Here i am on a 40mp Fujifilm X-T5 APSC camera with adapted long prime lenses shooting birds and fighting the poor AF performance and yet, still getting good shots, still capturing beautiful colors, and most importantly still having fun because I LOVE the body and how it all feels on my hands. I guess the most important thing is to shoot with whatever will encourage and give you motivation to get out there and use it. The best camera is the one you're excited to go out and play with :)
I've begun my journey as a wildlife photographer with the Fuji X-H2S and a 150-600mm. It's kinda interesting because there's not many photographers around so far that uses the X-series as their platform, so the knowledge is quite low overall. I made the choice myself because I had heard about the great ISO performance and the image quality and so far it hasn't disappointed. Some of my best shots have been 6,500 ISO or higher and I've had no issues removing some of the noise with post processing software (especially not with the latest Lightroom upodate). I've really liked Fujifilm cameras in the past so this is why I decided to go with a Fuji for wildlife photography as well. It is a bit tricky in low light situations of course but if Fuji stays on this path I'm sure we will have more options in the near future when it comes to better lenses etc.
Probably the best video I've ever seen comparing all the methods for filling the frame with small, or even any birds. One quick note from a UK nature photographer. I am somewhat envious at how close Australian and North American bird photographers can get to birds in general. For many years I was just amazed at the bird photos American photographers got. However, TH-cam videos have explained why, because when you see how close the photographer is to the bird, out in the open, I am amazed. These are often similar, or even the same species as in the UK. Yet except when using a hide/blind, you would never get that close. In the UK, except for tame birds in a public park, certain seabirds at breeding colonies, there is almost no way you could fill the frame with a FF sensor, no matter how much focal length you have. So cropping, and heavy cropping at that is fairly standard. Additionally, being a far more crowded island with less public land, you are generally stuck to walking around a lot of sites, meaning a more portable outfit. Although of course there is a big difference between bird photography, and birding with a camera, but that is a whole different subject. Just to give some ideas of distance. With a raptor, out in the open, there are not many opportunities to get within 100yds/m of the bird. With small birds out in the open, often it is difficult to get closer than 45ft, ,15 yds, 14m. Many ducks, because they are regularly shot, like Teal, Shoveller etc, won't let you get closer than about 80m in the open.
Stephan, I live in Kentucky which is part of the mid Atlantic flyway for migratory waterfowl. If after this Covid crazy ever gets a handle and under control try to make it to the states. Either early to mid spring for songbirds and turkeys or wintertime for Bald eagles, waterfowl and other raptors. Be more than HAPPY to be your photo guide. It gives me more opportunities to get out too.
Stephen, I appreciate how difficult it must be for you, we are very fortunate with how many birds allow a semi close approach. We do have very wild ducks so I have some idea of your challenge, it is near impossible to get anywhere near them as they are shot here also. I spend a lot of time trying to find locations that have birds that are approachable or locations I can setup and have good odds of getting a shot. Chasing truly wild birds is a real challenge that is for sure. Cheers, Duade
VERY thorough, thanks Duade. I’ve been eyeing the R6, 100-500, extenders and upscaling software as I rarely print larger than 8x10 so this video is very helpful.
I've just Sold all my Sony A7 gear and gone back to a Canon 20D and 40D both with low shutter count, at 70 years old I felt that going back to old school photography suits me best now, modern cameras are ok don't get me wrong but photography seems to easy with the latest tech, great video as always Duade :)
Absolutely epic.. this Video will stand the test of time and will be a reference for years to come... We missed ya, but so glad you took the time to produce this. I'm so happy with my R6 and you showed pretty much my workflow, by shooting, enhancing, cropping. Great to see I'm not doing anything stupid 🤣 A million thanks Duade, cheers!!!
You do a good job of explaining all the possible combos and the pluses and minuses........and in moving along at a pace to deal with ever-shortening attention spans.
Thanks for another great video Duade. I use the 400 f5.6 on my Eos R. The 30mp sensor is a good size but the focal length is a bit limiting. I just try getting closer to the subject to try to get frame fillers. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. Can't wait for this bloody lockdown to end so I can get back out there. All the best, Brian.
G'day Brian, yes 400 can be a bit limiting for sure, as Keith mentioned my 1.4 version 3 extender works very well when you have adequate light. I shared lots of photos in my last video using the extender. It does struggle in low light but is very good in better light. I am also waiting for the lockdown to end. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade Hi Duade, I have the same 1.4 extender and I do use it but as you have mentioned and as I replied to Keith it has its own limitations. Maybe I'm just impatient or expect too much from my equipment. Anyway, thanks again. All the best.
You have done a fantastic job of testing, comparing, and clarifying the available telephoto imaging options for wildlife photography. Especially for us Canon shooters you have specifically clarified our options and choices and the relative merits and/or liabilities of each. You left no stone unturned. Concerning the R5's option to shoot in 1.6 crop factor mode, might it also convey the benefit of applying the camera's entire internal computing power (with a buffer and autofocusing system capable of 45mp) to a smaller file size, thereby increasing buffer depth and perhaps focusing faster/better, or increasing frames per second rates, beyond just applying a crop in the camera? I wonder if you have any insight into those possibilities? Thanks for a terrific and entertaining video empowering your viewers, whatever their equipment.
Mark, thanks for your comment I appreciate it. Yes, I think you are correct in crop mode you will have a much bigger buffer as the files are so much smaller. The FPS will not change and I am unsure about the AF performance, its possible if the bird is bigger it is easier for the sensor to pick up the eye, not sure. Cheers, Duade
My Sony a7rv has a 9k sensor. Using my 600mm lens, I can crop into 1500mm-ish (2.5x crop) and still retain a 4k crop. I have no need for a teleconverter. I use DxO deep prime 6 pro software and the sharpening capabilities of it are astonishing. I don't pay as much attention to ISO anymore because this software is absolutely amazing. It also adds dynamic range.
Mine would be an R5 and EF400mm DO f/4 ii plus 1.4x and 2x extenders as this prime lens is the only Canon super tele light enough for hand holding at about 2kg and works brilliantly with either 1.4x or 2x extenders or even both stacked for 2.8x (need to use the EF mark ii extenders as these are the only ones that can be stacked) and I'd also use either an EF100-400mm ii or RF100-500 zoom.
@@angelogarciajr5356 the R3 is in my dream list but we won't have any unbiased tests until after it's released . The RF400 f/2.8 weighs 2.9kg so it's too heavy for handholding for birds in flight and the extra stop of light isn't enough to justify the weight I think.
G'day Angelo, at the moment the Sony A1 is the best camera out there and coupled with the 600 f4 would be a fantastic kit. For BIF the A1 and 200-600 would be a great kit. Cheers, Duade
Thanks for the reminder about shooting the R5 in crop mode. I started digital photography with an 8 MP Rebel then “upgraded” to a 60D. When I put both cameras on a tripod and tested with a zoom lens at identical image size I liked the Rebel better. I now have a 6D and 100-400 L zoom. I thought the R7 might be a good choice to get more reach, but the more I see, the more I think it might be a repeat of my 60D experience. A 1.4x extender probably isn’t a good choice either. Without spending a fortune, the R5 might be my best choice at this time, or I could wait for a true replacement for the 7D.
James, yes all very interesting questions, I think the R5 will deliver far better quality and has many better features but at a much higher cost. The R7 really is an affordable way to get a bigger subject with amazing AF. Cheers, Duade
Your vlogs are excellent and thorough and well thought out. Really easy to listen to and understand. Thanks so much for sharing this. Really well presented. Thank you.
Did a comparison test using the Sigma 1.4 extender on a Sigma 150-600 vs a cropped the image to equal scale without the extender. The cropped image without the extender yielded better results. I my case I should have saved my money.
Thank you very much, was debating going for the R6 to shoot sports and your video really helped me see the differences between all different factors. In the summer, when our school is closed, I started shooting birds as practice for in mouvement shooting, so small little hobby on the side, since their are similarities.
Just found your fab channel - and like many others here really appreciate your offering us such well done and useful videos! Very thorough...I'll keep following and learning!
I have been considering a change to Canon mirrorless for my full size bodies ( currently all 5D series). I have decided to stay with my DSLR equipment for now but I have decided to add a 7D mk ii to add to my 600 f4 and 300 f 2.8 rather then using my teleconverters. Especially on my 600 as I don’t care for the image quality especially the 2x. I will keep the new mirrorless in mind for the future, but the price of the used body outweighs the investment right now for the mirrorless option. I’m just getting into birding and find it very interesting and a lot of fun. Love your video s and instructional style. Keep it up.
Mark, thanks for your comment and sharing your experience. I believe the R7 is the camera many birders are waiting for as it should give excellent IQ, AF, FPS etc but also the 1.6 crop which is great for wildlife. The big question is how it handles higher ISO. Cheers, Duade
Loved the kookaburra! Hehe. Thanks for this video. Loads of comparisons and information. I noted that the APS-C will always noise issues. I think I keep coming back to the R5 as my upgrade from a 1200D. But Canon rumours say they bring out a new APS-C with bigger MP and hopefully better ISO capabilities. So I will continue to wait. Nothing to lose by waiting. I'll only upgrade once as I am hobbyist photographer and don't earn money from it. It's just for fun.
Nerrel, yes, I think that is wise, I believe Canon will release an APSC mirrorless at some stage this year which will be a nice upgrade over the 1200D. Cheers, Duade
I just bought an R6 after finding a used one at a great price, I can't afford the R5 right now. The only thing is, I also own the Canon 90D, which has 32.5 MP compared to the R6's 20.1MP. So although I think the R6 is overall a better camera in basically every way, being full-frame and mirrorless (vs. the 90D being APS-C and DSLR), I'm still wondering if the higher MP count on the 90D makes it more worthwhile for bird photography, at least when I'm not pushing the ISO too high. I should also mention I'm working with the Canon EF 70-300mm IS II USM, so the crop factor on the 90D is really helping me out with distant subjects.
This video is very timely! I finally got my 100-500 and shot it yesterday on my R5. I got some decent images of some butterflies and a wren. Given the light, the results were pretty decent but next time I'll use crop mode for such relatively small and distant subjects.
Just the comparison I was looking for - thank you. I'm thinking of getting the R5 and I have a 100-400mm and currently use it on my 7D2. Also have a 1.4x but never used it on this setup due to the reduced speed/noise. The extender was unusable until we calibrated it, now that the mirrorless lenses don't need calibrating, it will be interesting to see how the extender performs
Hi Duade! Thank you for your very interesting and enjoyable videos. The very serious approache in this video was very helpfull with very nice picture examples. Thank for your quality work!! Paul
I found your video very informative. I, too, see that this took a fair amount of work to produce and edit to a watchable video. Thank you very much. I learned a whole lot.
Was looking forward for this video! Its very interesting with megapixels in relation to social media, I recently posted a picture many people liked and looked very sharp on facebook, but I knew for me personally the quality was terrible as my shutter speed was too slow and details were blurred. This aside I think its no excuse just to accept poor image quality because your only posting on social media, im aiming for the best image quality for all my images even though I don't print or sell at the moment, I like to know any shots im really proud of I can have them printed in future for friends and family to enjoy the full detail up close and in person. Also a bonus of a quality photo is really tight crops to 1 of 2 megapixels for instagram :)
Thanks Kurtis, yes, the goal should be to try and get high quality images, we are just lucky that these new cameras allow very nice shots even after decent cropping. Cheers, Duade
Another interesting video. Your results are pretty much what I thought you would get. As a Nikon user I’m still waiting for a mirrorless body that can rival the R5. Keep the videos coming! Thanks
Another great video Duade, I went for a 400mm f2.8 GM over a 600mm for the exact reasons you mentioned in you video, A1 with 50mp and you R5 will all these extra megapixels give so much more versatility
Mick, the A1 and 400 must be an amazing piece of kit, I think we all ower Sony a lot as they have really given the industry a shake up which has only benefited all users. Cheers, Duade
Thinking of picking up the R5 for landscapes and birding until the R7 shows up, the 7D Mark II with the 100-400mm II is nice but as soon as the light starts to fade the noise is too high for my taste. Thought of getting the R6 for landscapes first but that 45mp makes a difference, tried comparing my friends 50mp 5dsr to a 6D II and sheshh that 50mp made a huge difference.
Yes, I too am waiting for the R7, fingers crossed it is everything we hope for. The R5 is a fantastic FF camera and you can't go wrong with it. Cheers, Duade
Yes, for landscapes and portraits the R is a nice camera. For wildlife it lacks the eye tracking and FPS of the R6 which is really important. Cheers, Duade
Kevin, I think you have a great set of lenses for most scenarios. Those RF extenders are very expensive, I have not got one yet as if I need reach I use my EF prime. Cheers, Duade
Very good analysis, and my own experience parallels. I got back into photography a couple years ago with a Sony a 7R2 and the Tamron 28 to 75 lens. The R2 has 42 megapixels and an APSC mode it has 18. That crop-mode gives me a much greater usability out of my one lens and still leaves some room for additional cropping. Additional glass is pending, but for now I have some freedom.
great video. I love real comparisons like this. I've had both of them EF lenses, and went from 7dmk2 to 5D mk4, now I have a Canon 600mm F4 LIS ii and the extenders and I just got an R5 on loan for a few weeks. It's going to be my next upgrade. It's a shame the R3 is only 24 megapixels because its ergonomics and other improvements are great.
Excellent comparison Duade! I still prefer my full frame, yet, I am now using both, FF and Apsc. As you said, what is important is what we intend to do with our photos. But , all things aside, I still use my old canon 5dsr, even with noise and all, paired with one 150-600 lens ( I can't afford the price in uruguay for the canon 500 ) is my prefered setting for bird photography. I agree to more DSLR videos as there are still plenty of photograhers who use those with longer lenses. In fact in my country, from the community I know, no one uses the mirrorless systems, ( I'm alone with my xt4) all kept either the DSlr,just a few with Sony, and a lot of them with bridge cameras for birding purposes.... Thanks again Duade for a great content!
Rui, thanks for the ongoing support. Just FYI I have always smiled when I see your name as I had a childhood friend who had your name. You may not be aware, but it is a Maori name in New Zealand. Cheers, Duade
Another great video weighing up the different options, illustrated nicely. Thanks Duade ! While the short summary is obviously "the most expensive gear is the best", you still offer a good insight into which next incremental steps can help to reach a next level. While do have a tripod and gimbal, I want the best reach which I can still walkaround with on longer hikes. This limits the weight of camera plus lens to max 2.5kg, which rules out the big whites or a Sigma 150-600Sports. And sadly the RF F11 lenses are not weatherproof. Last year I moved up from the Tamron 16-300 to the Canon 100-400ii (day and night difference in IQ !), next I want to replace my 70D with the R6 .. or if possible the R7. In this video you compared FF mirrorless to good old DSLR APS-C. Of course because who in the Canon world would mate a M6ii without a (decent) EVF to a 100-400ii or a big white ? If the R7 unicorn would turn out to be the January 22 arrival supposed to "annoy the fanboys" (Canon Rumors) then I would really want to see an update of this comparison because the R7 might be pretty close to an R6 plus a 1.4x extender ..
I believe the R7 and RF100-500 would be an excellent kit that is super light with plenty of reach. I really do hope Canon release one in 2022. Cheers, Duade
It's always fun when people learn the basics of focal length. That every mm counts heavily on the ultra wide spectrum and on the tele spectrum only steps of 100mm really shows.
Patrick, yes you can't crop wider but you can crop in closer. I was shooting with the 200-600 Sony and a friend with the 100-500 Canon and the difference was crazy, I simply couldn't get the shots he was. Cheers, Duade
This is a great video with proof of the pudding on top. I actually also got a 40D that I don't know what to do with. But Im off to Antarctica in January and have invested in a used 80D and a r6. This video makes me confident that my choice of gear is good. For glass I got an very old Vivitar 19-35, rf 24-105mm f4, canon ef 70-200mm f4 and sigma 150-600mm. Thanks for confirming my choices! Wooohaa
Just getting into wildlife photography and this is MASSIVELY helpful determining what I can do well with what I’ve got and what is the best value lens to get reach. Thanks!
Thanks for the video. Well, I use EF 300mm f/2.8 + 2x on my 7D for bird photography. Don't find any valid reason to replace the body with R5 or R6. My EF 400mm f/ 5.6 also gives me great service for handheld flight shots.
Someone told me put an Englishmen in the sun and give him a cocktail and tada you’ve got an aussie…:) that’s why one has to love your chilled way but the content of course is great too thanks so much! One question if you had to decide owning the R5 and the rf 100-500 between the extender 1.4 or the 2.0 which one would you prefer (both cost almost the same and of course more reach seems the better choice but is there a big fall of in terms of image quality in your opinion…?) cheers
I think your mate is about right, I prefer the relaxed quiet life to a fast paced one. I would go with the 1.4, the 2x is just a little too slow in terms of light coming in and AF not quite as accurate. The 1.4 does pretty well but the lens is at its best without extenders IMO. I have used the 1.4 but only in good light. Good luck, Cheers, Duade
@@Duade oh man trank you for that really fast answer! I just got my rf 100-500 today and it’s recognisably sharper than my ef 100-400 mm L IS USM II. I didn’t expect so much of a difference since I always found my ef lens very sharp and nicely… so I in case I’ll try an extender any time soon I will follow your advise thank you so much. I enjoy so much your videos as I would travel to Australia during watching these videos 😍 looking forward for all you’re doing 👏👌👍📸
Thanks for the video! I bought an R5 earlier this year. Emptied my camera budget account, so I have been using my EF 70-200 2.8is with and without my 2x converter for several months. I get decent pictures with the lens by itself, but when I add the converter the pictures are just not great. I finally have the budget to buy a new lens and was trying to decide if I should go with the RF 100-500 or a used original EF Prime 300 2.8is. I ordered a used 300 2.8 today. I will have 21 days to try it...if I hate it, I will return it and get the RF 100-500. Can't wait to see if the 300 with the 2x converter on the R5 provides good files. Though this video makes me wish I had one with an R6ii and the RF 100-500. Those files from the R6 look really good.
Hi Duade, Great video once again! This is has helped me decide on my next body, R5 here I come! Being cheeky would it be possible to get a few "how to" video showing how you capture images in the field again?
We are currently in a hard lockdown here in Victoria making it difficult to get out and about. I hope to do some in the field videos in the future, Cheers, Duade
@10:14 if someone is shooting a full frame in crop mode to get the bird bigger, they should use the zoom button. It doesn't alter the image size or quality, but does allow you to see a bit better what you are shooting
You nailed every major issue perfectly. I can not reinforce the advantage of getting as close as possible physically to your object. At 30 to 50 feet, there is no need for a larger and heavier lens nor crop sensor nor TC. Leaving that gimbal head and large tripod at home and hand holding a 100-500 f/5.6 up close will blow at background perfectly and fill ones frame.
Really cool, thanks. I've often wanted to do this comparison but I don't have the gear to do it. I'm just a hobbyist (mostly) and often wonder if it's not smarter to pair a higher quality shorter lens with a higher rez body, vs a cheaper body with a 'wildlife' lens. For me, I think the former makes more sense since it likely means a more versatile solution for the same budget or less - something like a D850 with a good fast portrait lens will meet (most) of my wildlife needs - bigger game at fair distance, closer birds (with heavy cropping). If I had the money I'd get a GFX100s and the 250mm prime - I'd love to see how far that could get you realistically :D
Nice, very interesting, I use a 500 with teleconverter, but my photos are 90% from a fixed position, I think that for the photos where you move it is better to prefer lightness, with a more manageable lens :)
Duade I compare my 6 megapixel APS-C to my 24 APS-C cameras as I use both my observations confirm yours . The 6 megapixel cameras are only good for three pictures then buffer. BIF are challenging with the older cameras and screw mount lens compared to the PLM lens with blazing fast autofocus. Also focus points on one 6 megapixel camera has 4 focus points the other 12 focus points my 24 megapixel camera has 27 focus points makes a difference in autofocus speed. I have tried a 500mm mirror lens good for stationary birds. Terrible for BIF most are out of focus. So many options I find what works for me is all I can ask as it dips a hobbies for me not my livelihood.
This is really excellent and nicely comprehensive, Duade. If there was one additional aspect to include in the discussion, I would suggest it be the role of pixel density when choosing between FF and APS-C for distant subjects.
Great video, Duade!! Really nice and comprehensive comparison. I use the R5 and the 100-500. When the light is good I sometimes use the 1.4 TC and I am pleased with the results. I also have the RF 800 f11 but rarely use it because of the image quality that is just a far cry from the 100-500. Even with the TC attached the 100-500 is still better than the 800f11. Still the f11 is great for what it is
Aaron, I appreciate you sharing your real world experience, the RF100-500 is pretty much telephoto sharpness and quality which is pretty incredible from a zoom. Its a shame the extender use is a bit clumsy on the RF lenses as it is annoying to lose the 100mm and not being able to retract the lens. Cheers, Duade
That was a great video Duade. Very interesting. I bought my R5 a month or two ago and I’m loving it. Planning to buy the 100-500 once I’ve saved a bit more. One thing I’ve been thinking about - which your video *nearly* answered is whether an extender is worth it. How would an image at 500, cropped for 1000 and scaled with super resolution compare with an image at 1000 using a 2x extender?
Nick if you watch from 12:22 that should give you a good idea. That was 500mm vs 1000mm which gives you the field of view. The 2x on the 100-500 has its problems as the max aperture becomes f14 meaning you need a lot of light, the AF slows down, the IQ takes a drop and with extenders the lens is permanently extended. The extenders will work but just be prepared for a drop in quality and AF speed. I would likely use a 1.4 and crop if I had to choose and only in good light. Cheers, Duade
Thanks Duade, this is a very well thought out and presented video and helpful to a lot of folks, I’m sure. I like the fact you emphasise that people have options available to them irrespective of their budget, that can still produce good images, particularly if the intention is to display the end result on screen, which is what a lot of people do. I also like that you mention that when birds are in flight, in low light, and some distance away then a fast prime with an extender and the R5 are going to offer you the ability to crop and still have the image quality. Quite a few of the birds I like to photograph fall into this category so I will be leaning towards the R5 as I already have a legacy EF 500L F4. Duade, a question , I have a EF 100-400 MK II, if I upgrade to an R5, would you recommend going for the 100-500 RF as well (selling/ trading in the 100-400)?
Dave, if you have a 500 with a 1.4 then the 100-400 would be a great second lens. I didn't have a zoom so the 100-500 was a good option. I would only switch if you could easily afford it as it won't be a huge difference. Good luck with it all. Cheers, Duade
I use a Nikon D500 (crop sensor) with a 500mm f4.0 P lens. Normally there is a 1.4x teleconverter attached. I also have a 2x teleconverter, but use it sparingly. A DK-17M Magnifying Eyepiece helps with focusing
Thanks for this helpful and very informative video. I would, however, take issue with your claim that APSC sensors are noiser than full frame sensors. Noise is a function of pixel density not sensor size. So, yes a crop sensor that has the same pixel count as a full-size sensor will be the noisier of those two sensors (if everything else is kept the same). However, my old 60D with it's crop sensor isn't inherently noiser than my new R5 because they both have pretty much the same pixel density. If the R5 is less noisy it's because of tech improvements that could apply just as well to a camera with an APSC camera if Canon wanted to. In fact, I suspect it is a bit easier to limit noise in a smaller sensor, as it generates less heat and has relatively more surface area than a larger sensor with the same pixel density.
Thanks Erik, yes, I am hopeful that the R7 if it happens will be a class leading APSC sensor. I hope to get a 90D in the near future and will do a number of tests which should be fun. Cheers, Duade
False! For the same sensor tech, noise is a function of sensor size. Dont believe me? Check the recent dpreview video that compares the A7sIII vs A7rIV
@@rzlorlnd please rewatch the video you cite. At 9 minutes they say a higher megapixel sensor of the same size absolutely has more noise. The point of that video is that both sensors are so good that you really don't see more noise in a print of a normal scene. The laws of physics dictates that more closely packed pixels will produce more noise if all else is equal. This may only be particularly important if you are doing astrophotography or other truly low light photography, but it is a fact.
@@erikswenson2659 No it's not a fact, you don't understand what you talking about. More pixels equals more noisy only if you display in your monitor at 100% because you view the photo at more magnfication not because "noise is a function of megapixels".
@@rzlorlnd we'll this isn't the forum for trying to debate such a technical question. I suggest others carefully watch the video you suggest and do some additional research to decide for themselves.
For me bird and nature photography is all about mobility. I like to walk a lot and not use tripods. That is why i chose Olympus and never have looked back. Also high iso is not a problem anymore because of dx0 and topaz.
I agree though nothing can replace a 500 or 600mm f/4. For now I sacrifice comfort to carry more weight. But the important thing is to get out and enjoy nature.
Absolutely agree, I have moved from Nikon to Panasonic's G9. With native lenses I can hand hold at 400mm down to 60th of a second and can walk with it all day!
@@johnpavett68 You do know there are full frame cameras and lenes you can walk around all day with too? I have the 100-500 lens and it's perfectly light and mobile.
Great video as usual, really appreciate all of your content. Have you used Canons digital photo professional? It´s a bit of a pain to use but the images look sooo much better regarding color and noise. Even if its a bit slow it saves time (or at least pain) for me trying to get the colors right in Lr. If I´m going to print I always use it first and export a tif to do the final details in Lr. A comparison video with pros/cons between the two would be cool to see and appreciated by many who struggle with specially R5 and Lr. Have a great weekend!
Thanks Henrik, yes, I have used it but it is very painful. If you use a mask to selectively sharpen in Lightroom it should reduce the noise in the background. Cheers, Duade
Imrecently purchased the rf100-500 and use it on my EOS R. It has increased my keeper rate over my old 100-400 mk1. I really do like the R but have started lusting for an R5 or 6. The large file size from the R5 I thought was actually something I wasn’t going to take advantage of as I usually just post to social media and rarely print anything bigger than 8x10 so the R6 seemed it might be the logical choice. Then I watch this! I often rely on cropping since my maximum reach is 500mm. Topaz Labs has helped with their SharpenAI and GigaPizal software but now I’m thinking the larger file size from the R5 just gives you a better starting point. It just means I may have to save a little bit longer before I can jump into the R5. Sorry for the long comment but I do thoroughly enjoy your videos, thank you!
If you buy the R5 you won't regret it and if you record cRAW to the CF express card and jpeg or heif to the SD card you can just use the jpeg or heif files for social media and if you get an exceptional image you can download the cRAW file. Apparently the cRAW file is half the size of RAW and just as good.
Joe, yes the R5 would be perfect on the RF100-500, the cropping ability is very good, who knows perhaps the R7 will come along whilst you are saving and may be another option. Cheers, Duade
Thanks Duade, great, concise and informative video. I have used the 1.6 crop in the R5 fairly regularly as I do find the tracking does a better job in messy situations. Certainly agree about the risk of clipping a wing, but I been frustrated on a number of occasions where the R5 simply won’t lock on otherwise ( I’ve set my depth of field button to that function). Thanks again !
With a 200 to 500 and a 2X converter I still end up having to crop a bit. I don’t crop that much since I only have 12 Megas pixels to start with on my Nikon D3S. I’m planning on getting the D850
I really want the Canon 400mm 2.8 iii EF & 2X iii extender as i would love to shoot larger wildlife aswell as birds!. I best get to saving my dollars :)
Wait, the R5 images are 8192 x 5464 and you forgot to mention that it depends on the size of the monitor, not the resolution so much, for example a 4K 27" monitor is practically identical to a 1440P 27" monitor.
Bernie, my apologies if it was confusing, I was referring to the cropped size of the R5 which was I think 3860px and the R6 around 2500px. A 4k monitor requires a minimum 3840px so the R6 could not display. My understanding is the resolution of 4k is the same regardless of the size of the monitor. A 27" 4k monitor has the same amount of pixels as a 32" 4k monitor, that is 3840px. A 1440p monitor has a width of 2560px regardsless of the size of the monitor. Cheers, Duade
Here i am on a 40mp Fujifilm X-T5 APSC camera with adapted long prime lenses shooting birds and fighting the poor AF performance and yet, still getting good shots, still capturing beautiful colors, and most importantly still having fun because I LOVE the body and how it all feels on my hands.
I guess the most important thing is to shoot with whatever will encourage and give you motivation to get out there and use it. The best camera is the one you're excited to go out and play with :)
Finally a pro who ask the right questions to help choose the right a cam and a lens ! Thx !
Nicolas, thanks for the comment, glad it helped, Cheers, Duade
One of the best videos I’ve seen comparing focal length, crop factor and sensor size. Awesome video. Thank you so much for the examples
Jhosse, it is my pleasure, I am glad to hear you found it helpful. Cheers, Duade
Indeed!
Completely agree. Great video!
I've begun my journey as a wildlife photographer with the Fuji X-H2S and a 150-600mm. It's kinda interesting because there's not many photographers around so far that uses the X-series as their platform, so the knowledge is quite low overall. I made the choice myself because I had heard about the great ISO performance and the image quality and so far it hasn't disappointed. Some of my best shots have been 6,500 ISO or higher and I've had no issues removing some of the noise with post processing software (especially not with the latest Lightroom upodate). I've really liked Fujifilm cameras in the past so this is why I decided to go with a Fuji for wildlife photography as well. It is a bit tricky in low light situations of course but if Fuji stays on this path I'm sure we will have more options in the near future when it comes to better lenses etc.
First time I've seen your videos. This one is a great survey of the real dynamics and differences across glass and sensors. Well done.
Tim, welcome to the channel and thanks for the feedback. I hope you enjoy the content. Cheers, Duade
Appreciate ALL the work this took. I've been saying for a while now, that the R5 has a built-in 7D2 and why I sold it and the 5D4 to offset the cost.
Fernando, yes, it is a wonderful camera that gives you the benefit of being able to crop. Cheers, Duade
Probably the best video I've ever seen comparing all the methods for filling the frame with small, or even any birds. One quick note from a UK nature photographer. I am somewhat envious at how close Australian and North American bird photographers can get to birds in general. For many years I was just amazed at the bird photos American photographers got. However, TH-cam videos have explained why, because when you see how close the photographer is to the bird, out in the open, I am amazed. These are often similar, or even the same species as in the UK. Yet except when using a hide/blind, you would never get that close. In the UK, except for tame birds in a public park, certain seabirds at breeding colonies, there is almost no way you could fill the frame with a FF sensor, no matter how much focal length you have. So cropping, and heavy cropping at that is fairly standard. Additionally, being a far more crowded island with less public land, you are generally stuck to walking around a lot of sites, meaning a more portable outfit. Although of course there is a big difference between bird photography, and birding with a camera, but that is a whole different subject.
Just to give some ideas of distance. With a raptor, out in the open, there are not many opportunities to get within 100yds/m of the bird. With small birds out in the open, often it is difficult to get closer than 45ft, ,15 yds, 14m. Many ducks, because they are regularly shot, like Teal, Shoveller etc, won't let you get closer than about 80m in the open.
Stephan, I live in Kentucky which is part of the mid Atlantic flyway for migratory waterfowl. If after this Covid crazy ever gets a handle and under control try to make it to the states. Either early to mid spring for songbirds and turkeys or wintertime for Bald eagles, waterfowl and other raptors. Be more than HAPPY to be your photo guide. It gives me more opportunities to get out too.
Stephen, I appreciate how difficult it must be for you, we are very fortunate with how many birds allow a semi close approach. We do have very wild ducks so I have some idea of your challenge, it is near impossible to get anywhere near them as they are shot here also. I spend a lot of time trying to find locations that have birds that are approachable or locations I can setup and have good odds of getting a shot. Chasing truly wild birds is a real challenge that is for sure. Cheers, Duade
The tip on upscaling images in Lightroom is huge. Just tried it on a raw file from my R6 and it made a huge difference. Great information. Thanks.
Great to hear, it is a good option if you want to print or make it larger. Cheers, Duade
VERY thorough, thanks Duade. I’ve been eyeing the R6, 100-500, extenders and upscaling software as I rarely print larger than 8x10 so this video is very helpful.
Thanks Charles, glad to hear you are enjoying the R6 and 100-500, it is a wonderful light kit. Cheers, Duade
I've just Sold all my Sony A7 gear and gone back to a Canon 20D and 40D both with low shutter count, at 70 years old I felt that going back to old school photography suits me best now, modern cameras are ok don't get me wrong but photography seems to easy with the latest tech, great video as always Duade :)
Great video mate. Glad you did the summary at the end, that wrapped it up nicely
Thanks mate, it was a fun video to make but took a lot longer than I had anticipated. Cheers, Duade
Absolutely epic.. this Video will stand the test of time and will be a reference for years to come... We missed ya, but so glad you took the time to produce this. I'm so happy with my R6 and you showed pretty much my workflow, by shooting, enhancing, cropping. Great to see I'm not doing anything stupid 🤣 A million thanks Duade, cheers!!!
Ramón great to hear we have a similar workflow, great to hear the R6 is performing well. Cheers, Duade
You do a good job of explaining all the possible combos and the pluses and minuses........and in moving along at a pace to deal with ever-shortening attention spans.
Stephen, thanks for that, yes it can be hard to find time to watch longer videos. Cheers, Duade
Thank you for doing this and other you tube videos on photography. They are clear and concise. The material that you provide has helped me greatly.
It is my pleasure Paul, I am glad it is helpful. Cheers, Duade
I loved learning about the Adobe Lightroom enhance feature. Thank you!
It is my pleasure Joanne, Cheers, Duade
Wow! Great information, well presented. I learned quite a bit 🙂 (Maine, USA)
That is great to hear Tom, Cheers, Duade
Hahah love the bluppers . You’re already humble to begin with hun . Love your videos 🙏
Thanks Kev, Cheers, Duade
Must have taken you ages to do this, very comprehensive and great insight and detail. Excellent, thank you
Ian, yes it took some time to put this one together, but I enjoyed the process. Cheers, Duade
Great demonstration video. The resolution of the R5 has made it a truly phenomenal camera for sports and wildlife.
Kevin, yes it is a fantastic camera, Cheers, Duade
Thanks for another great video Duade. I use the 400 f5.6 on my Eos R. The 30mp sensor is a good size but the focal length is a bit limiting. I just try getting closer to the subject to try to get frame fillers. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. Can't wait for this bloody lockdown to end so I can get back out there. All the best, Brian.
Have you tried the 1.4 extender with it? That's what I use on my 5dm3. Of course getting closer would be better.
G'day Brian, yes 400 can be a bit limiting for sure, as Keith mentioned my 1.4 version 3 extender works very well when you have adequate light. I shared lots of photos in my last video using the extender. It does struggle in low light but is very good in better light. I am also waiting for the lockdown to end. Cheers, Duade
@@keithwiebe1787 Hi Keith, yep I do use the 1.4 but of course that comes with its own limitations. Thanks for your input mate. All the best, Brian.
@@Duade Hi Duade, I have the same 1.4 extender and I do use it but as you have mentioned and as I replied to Keith it has its own limitations. Maybe I'm just impatient or expect too much from my equipment. Anyway, thanks again. All the best.
You have done a fantastic job of testing, comparing, and clarifying the available telephoto imaging options for wildlife photography. Especially for us Canon shooters you have specifically clarified our options and choices and the relative merits and/or liabilities of each. You left no stone unturned.
Concerning the R5's option to shoot in 1.6 crop factor mode, might it also convey the benefit of applying the camera's entire internal computing power (with a buffer and autofocusing system capable of 45mp) to a smaller file size, thereby increasing buffer depth and perhaps focusing faster/better, or increasing frames per second rates, beyond just applying a crop in the camera? I wonder if you have any insight into those possibilities? Thanks for a terrific and entertaining video empowering your viewers, whatever their equipment.
Mark, thanks for your comment I appreciate it. Yes, I think you are correct in crop mode you will have a much bigger buffer as the files are so much smaller. The FPS will not change and I am unsure about the AF performance, its possible if the bird is bigger it is easier for the sensor to pick up the eye, not sure. Cheers, Duade
My Sony a7rv has a 9k sensor. Using my 600mm lens, I can crop into 1500mm-ish (2.5x crop) and still retain a 4k crop. I have no need for a teleconverter. I use DxO deep prime 6 pro software and the sharpening capabilities of it are astonishing. I don't pay as much attention to ISO anymore because this software is absolutely amazing. It also adds dynamic range.
Thanks Jaysun, yes, that appears to be a very impressive sensor for sure. I would love to try that camera at some point. Cheers, Duade
What do you mean it adds dynamic range?
What would be your dream set up for birds and wildlife. Forget the cost. Thanks for your research in comparing gear.
Mine would be an R5 and EF400mm DO f/4 ii plus 1.4x and 2x extenders as this prime lens is the only Canon super tele light enough for hand holding at about 2kg and works brilliantly with either 1.4x or 2x extenders or even both stacked for 2.8x (need to use the EF mark ii extenders as these are the only ones that can be stacked) and I'd also use either an EF100-400mm ii or RF100-500 zoom.
@@noelchignell1048 What about the R3 and the 12,000 dollar RF 400 f2.8? Fun to dream.
@@angelogarciajr5356 the R3 is in my dream list but we won't have any unbiased tests until after it's released .
The RF400 f/2.8 weighs 2.9kg so it's too heavy for handholding for birds in flight and the extra stop of light isn't enough to justify the weight I think.
G'day Angelo, at the moment the Sony A1 is the best camera out there and coupled with the 600 f4 would be a fantastic kit. For BIF the A1 and 200-600 would be a great kit. Cheers, Duade
Thanks for the reminder about shooting the R5 in crop mode. I started digital photography with an 8 MP Rebel then “upgraded” to a 60D. When I put both cameras on a tripod and tested with a zoom lens at identical image size I liked the Rebel better. I now have a 6D and 100-400 L zoom. I thought the R7 might be a good choice to get more reach, but the more I see, the more I think it might be a repeat of my 60D experience. A 1.4x extender probably isn’t a good choice either. Without spending a fortune, the R5 might be my best choice at this time, or I could wait for a true replacement for the 7D.
James, yes all very interesting questions, I think the R5 will deliver far better quality and has many better features but at a much higher cost. The R7 really is an affordable way to get a bigger subject with amazing AF. Cheers, Duade
Bravo Duade. You put a great deal of work into this very excellent presentation.
Thanks for the feedback, Cheers, Duade
Thanks Duade . Would love to hear this same comparison with the new R7!
Thanks Steven, I do plan on doing a video soon on lenses etc. Cheers, Duade
Thanks from England mate, watched this twice to soak up the info :)
That is great to hear, I hope it was helpful, Cheers, Duade
Your vlogs are excellent and thorough and well thought out. Really easy to listen to and understand. Thanks so much for sharing this. Really well presented. Thank you.
Kelly, thanks for the lovely feedback, I appreciate it, Cheers, Duade
Did a comparison test using the Sigma 1.4 extender on a Sigma 150-600 vs a cropped the image to equal scale without the extender. The cropped image without the extender yielded better results. I my case I should have saved my money.
Thanks Robert, yes, extenders are only really useful on fast glass and usually primes. Cheers, Duade
Thank you very much, was debating going for the R6 to shoot sports and your video really helped me see the differences between all different factors. In the summer, when our school is closed, I started shooting birds as practice for in mouvement shooting, so small little hobby on the side, since their are similarities.
Jean-Pierre, I am glad it helped, good luck with the sports, Cheers, Duade
Best video of Duade so far. Keep it up. Thanks. Cheers...
Gayan, thanks for the feedback, Cheers, Duade
Awesome work Duade can't keep up with your output , great comparison between crop and full MP !
Thanks mate, it was a fun video to make. Cheers, Duade
Just found your fab channel - and like many others here really appreciate your offering us such well done and useful videos! Very thorough...I'll keep following and learning!
Thanks and welcome
Thanks from Toronto.having 600 mm Prime with R6 Mark II
That bee @ 16:21 deserves an Oscar for best supporting actor
Thanks, they love those flowers, Cheers, Duade
interesting video! I'd probably seen hundreds on the topic but yours is so much better. Cant't wait for the next one, cheers!
Jordan, thanks for the feedback, Im glad you enjoyed it, Cheers, Duade
I have been considering a change to Canon mirrorless for my full size bodies ( currently all 5D series). I have decided to stay with my DSLR equipment for now but I have decided to add a 7D mk ii to add to my 600 f4 and 300 f 2.8 rather then using my teleconverters. Especially on my 600 as I don’t care for the image quality especially the 2x. I will keep the new mirrorless in mind for the future, but the price of the used body outweighs the investment right now for the mirrorless option. I’m just getting into birding and find it very interesting and a lot of fun. Love your video s and instructional style. Keep it up.
Mark, thanks for your comment and sharing your experience. I believe the R7 is the camera many birders are waiting for as it should give excellent IQ, AF, FPS etc but also the 1.6 crop which is great for wildlife. The big question is how it handles higher ISO. Cheers, Duade
Loved the kookaburra! Hehe. Thanks for this video. Loads of comparisons and information. I noted that the APS-C will always noise issues. I think I keep coming back to the R5 as my upgrade from a 1200D. But Canon rumours say they bring out a new APS-C with bigger MP and hopefully better ISO capabilities. So I will continue to wait. Nothing to lose by waiting. I'll only upgrade once as I am hobbyist photographer and don't earn money from it. It's just for fun.
Nerrel, yes, I think that is wise, I believe Canon will release an APSC mirrorless at some stage this year which will be a nice upgrade over the 1200D. Cheers, Duade
I just bought an R6 after finding a used one at a great price, I can't afford the R5 right now. The only thing is, I also own the Canon 90D, which has 32.5 MP compared to the R6's 20.1MP. So although I think the R6 is overall a better camera in basically every way, being full-frame and mirrorless (vs. the 90D being APS-C and DSLR), I'm still wondering if the higher MP count on the 90D makes it more worthwhile for bird photography, at least when I'm not pushing the ISO too high. I should also mention I'm working with the Canon EF 70-300mm IS II USM, so the crop factor on the 90D is really helping me out with distant subjects.
This video is very timely! I finally got my 100-500 and shot it yesterday on my R5. I got some decent images of some butterflies and a wren. Given the light, the results were pretty decent but next time I'll use crop mode for such relatively small and distant subjects.
John, congrats on the lens, it is a wonderful versatile lens that is just great for just about everything. Cheers, Duade
Just the comparison I was looking for - thank you. I'm thinking of getting the R5 and I have a 100-400mm and currently use it on my 7D2. Also have a 1.4x but never used it on this setup due to the reduced speed/noise. The extender was unusable until we calibrated it, now that the mirrorless lenses don't need calibrating, it will be interesting to see how the extender performs
Jane, the R5 takes converters very well, much better than my DSLR. Good luck with your decision. Cheers, Duade
Hi Duade!
Thank you for your very interesting and enjoyable videos. The very serious approache in this video was very helpfull with very nice picture examples. Thank for your quality work!! Paul
Thanks Paul, it is my pleasure, Cheers, Duade
I found your video very informative. I, too, see that this took a fair amount of work to produce and edit to a watchable video. Thank you very much. I learned a whole lot.
Yes it took some time to put together but it was fun to produce, Cheers, Duade
Was looking forward for this video! Its very interesting with megapixels in relation to social media, I recently posted a picture many people liked and looked very sharp on facebook, but I knew for me personally the quality was terrible as my shutter speed was too slow and details were blurred.
This aside I think its no excuse just to accept poor image quality because your only posting on social media, im aiming for the best image quality for all my images even though I don't print or sell at the moment, I like to know any shots im really proud of I can have them printed in future for friends and family to enjoy the full detail up close and in person. Also a bonus of a quality photo is really tight crops to 1 of 2 megapixels for instagram :)
Thanks Kurtis, yes, the goal should be to try and get high quality images, we are just lucky that these new cameras allow very nice shots even after decent cropping. Cheers, Duade
Another interesting video. Your results are pretty much what I thought you would get. As a Nikon user I’m still waiting for a mirrorless body that can rival the R5. Keep the videos coming! Thanks
Thanks David, I have no doubt the Z9 will be amazing, Cheers, Duade
Another great video Duade, I went for a 400mm f2.8 GM over a 600mm for the exact reasons you mentioned in you video, A1 with 50mp and you R5 will all these extra megapixels give so much more versatility
Mick, the A1 and 400 must be an amazing piece of kit, I think we all ower Sony a lot as they have really given the industry a shake up which has only benefited all users. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade Cheees Duade, yes if I only had 20-24mp I would have gone with a 600mm, we sure are spoilt now to the point you just can’t miss a shot - lol
Thinking of picking up the R5 for landscapes and birding until the R7 shows up, the 7D Mark II with the 100-400mm II is nice but as soon as the light starts to fade the noise is too high for my taste. Thought of getting the R6 for landscapes first but that 45mp makes a difference, tried comparing my friends 50mp 5dsr to a 6D II and sheshh that 50mp made a huge difference.
Yes, I too am waiting for the R7, fingers crossed it is everything we hope for. The R5 is a fantastic FF camera and you can't go wrong with it. Cheers, Duade
😊 In leu of the 20MP R6 for smaller budgets, the 30MP R is a good choice which saves you $700 dollars and you get 10 more mega pixels to work with.
Yes, for landscapes and portraits the R is a nice camera. For wildlife it lacks the eye tracking and FPS of the R6 which is really important. Cheers, Duade
Good run-down. Matches my experience with my R5 and 100-500 and 800mm lenses. I've been tempted by extenders, but haven't tried one yet.
Kevin, I think you have a great set of lenses for most scenarios. Those RF extenders are very expensive, I have not got one yet as if I need reach I use my EF prime. Cheers, Duade
Very good analysis, and my own experience parallels. I got back into photography a couple years ago with a Sony a 7R2 and the Tamron 28 to 75 lens. The R2 has 42 megapixels and an APSC mode it has 18. That crop-mode gives me a much greater usability out of my one lens and still leaves some room for additional cropping. Additional glass is pending, but for now I have some freedom.
Guy, yes that flexibility is fantastic, and we are fortunate to have these cameras now. Cheers, Duade
Great video, good to see the comparisons between the various options.
Lachlan, glad it was helpful, Cheers, Duade
great video. I love real comparisons like this. I've had both of them EF lenses, and went from 7dmk2 to 5D mk4, now I have a Canon 600mm F4 LIS ii and the extenders and I just got an R5 on loan for a few weeks. It's going to be my next upgrade. It's a shame the R3 is only 24 megapixels because its ergonomics and other improvements are great.
G'day, the 600 is a beautiful lens and paired with the R5 will result in stunning images. Good luck, Cheers, Duade 👍
@@Duade thanks :)
Awesome video and what I myself wanted to test. :)
Jan, glad it was helpful, Cheers, Duade
Excellent comparison Duade! I still prefer my full frame, yet, I am now using both, FF and Apsc. As you said, what is important is what we intend to do with our photos. But , all things aside, I still use my old canon 5dsr, even with noise and all, paired with one 150-600 lens ( I can't afford the price in uruguay for the canon 500 ) is my prefered setting for bird photography. I agree to more DSLR videos as there are still plenty of photograhers who use those with longer lenses. In fact in my country, from the community I know, no one uses the mirrorless systems, ( I'm alone with my xt4) all kept either the DSlr,just a few with Sony, and a lot of them with bridge cameras for birding purposes.... Thanks again Duade for a great content!
Daniela, hopefully in the next month or two I will have some DSLR videos, Cheers, Duade
@@Duade you are very kind, thanks for the comment and we (I think more than one lol) await for your Dslr vlogs! Best wishes for you and your family.
Thanks Duade. Great video as always. The R5 is a beast….
Rui, thanks for the ongoing support. Just FYI I have always smiled when I see your name as I had a childhood friend who had your name. You may not be aware, but it is a Maori name in New Zealand. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade 🙂. That’s interesting. I mean I’m from Portugal 🇵🇹, that’s half way around the world from you guys. Cheers.
Another great video weighing up the different options, illustrated nicely. Thanks Duade !
While the short summary is obviously "the most expensive gear is the best", you still offer a good insight into which next incremental steps can help to reach a next level.
While do have a tripod and gimbal, I want the best reach which I can still walkaround with on longer hikes. This limits the weight of camera plus lens to max 2.5kg, which rules out the big whites or a Sigma 150-600Sports. And sadly the RF F11 lenses are not weatherproof.
Last year I moved up from the Tamron 16-300 to the Canon 100-400ii (day and night difference in IQ !), next I want to replace my 70D with the R6 .. or if possible the R7.
In this video you compared FF mirrorless to good old DSLR APS-C. Of course because who in the Canon world would mate a M6ii without a (decent) EVF to a 100-400ii or a big white ? If the R7 unicorn would turn out to be the January 22 arrival supposed to "annoy the fanboys" (Canon Rumors) then I would really want to see an update of this comparison because the R7 might be pretty close to an R6 plus a 1.4x extender ..
I believe the R7 and RF100-500 would be an excellent kit that is super light with plenty of reach. I really do hope Canon release one in 2022. Cheers, Duade
It's always fun when people learn the basics of focal length. That every mm counts heavily on the ultra wide spectrum and on the tele spectrum only steps of 100mm really shows.
Patrick, yes you can't crop wider but you can crop in closer. I was shooting with the 200-600 Sony and a friend with the 100-500 Canon and the difference was crazy, I simply couldn't get the shots he was. Cheers, Duade
This is a great video with proof of the pudding on top. I actually also got a 40D that I don't know what to do with. But Im off to Antarctica in January and have invested in a used 80D and a r6. This video makes me confident that my choice of gear is good. For glass I got an very old Vivitar 19-35, rf 24-105mm f4, canon ef 70-200mm f4 and sigma 150-600mm. Thanks for confirming my choices! Wooohaa
Congrats on the new gear and have fun down with the Penguins, Cheers, Duade
Just getting into wildlife photography and this is MASSIVELY helpful determining what I can do well with what I’ve got and what is the best value lens to get reach. Thanks!
Wow!! Fantastic video, full of everything I wanted to know on this subject. Thanks
that is great to hear, I'm glad your enjoyed it, Cheers, Duade
Thanx a lot for this video! Super informative video for me!
thanks for the feedback, I'm glad it helped, Cheers, Duade
Excellent content, well explained!
Thanks Chris, I appreciate the feedback, Cheers, Duade
Thank you for the video,, I think this is one of the best videos i have seen on this subject.
Thank you for your kind comment, I'm glad you enjoyed it, Cheers, Duade
I enjoyed this video!. Thanks. FYI, the volume was low.. you might consider. Thanks.
Thanks for the feedback, Cheers, Duade
Thanks for the video.
Well, I use EF 300mm f/2.8 + 2x on my 7D for bird photography. Don't find any valid reason to replace the body with R5 or R6. My EF 400mm f/ 5.6 also gives me great service for handheld flight shots.
Quazi, yes your kit is more than capable of capturing very nice images, good luck with it, Cheers, Duade
Someone told me put an Englishmen in the sun and give him a cocktail and tada you’ve got an aussie…:) that’s why one has to love your chilled way but the content of course is great too thanks so much!
One question if you had to decide owning the R5 and the rf 100-500 between the extender 1.4 or the 2.0 which one would you prefer (both cost almost the same and of course more reach seems the better choice but is there a big fall of in terms of image quality in your opinion…?) cheers
I think your mate is about right, I prefer the relaxed quiet life to a fast paced one. I would go with the 1.4, the 2x is just a little too slow in terms of light coming in and AF not quite as accurate. The 1.4 does pretty well but the lens is at its best without extenders IMO. I have used the 1.4 but only in good light. Good luck, Cheers, Duade
@@Duade oh man trank you for that really fast answer! I just got my rf 100-500 today and it’s recognisably sharper than my ef 100-400 mm L IS USM II. I didn’t expect so much of a difference since I always found my ef lens very sharp and nicely… so I in case I’ll try an extender any time soon I will follow your advise thank you so much. I enjoy so much your videos as I would travel to Australia during watching these videos 😍 looking forward for all you’re doing 👏👌👍📸
Thanks for the video! I bought an R5 earlier this year. Emptied my camera budget account, so I have been using my EF 70-200 2.8is with and without my 2x converter for several months. I get decent pictures with the lens by itself, but when I add the converter the pictures are just not great.
I finally have the budget to buy a new lens and was trying to decide if I should go with the RF 100-500 or a used original EF Prime 300 2.8is. I ordered a used 300 2.8 today. I will have 21 days to try it...if I hate it, I will return it and get the RF 100-500. Can't wait to see if the 300 with the 2x converter on the R5 provides good files. Though this video makes me wish I had one with an R6ii and the RF 100-500. Those files from the R6 look really good.
Hi Duade, Great video once again! This is has helped me decide on my next body, R5 here I come! Being cheeky would it be possible to get a few "how to" video showing how you capture images in the field again?
We are currently in a hard lockdown here in Victoria making it difficult to get out and about. I hope to do some in the field videos in the future, Cheers, Duade
@@Duade how stupid am I! I really should know better with family living in Geelong. Sorry
@10:14 if someone is shooting a full frame in crop mode to get the bird bigger, they should use the zoom button. It doesn't alter the image size or quality, but does allow you to see a bit better what you are shooting
very comprehensive.
Thanks Steve, Cheers, Duade
The best video ever. Well done and thx for what you do.
Thanks Tomas, I appreciate the feedback, Cheers, Duade
Good comparison Duade 👌
ruley74 thank you, Cheers, Duade
Tnx. Really appreciated this video. I’m trying to work learn how to best use a 2x on the R5 with RF 100-500. Works great if there is enough light
Paul, yes it only really works in direct sunlight, nice to have that option available. Cheers, Duade
Thanks, very good coverage of the topic.
Hovhannes, my pleasure, Cheers, Duade
Very informative video Duade.
Thanks mate, glad you enjoyed it, Cheers, Duade
Only Topaz Gigapixel ! just like Topaz DeNoise AI ! nothing better yet :) Thanks for the informative reviews.
My pleasure, DXO Pure RAW is also very good. Cheers, Duade
You nailed every major issue perfectly. I can not reinforce the advantage of getting as close as possible physically to your object. At 30 to 50 feet, there is no need for a larger and heavier lens nor crop sensor nor TC. Leaving that gimbal head and large tripod at home and hand holding a 100-500 f/5.6 up close will blow at background perfectly and fill ones frame.
I completely agree, and it can be difficult to get close but trying to find locations and approachable species is the key. Cheers, Duade
Glad I found you
Ivan, I am glad you did too. Cheers, Duade
Really cool, thanks. I've often wanted to do this comparison but I don't have the gear to do it. I'm just a hobbyist (mostly) and often wonder if it's not smarter to pair a higher quality shorter lens with a higher rez body, vs a cheaper body with a 'wildlife' lens. For me, I think the former makes more sense since it likely means a more versatile solution for the same budget or less - something like a D850 with a good fast portrait lens will meet (most) of my wildlife needs - bigger game at fair distance, closer birds (with heavy cropping). If I had the money I'd get a GFX100s and the 250mm prime - I'd love to see how far that could get you realistically :D
Ruaan, yes that would be interesting, might have to try that one day. The D850 is probably one of the best DSLR's ever made. Cheers, Duade
Great video, very informative
Thanks David, Cheers, Duade
Nice, very interesting, I use a 500 with teleconverter, but my photos are 90% from a fixed position, I think that for the photos where you move it is better to prefer lightness, with a more manageable lens :)
Marco, yes having a light lens is a big advantage when you need to move around. Cheers, Duade
Awesome video, I keep learning a lot of your videos... Thanks for all the hard work
Duade
I compare my 6 megapixel APS-C to my 24 APS-C cameras as I use both my observations confirm yours . The 6 megapixel cameras are only good for three pictures then buffer. BIF are challenging with the older cameras and screw mount lens compared to the PLM lens with blazing fast autofocus. Also focus points on one 6 megapixel camera has 4 focus points the other 12 focus points my 24 megapixel camera has 27 focus points makes a difference in autofocus speed. I have tried a 500mm mirror lens good for stationary birds. Terrible for BIF most are out of focus. So many options I find what works for me is all I can ask as it dips a hobbies for me not my livelihood.
yes the newer cameras just make it a lot easier to capture images, Cheers, Duade
Really enjoy your videos. Lots of great advice and Information.
Thx 😊
This is really excellent and nicely comprehensive, Duade. If there was one additional aspect to include in the discussion, I would suggest it be the role of pixel density when choosing between FF and APS-C for distant subjects.
Thanks Timothy, good point, Cheers, Duade
Awesome video!
Thanks Justin, Cheers, Duade
Great video, Duade!! Really nice and comprehensive comparison. I use the R5 and the 100-500. When the light is good I sometimes use the 1.4 TC and I am pleased with the results. I also have the RF 800 f11 but rarely use it because of the image quality that is just a far cry from the 100-500. Even with the TC attached the 100-500 is still better than the 800f11. Still the f11 is great for what it is
Aaron, I appreciate you sharing your real world experience, the RF100-500 is pretty much telephoto sharpness and quality which is pretty incredible from a zoom. Its a shame the extender use is a bit clumsy on the RF lenses as it is annoying to lose the 100mm and not being able to retract the lens. Cheers, Duade
That was a great video Duade. Very interesting. I bought my R5 a month or two ago and I’m loving it. Planning to buy the 100-500 once I’ve saved a bit more. One thing I’ve been thinking about - which your video *nearly* answered is whether an extender is worth it. How would an image at 500, cropped for 1000 and scaled with super resolution compare with an image at 1000 using a 2x extender?
Nick if you watch from 12:22 that should give you a good idea. That was 500mm vs 1000mm which gives you the field of view. The 2x on the 100-500 has its problems as the max aperture becomes f14 meaning you need a lot of light, the AF slows down, the IQ takes a drop and with extenders the lens is permanently extended. The extenders will work but just be prepared for a drop in quality and AF speed. I would likely use a 1.4 and crop if I had to choose and only in good light. Cheers, Duade
Thanks Duade, this is a very well thought out and presented video and helpful to a lot of folks, I’m sure. I like the fact you emphasise that people have options available to them irrespective of their budget, that can still produce good images, particularly if the intention is to display the end result on screen, which is what a lot of people do. I also like that you mention that when birds are in flight, in low light, and some distance away then a fast prime with an extender and the R5 are going to offer you the ability to crop and still have the image quality. Quite a few of the birds I like to photograph fall into this category so I will be leaning towards the R5 as I already have a legacy EF 500L F4.
Duade, a question , I have a EF 100-400 MK II, if I upgrade to an R5, would you recommend going for the 100-500 RF as well (selling/ trading in the 100-400)?
Dave, if you have a 500 with a 1.4 then the 100-400 would be a great second lens. I didn't have a zoom so the 100-500 was a good option. I would only switch if you could easily afford it as it won't be a huge difference. Good luck with it all. Cheers, Duade
I use a Nikon D500 (crop sensor) with a 500mm f4.0 P lens. Normally there is a 1.4x teleconverter attached. I also have a 2x teleconverter, but use it sparingly. A DK-17M Magnifying Eyepiece helps with focusing
Thanks for this helpful and very informative video. I would, however, take issue with your claim that APSC sensors are noiser than full frame sensors. Noise is a function of pixel density not sensor size. So, yes a crop sensor that has the same pixel count as a full-size sensor will be the noisier of those two sensors (if everything else is kept the same). However, my old 60D with it's crop sensor isn't inherently noiser than my new R5 because they both have pretty much the same pixel density. If the R5 is less noisy it's because of tech improvements that could apply just as well to a camera with an APSC camera if Canon wanted to. In fact, I suspect it is a bit easier to limit noise in a smaller sensor, as it generates less heat and has relatively more surface area than a larger sensor with the same pixel density.
Thanks Erik, yes, I am hopeful that the R7 if it happens will be a class leading APSC sensor. I hope to get a 90D in the near future and will do a number of tests which should be fun. Cheers, Duade
False! For the same sensor tech, noise is a function of sensor size. Dont believe me? Check the recent dpreview video that compares the A7sIII vs A7rIV
@@rzlorlnd please rewatch the video you cite. At 9 minutes they say a higher megapixel sensor of the same size absolutely has more noise. The point of that video is that both sensors are so good that you really don't see more noise in a print of a normal scene. The laws of physics dictates that more closely packed pixels will produce more noise if all else is equal. This may only be particularly important if you are doing astrophotography or other truly low light photography, but it is a fact.
@@erikswenson2659 No it's not a fact, you don't understand what you talking about. More pixels equals more noisy only if you display in your monitor at 100% because you view the photo at more magnfication not because "noise is a function of megapixels".
@@rzlorlnd we'll this isn't the forum for trying to debate such a technical question. I suggest others carefully watch the video you suggest and do some additional research to decide for themselves.
3:46 That's a weird looking bird.
Thanks, yes, they have a very big bill, unfortunately they are critically endangered due to habitat loss. Cheers, Duade
For me bird and nature photography is all about mobility. I like to walk a lot and not use tripods. That is why i chose Olympus and never have looked back. Also high iso is not a problem anymore because of dx0 and topaz.
I agree though nothing can replace a 500 or 600mm f/4. For now I sacrifice comfort to carry more weight. But the important thing is to get out and enjoy nature.
Totally agree Joonas. I don't miss my old Canon 500mmf4 at all. The Olympus 300mm f4 pro is a stellar lens on a 2x crop MFT body.
Absolutely agree, I have moved from Nikon to Panasonic's G9. With native lenses I can hand hold at 400mm down to 60th of a second and can walk with it all day!
@@johnpavett68 You do know there are full frame cameras and lenes you can walk around all day with too? I have the 100-500 lens and it's perfectly light and mobile.
@@frankanderson5012 That's my goto lens, fantastic, lightweight and couple it with R5/R6 with IBIS and it gives superb results.
Great information. I like to pixel peep due to my fascination w/ nature, so my A7iii w/ 100-400 leaves a bit to be desired.
Taylor, still a great kit for wildlife, good luck with your photography, Cheers, Duade
Great video as usual, really appreciate all of your content. Have you used Canons digital photo professional? It´s a bit of a pain to use but the images look sooo much better regarding color and noise. Even if its a bit slow it saves time (or at least pain) for me trying to get the colors right in Lr. If I´m going to print I always use it first and export a tif to do the final details in Lr. A comparison video with pros/cons between the two would be cool to see and appreciated by many who struggle with specially R5 and Lr. Have a great weekend!
Thanks Henrik, yes, I have used it but it is very painful. If you use a mask to selectively sharpen in Lightroom it should reduce the noise in the background. Cheers, Duade
Imrecently purchased the rf100-500 and use it on my EOS R. It has increased my keeper rate over my old 100-400 mk1. I really do like the R but have started lusting for an R5 or 6. The large file size from the R5 I thought was actually something I wasn’t going to take advantage of as I usually just post to social media and rarely print anything bigger than 8x10 so the R6 seemed it might be the logical choice. Then I watch this! I often rely on cropping since my maximum reach is 500mm. Topaz Labs has helped with their SharpenAI and GigaPizal software but now I’m thinking the larger file size from the R5 just gives you a better starting point. It just means I may have to save a little bit longer before I can jump into the R5. Sorry for the long comment but I do thoroughly enjoy your videos, thank you!
If you buy the R5 you won't regret it and if you record cRAW to the CF express card and jpeg or heif to the SD card you can just use the jpeg or heif files for social media and if you get an exceptional image you can download the cRAW file. Apparently the cRAW file is half the size of RAW and just as good.
Joe, yes the R5 would be perfect on the RF100-500, the cropping ability is very good, who knows perhaps the R7 will come along whilst you are saving and may be another option. Cheers, Duade
Thanks Duade, great, concise and informative video. I have used the 1.6 crop in the R5 fairly regularly as I do find the tracking does a better job in messy situations. Certainly agree about the risk of clipping a wing, but I been frustrated on a number of occasions where the R5 simply won’t lock on otherwise ( I’ve set my depth of field button to that function). Thanks again !
Thanks Guy, yes that is a good reason to use the crop mode, Cheers, Duade
With a 200 to 500 and a 2X converter I still end up having to crop a bit. I don’t crop that much since I only have 12 Megas pixels to start with on my Nikon D3S. I’m planning on getting the D850
I really want the Canon 400mm 2.8 iii EF & 2X iii extender as i would love to shoot larger wildlife aswell as birds!. I best get to saving my dollars :)
Stephen, yes the RF400 2.8 is a wonderful lens, but as you say very expensive, Cheers, Duade
Wait, the R5 images are 8192 x 5464 and you forgot to mention that it depends on the size of the monitor, not the resolution so much, for example a 4K 27" monitor is practically identical to a 1440P 27" monitor.
Bernie, my apologies if it was confusing, I was referring to the cropped size of the R5 which was I think 3860px and the R6 around 2500px. A 4k monitor requires a minimum 3840px so the R6 could not display. My understanding is the resolution of 4k is the same regardless of the size of the monitor. A 27" 4k monitor has the same amount of pixels as a 32" 4k monitor, that is 3840px. A 1440p monitor has a width of 2560px regardsless of the size of the monitor. Cheers, Duade