bcguy wrote:
Those are awesome photos! I can't say that I've ever seen that species of goose before. I looked it up--it looks like it's an old world species. That's something you don't see every day in North America!
Thank you, they have been there a few years now. I am not sure of the story where they came from. They are in our local park/zoo but free roaming. They had 4 chicks last year, one survived which was there with them. They are different and loud.
How low of a shutter speed can I hand hold a long lens and still capture a slow moving bird? Don't really know but I was pushing it at a Tv of 1/640 with a FL of 700mm. A testament to the R5's IBIS/OS (mode 2)
Really pushing it...
100% crop - R5 amazing AF stayed on bird not the drops
armd wrote:
I'll take the bait and troll over here. So far, I've been underwhelmed with what I've seen out of the A1. The images appear ok, though not $2500 better than those I'm taking with the R5 and I'm seeing the usual Sony challenges with the yellow/greens. Can't say I'm compelled to want to switch.
I'm curious if there are certain shots you can't get with your R5 that you would hope a new camera can get you wether that camera is an R1, A1, Z9 etc.?
I really can't think of many/any shots that I would be trying to get by purchasing a new camera. I totally agree I haven't seen anything from an A1 that I couldn't get from an R5. Likewise I haven't seen anything from an R5 I couldn't have got from my Nikon DSLRs.
Now if I look back further to my older cameras like 7D2, 5D3 then I do feel that these newer cameras have got me shots that were extremely difficult to get with the older cameras...ones that could only be had via a fluke. Those cameras just could not track a head on passerine IF like all these newer ones do.
I buy a lot of new cameras but they haven't been about getting shots I couldn't get with my previous ones for a good while now. They can be about getting shots more easily or more consistently. They certainly can be about workflow improvements. There are sometimes different unique features that I buy them for. And of course there is the entire DSLR to MILC shift.
I just find it odd that I keep hearing this argument about camera X isn't getting shots camera Y is already getting so camera X is a waste of $ or a useless upgrade.
Here is a Drake Mallard with colors I never seen before. He is very dramatic looking. Love the flip screen for getting down low. I actually got the hood wet on this one :lol:
arbitrage wrote:
I'm curious if there are certain shots you can't get with your R5 that you would hope a new camera can get you wether that camera is an R1, A1, Z9 etc.?
I really can't think of many/any shots that I would be trying to get by purchasing a new camera. I totally agree I haven't seen anything from an A1 that I couldn't get from an R5. Likewise I haven't seen anything from an R5 I couldn't have got from my Nikon DSLRs.
Now if I look back further to my older cameras like 7D2, 5D3 then I do feel that these newer cameras have got me shots that were extremely difficult to get with the older cameras...ones that could only be had via a fluke. Those cameras just could not track a head on passerine IF like all these newer ones do.
I buy a lot of new cameras but they haven't been about getting shots I couldn't get with my previous ones for a good while now. They can be about getting shots more easily or more consistently. They certainly can be about workflow improvements. There are sometimes different unique features that I buy them for. And of course there is the entire DSLR to MILC shift.
I just find it odd that I keep hearing this argument about camera X isn't getting shots camera Y is already getting so camera X is a waste of $ or a useless upgrade....Show more →
Interestingly, I don’t usually engage in these discussions because as you’ve alluded to the software and hardware improvements have been evolutionary and the conversations are rarely productive. For Canon users the R5 and for Sony users the A9 were perhaps the true “bumps” in MILC af ability which were game changers. Both bodies provided a level of consistency and accuracy which were distinctive from prior dslr’s and MILC’s I had used.
With respect to value, cameras are tools which photographers use to achieve the results they seek and only they can determine the relative worth. Manufacturers, on the other hand are there to sell product and in the process frequently employ a bit of hype to promote their sales. Though I haven’t shot with the A1 yet (as you have), my R5 is so solid of a performer that quite frankly the A1 would have to cook eggs and bacon and have a hot cup of coffee ready for me on those cold mornings I’m out shooting critters before I would dump my Canon gear. How’s that for hyperbole? Cheers.
lighthound wrote:
Beautiful shots Rob. That RWBB couldn't have given you a better pose and you didn't let it go to waist! Gorgeous!
Thank you, we had a great day yesterday driving around in the Jeep with the top opened and we even found a new nesting area while exploring on our way to the wood ducks and the RWBB was there too.
Finally got out birding yesterday for the first time since October. Still not much going on in Calgary just yet, but in a few weeks our rivers and ponds will be action packed.
The R5 focus system continues to impress. In fact, I'm blown away by it.
I am noticing ES read speed distortion at the tips of wings in certain wing positions more often, though; now that I've noticed it, I can't seem to not see it. I can mostly get rid of strange lines that appear in post processing, but it's still annoying.
