ego.

@@Tugela60I can assure you, I know many birders who I have met via social media that just bought it for bird pics, and are in no way professionals. In many of the situations I pointed out here, the prime is simply not an option. Also, professionals won’t be watching this video, on the title alone, it’s clearly for enthusiasts who won’t be spending that kind of money.

@stormcabbirds Your personal style is not a reason. Primes are tools for particular purposes. Your argument is like saying no one should buy a 50 mm because a 28-70 mm does more, ignoring the fact that if the best IQ and aperture is important, then you SHOULD be using a prime, because it does what the zoom can't do. If you want the best image, and that is important to you, then you use a prime. Both lenses have their purpose, but there are plenty of people who get by without using any zooms, only primes.

The difference in aperture makes a huge difference. In wildlife photography shooting in low light is standard, and the 200-800 just doesn't deliver for fast moving subjects. The prime may be heavier and pricier, but only the primes can shoot AT ALL in these conditions. Seriously, your points are like the Reliant Robin is better because you only have to buy 3 tires. BTW, the 200-800 has been with me since February and I love it, can't afford the prime. But its creative possibilities are seriously limited. I am thankful Canon released this lens for the rest of us, though.

Congrats. Luckily got mine in Hong Kong

True, but when you go out and about, you meet or learn of the photographers who have these expensive lenses. When you see their posts, you can see the lens in action. It’s clear to those who have trained eyes. That’s one of my points though, that to most people, they won’t see a difference, so not worth the prime purchase. These photographers also don’t like to advertise that they are walking about with £25k worth of kit, as it’s very easy to find people’s locations online. Then there’s the worry that their photos will be labelled “yeah, he only got that photo because of the equipment”.

@@stormcabbirds How many YT toggers have went out and actually bought ethier of those lenses .. You'll be hard pressed to find an honest review of ethiet after a years useage

Most of my points are true though. Cost, being stuck at 800mm, not fitting in cabin bag, weight etc. I want to grow my youtube presence, and these comparison videos are good for that. It’s also practise for me to improve my editing, be more comfortable and spontaneous on camera. And yes, we live in a world where there needs to be a bit of a click baity title or photo, but I won’t abuse that. It will be still be very relevant to my video content.

@@stormcabbirds I hear that, and I get it, its like trying to grow a following on IG, if you post quality no one cares, you post close up crap with tight crops and people go mental. Its formulaic crap. If you don't mind me offering a suggestion, be better than that. Offer people value for their time, make what they are seeing have impact and give them something to come back for. I watched this and yeah you have a couple of points for the average guy, but if you're a pro then it's just nonsense. I watched it waiting for you to bring out the 800. Its opinion based on price and affordability. I'm telling you, make people better photographers like you said, thats the goal. The click bait stuff might get you some views but who will come back. Good luck, I mean it.

I see Vince’s points, but our host could have addressed them all by just saying “Why I don’t need or want a prime”. But maybe that doesn’t draw in enough clicks as bait…. (by the way, as click bait goes that title was not very bad compared to some.) Two of my own thoughts for you: First I keep watching a lot of these 200 to 800mm videos even though I can’t find one to buy and don’t get a sense that Canon will be catching up with backorders anytime soon. People who post about that lens should acknowledge that they are impossible to get. Second, Canon makes an 800mm f11 prime and you should have mentioned that too. It’s inexpensive, collapsible and the image quality is acceptable if you have decent light. I bought that f11 version because I needed the reach but (as noted) can’t find the 200-800mm. For my non-pro purposes it’s great.

@@briancox2216 Is it? I have an 800 F11 and I have a 200-800 I might sell..undecided yet but if they are unobtanium I might just do.

The news is that it should be in the UK in June, hence why I’m doing videos about it. As I know people will be doing lots of research online about other people’s experience. Yes there’s a fine line when it comes to click bait titles, but I like to think that I don’t go overboard with it.

Don’t think I’ll ever be able to see the difference.

Same cab 🤷‍♂️😁

It’s a Little Owl over here in the UK 😊

Yeah a couple times I’ve been staring at what I thought was a Marsh Harrier heading my way, and it turned out to be a Bittern. Gotta really check everything 😂

Because of the camera’s in body IS, I have managed to get ok shots at 1/50th of a second when in a darker wood. Obviously I have to do a burst to make sure at least one is sharp. You’d better watch some videos from people who have access to both lenses. From what I’ve heard the 100-500mm is sharper when the subject isn’t too far. Ultimately I decided most wildlife is always very far away, and the crop at 500mm to get the same size as 800mm would mean a lower quality image. I’ve only had the lens since March, so haven’t gone through the lower winter light yet.

@@stormcabbirds Thank you very much for that information. How have you found the 200-800 canon lens for capturing birds in flight with the R7? I have heard of autofocus issues with the lens

@@stephenbolger5925 the issue is I have nothing to compare it to. I’ve never used any better camera or lens to know what’s possible. The autofocus issues when they’ve happened is due to atmospheric or fussy backgrounds. If there’s a lot of heat haze/mist, it will struggle, like any lens. Cooler days definitely result in sharper pics. You have to remember that the R7 and 200-800 is a £3.5k combo. Of course it won’t perform as good as a £20k combo.

Thanks 🤗

The lens was second hand, and the person who sold it to the shop left that on.

Nice one!! I was wondering why they didn’t have a crest, just thought it was juvenile or something. So that’s another lifer for me. Yeah it was just down the road I saw the bee eaters.

@@stormcabbirds I looked at your shearwaters. The dusky underside and pot-bellied profile point to Balearic, rather than Yelkouan, which is more black and white, like a Manx. Balearic and Yelkouan used to be considered the two subspecies of 'Mediterranean Shearwater', but that has now been split and they are considered separate species. Balearic, as the name suggests, breed in the islands, while Yelkouan has a more Eastern Med distribution. I've seen Yelkouan near Gibraltar, but they are uncommon in Spanish waters. Your Icterine warbler is much more likely to be Melodious warbler, based on range. They are very similar in appearance.

@@stormcabbirds I looked at your shearwaters. The dusky underside and pot-bellied profile point to Balearic, rather than Yelkouan, which is more black and white, like a Manx. Balearic and Yelkouan used to be considered the two subspecies of 'Mediterranean Shearwater', but that has now been split and they are considered separate species. Balearic, as the name suggests, breed in the islands, while Yelkouan has a more Eastern Med distribution. I've seen Yelkouan near Gibraltar, but they are uncommon in Spanish waters. Your Icterine warbler is much more likely to be Melodious warbler, based on range. They are very similar in appearance.

@@alangilbertson8239 cheers, I’ll adjust the name of the shearwaters on my lifer list. Will still be a lifer. Another very knowledgeable med birder thought the yellow bird was more likely Icterine. I posted it on X and no one has disputed it? Either way, both would be a lifer 👍

@@stormcabbirds As I said, I was basing it purely on range. Hard to tell apart in the field, so if somebody who knows his warblers says Icterine, I wouldn't argue with it. :)

Yeah I’m making a video on why you don’t want an expensive prime, even if you can afford it

know it’s the sort of bird I will only watch in real time speed. If it’s something like a bird in flight, which can be a bit choppy, and you’re likely to only get several usable seconds, I will use 60fps. I keep the 2 settings saved in custom functions so I can switch to either quickly depending on the scenario.

Now I know where to find them for next time. I’ll spend a good while getting video & pics

Thank you kindly

Yeah I know exactly where the nest was, but didn’t broadcast its location. They are hungry chicks for sure.

@@stormcabbirds it's interesting to watch, they bring back all manner of things, from Guekos to scolapendra and beetles.

I stopped using mechanical as it was too slow. Also, at slower shutter speeds, I found the movement of the shutter was more likely to cause blurry pictures

Glad you enjoyed 🙌🙌