sskings wrote:
RobAmy, Where are you getting the wonderful pics of such a wide range of species? Fantastic.
As answered by Dave . Most of my shots have been from my yard. I do visit 2 other places at the ocean for the Oystercatchers, herons, ospreys and some of the small shore birds. We have not really gone far with the virus. So we are lucky to have the species we have on our property. I put in a small pond and that attracts many species. The cracked corn, bird seed and meal worms help too . We planted many native plants since we lived here. However still longing to get back to Costa Rica.
went out again this morning. r5 + 100-400II. Steller's Jay and Anna's photos are full-frame. Waxwing family was in crop mode. Still impressed with the camera. Miles ahead of 7d2. No problem tracking birds in dense foliage which you got the initial lock. pics look better on flickr. Think the hummingbird hit 8/8 on the burst.
johndguthrie wrote:
went out again this morning. r5 + 100-400II. Steller's Jay and Anna's photos are full-frame. Waxwing family was in crop mode. Still impressed with the camera. Miles ahead of 7d2. No problem tracking birds in dense foliage which you got the initial lock. pics look better on flickr. Think the hummingbird hit 8/8 on the burst.
rgreene wrote:
Rob, your bluebird shot at 8000 ISO is pretty impressive. Do you think the 1dx Mark III can get close to that quality at 8000?
Rick
Thanks, yes the 1dx Mark III does incredible with high ISO and to be expected being only 20mp. I am impressed with the R5 files and that is with no Lightroom support or color profiles yet.
Thanks, yes the 1dx Mark III does incredible with high ISO and to be expected being only 20mp. I am impressed with the R5 files and that is with no Lightroom support or color profiles yet.
Lots of great shots, along with a few awesome shots.
My R5 is probably about to be shipped as Canon just charged my card (finally).
I can't wait to try it out. Something tells me that my Siggy 150-600 will not be adequate for the newfound resolution. I have other options, but the size/weight of that zoom is pretty good for a walkabout birding lens.
Also have the 100-400 II, and I think it might just be my go-to lens when I want to wander around.
arbitrage wrote:
Did Eye-AF recognize the DF's eyes or just his head/body?
Yes, the eye AF tries to lock on their eyes but it's not as rock solid as it is on birds and other critters.
Just for the heck of it, I pulled up on dragonfly flying around over water that was about 70 yards away and the AF found it and actually tracked it. You can barely see it in the frame. Crazy stuff.
Thank you, I am actually using a Sony and change the EXIF
I really do not have any secret, I am very lucky to be able to own some of Canon's best. I do this for fun, so I really try to excel at it when I am in the field. I try to find the positives with the gear vs the negatives and try to build them into my work flow.
Last night while shooting bluebirds I had a few high up barn swallows so I tried the crop mode with the small fliers. It did really well. I will say this has been the best camera for locking onto swallows. I have not had good opps yet, they have all been fairly high but if I can do my job tracking them, then the camera does it's job well.
Here are a few images I took for a women's jacket company (the jackets have pockets!) using the RF 28-70. These were non-professional models and there was no stylist, but I think they turned out great all things considered. The R5's tracking was excellent and it worked well with my Godox lights:
RoamingScott wrote:
It's a known issue uploading direct to FM. Use flickr and link to a high res version of your images instead for better results.
Maybe that is what I'm doing wrong. What size do you send to flickr and then what do you select when linking. Original? In previous conversations I read that FM still resizes files from flickr but I could be wrong.