Dely wrote:
Excellent shots @lighthound. Thank you for sharing
Thanks!
Dave
---------------------------------------------
pliukait wrote:
Dave, these from around your yard or from Alaska?
I found this little guy in Alaska. The fox around my area in SC are extremely skittish and you seldom see them out and about in daylight. So in a sense, this is a first for me of any quality. This guy was a little nervous & jerky but hung around long enough to get these few shots thankfully.
I think I have more of him I took with my 90D + 100-400II but I haven't found those images in my 7,000 pile of images yet.
I'm getting a little overwhelmed with the amazing images I was lucky enough to capture on this trip. Every time I start to dig in to them to try and process and cull a few, I'm simply blown away by both the IQ as well as the moments I captured.
I intended on processing and presenting my images in the order I shot them but I love bears so much I can't help myself but to jump to those first. Then the old ADHD & OCD kick in and I find myself bouncing from one crazy nice set of shots to another (like this Fox) and never get any of them finalized.
It hasn't helped any that my wife and I filmed tons of video and she has demanded I put them together to show to the family.
You'll see what I mean in the coming days/weeks/months.
Happy camper I am and soooo glad I had the R5 in time for this trip.
Outstanding Rob! I've gone through all these pages and I changed my mind several times about my R5 decision. I let two go to people who needed them more than I did. I have two 1DX III's and two 5DSR's so the R5 is a bit of a flyer to test the waters. I shoot a lot of aerials, air to air and architecture. Your imagery and your thoughts have been a big help to me, thank you! JW
Amy and I went on a whale watch for our anniversary. It was nice to get out. We paid for the boat so only her parents and us were on the boat. For safety these days. The weather was cloudy and a bit choppy but it was nice to get out. Whales did not do much but we did see a couple different ones. Here is one from the trip I liked with a calf. Taken with the RF 100-500mm.
On our way back in to the dock the weather cleared a bit giving us some nice sunset colors, of course trip was done and no whales with amazing color. I took this with the 100-500mm while the boat was moving.
Henry ta wrote:
I use eye tracking to shoot the Burrowing Owl with 600mm f4 III https://flic.kr/p/2jF782d
Nice shots of a difficult BIF. Did you shoot in ES? That first shot seems to have a very distorted (stretched out) wing which I think is more than just motion blur and the natural shape it makes. This to me is one downside of the R5...if you use ES to get more FPS and a better EVF experience you are always risking distortion in some shots.
Whilst y'all are taking nice nature photos, I've been reduced to taking moon images at 6 AM, after finishing the night shift. At the risk of boring people with yet another lunar photograph, I had to take another shot this morning, but this time with the 100-400 II and the 2X III teleconverter, basically an 800 f/11 lens.
Anyway, I had pretty inconsistent results when I shot at ISO 400, with shutter speeds of 1/30 to 1/50 (Av mode), but I did manage to grab a couple of gems. Also took it to ISO 800 and found much more consistent results.
Keeping in mind again, the moon was almost directly overhead, so I was standing in my most un-steady position. Still, I'm pretty impressed with the IS of the lens and camera with this setup. I don't think I'll be shooting at 800 mm with the 100-400 very often, given that it's such a small aperture, but its nice to know that it can be done.
Note: R5 with the 1.1.1 firmware update. I cannot say that it's different with this lens compared to 1.1.0, because I didn't test that version under identical conditions.
Not sure about posting this - continued experimentation with the R5, this time, with the Sigma 150-600.
I'm thinking that the Canon solutions are better. The 500/4 with a teleconverter, the 100-400 with the 1.4X, all seem to handle eye AF better, and produce better bokeh. Still, the Siggy is cheap and offers 600 mm at f/6.3.
I'm not sure that the IS on the lens works well with the IS in the body. More testing is needed...
