R5II Birds In Flight

KINGOFKNGS
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · R5II Birds In Flight

Opening a new thread on this because so many seem to be interested in this. I’m away from my computer currently, so can’t share any photos at the moment, but I’ve been absolutely thrilled at the R5II’s ability to track birds in flight. For reference I owned the R5 and the R3, both from launch day. I thought the R5 was amazing when I first got it, and it was, but then as time went on and I got the R3, there were many times I knew the R3 would run circles around the R5 (shooting swallows and passerines in particular). As I’ve been shooting the R5II, it seems to surpass the R3 in every aspect for BIF except for perhaps drive speed of the lens and the subsequent initial focus acquisition. This is not much of an issue if the lens is remotely close to being focused when you try to pick up the bird. In other words, if you’re not at MFD or focused to infinity and the rough form of a bird can be made out, the R5II seems to nearly instantly catch focus on the bird.

The advantage I’ve noticed for the R5II over the R3 has been the R5II really identifies the subject faster (may not the acquire focus quite as fast, but fast enough), but its ability to stay focused consistently on the eye has really far surpassed the R3. If I shot 100 photos in a row of a bird with the R3, I would probably get 60-80% of shots in sharp focus on the eye, and all but the remaining 1-3% or so would be focused somewhere on the bird, but not the eye. With the R5II, it seems that I’m getting 90%+ of the photos in sharp focus on the eye. I’ve been extremely impressed. I’ve had some rapidly approaching shorebirds who eventually filled the frame where every shot in a series of 15-20 has been sharp on the eye. The R3 would not have done this.

I haven’t tried to shoot swallows much yet as the only group I’ve come across was about 50 yards away and the closest approaches were 10-30 yards away. Nearly all of those photos are tack sharp on the eye, but the birds were far away so not an overly impressive feat.

The only variable that I can think of that may make a difference between how I shot the R3 and now the R5II is that I changed the accel/decel tracking to -1, but on the R3 I shot that at +1 or +2. Im wondering if that setting on the R3 allowed for the rather frustrating issue of photographing a bird flying perpendicular to the direction you’re facing and the camera focusing on the near wingtip as it does this. The R3 did that frequently for me (and so I did the R5), but I am not seeing this behavior with the R5II. Perhaps a change in the accel/decel tracking on the R3 would have yielded better results, but I’ve already sold it so I can’t test. I supposed trying +2 on the R5II might offer some insight.

Overall I’m thrilled. I want to see how DXO handles the files. A friend asked if I would be getting an R1, and honestly I’m not sure. I have a hard time thinking how the R1 could be significantly better than the R5II for bird photography. Better high ISO noise performance would probably be the reason I get one, but it would be interested to see how well its AF does compared to the R5II. 45 megapixels vs 24 is the same decision I’ve faced for the last three years, and if DXO can negate any differences with noise performance, I’ll be a happy camper!

Sep 02, 2024 at 12:39 PM

cpe1991
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · R5II Birds In Flight

Good news! I am avid BIFer and find the RF100-500 on the R5 great but the 200-800 disappointing unless zoomed out to 500mm or so. I wonder if the R5ii will breathe something more into the 200-800?

Sep 02, 2024 at 01:00 PM

KINGOFKNGS
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · R5II Birds In Flight

I’m lucky to have both of those lenses, but also have the RF600 f4 and 400 f2.8. I’m to the point with the 200-800 that every time I’ve used it I’ve thought that I should have used a different lens, usually the 600 because it’s sharper. (I totally get that this isn’t a fair comparison in the least.) I used it again yesterday and haven’t had a chance to review pictures much, but it did seem to perform generally as well as the 200-800 did with the R3. I found it less than stellar on the R5, but the precision of the focus on the R5II seemed to be a big boon to the 200-800, at least in handling and the few photos I was able to look at on the computer. I suspect it will probably be a pretty good lens on the R5II. At 800 it seemed to be notably sharper stopped down 1/3-2/3 stops.

cpe1991 wrote:
Good news! I am avid BIFer and find the RF100-500 on the R5 great but the 200-800 disappointing unless zoomed out to 500mm or so. I wonder if the R5ii will breathe something more into the 200-800?

Sep 02, 2024 at 01:30 PM

arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · R5II Birds In Flight

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
I was very impressed with the R5II for BIF although I only got to shoot it for one day in decent light.
I found a couple scenarios it struggled a bit but I didn't get a do over with those scenarios so I don't know if it will consistently have the problem or not. I also didn't get a chance to shoot swallows as it seems they all migrated away a week ago. None were found at my top three locations yesterday.

Overall though it was really, really good. Is it better than my A1? I don't know. I'd say it is on par, not better. I prefer the A1 for other reasons and wouldn't switch to an R5II myself but I don't think one should choose an A1 because they think they will get better BIF AF. I'd pick R5II over Z8/Z9 if we ignore the Nikon lenses....although for bird photography it is very hard to ignore the Nikon lenses. They have caused me to buy a Z9 twice and beg a friend to shoot her Z8 for a couple days

I may renew my CPS Platinum membership once the R1 comes out so I can take advantage of their 3 day trials and get a better lens and try the R5II and the R1. My friend who lent me her R5II (a reward for setting it up for her) only has RF100-500. I feel I need to use the RF400/2.8, RF600/4 or RF100-300/2.8 to really get a good feel for the two cameras. I may get the trial in early April when peak VG Swallow males have just migrated in and are in great numbers for a few weeks.

Sep 02, 2024 at 02:00 PM

Axel H
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · R5II Birds In Flight

Coming from the R5, I have also been very impressed with the AF performance of the R5II when photographing birds in flight against varied backgrounds. I tested it with Barn Swallows and both focus acquisition and staying on the bird are noticeably better than with the R5, which is not exactly a bad camera, either.

The biggest difference I noticed is using a 1.4x extender on the RF600f4. The R5 struggled to focus fast enough on flying swallows, the R5II works much better with this combo. I'm not entirely sure if it is the camera itself or if it makes better use of the focus motors or a combination of both.

I have not been able yet to figure out if the batteries of the R5II are powerful enough to take advantage of both focus motors in the RF600f4. The R5 did not, but I think the R3 does.

Sep 02, 2024 at 03:42 PM

KINGOFKNGS
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · R5II Birds In Flight

I will absolutely say that the R5II drives the RF600 slower than the R3 does. I noticed it immediately on the first outing with the R5II. That said, once I’m actually focusing on a bird, it has been fast enough to track any bird that I’ve tried to track. Swallows seem to be the litmus test on this site, however I haven’t been able to get any close ones. The shorebirds I’ve been able to shoot have been the fastest flying birds I’ve been shooting so far and they seem to fly faster than swallows. They may not be as erratic, but the speed of the birds approaching me is sufficient to see the focusing being fast enough.

Note that I’m not saying it’s the same speed as the R5, only that it’s slower than the R3.

I’ve had a few situations where the bird I was tracking went out of the frame and then the camera continued to drive following the general trajectory the bird was on and then I was able to pick up the bird again without the camera immediately focusing on the background and losing the rest of the sequence! It didn’t come back immediately in 100% sharp focus, but the camera took 2-3 shots to fully acquire focus on the eye and then it continued to track normally. That was an immediate and notable experience I wasn’t expecting.

Axel H wrote:
Coming from the R5, I have also been very impressed with the AF performance of the R5II when photographing birds in flight against varied backgrounds. I tested it with Barn Swallows and both focus acquisition and staying on the bird are noticeably better than with the R5, which is not exactly a bad camera, either.

The biggest difference I noticed is using a 1.4x extender on the RF600f4. The R5 struggled to focus fast enough on flying swallows, the R5II works much better with this combo. I'm not entirely sure if it is the camera itself or if it...Show more →

Sep 02, 2024 at 04:35 PM

Axel H
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · R5II Birds In Flight

KINGOFKNGS wrote:
I will absolutely say that the R5II drives the RF600 slower than the R3 does. I noticed it immediately on the first outing with the R5II. That said, once I’m actually focusing on a bird, it has been fast enough to track any bird that I’ve tried to track. Swallows seem to be the litmus test on this site, however I haven’t been able to get any close ones. The shorebirds I’ve been able to shoot have been the fastest flying birds I’ve been shooting so far and they seem to fly faster than swallows. They may not be as...Show more →

Interesting, I haven't used the R3 but that would confirm that the R5II batteries might not be powerful enough to drive the second motor, maybe the faster AF is due to algorithms and/or faster processors. It would be great if Canon were more forthcoming providing this kind of information.

Sep 02, 2024 at 04:53 PM

KINGOFKNGS
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · R5II Birds In Flight

I just assumed it was due to the higher voltage of the R3 batteries vs R5ii batteries.

Axel H wrote:
Interesting, I haven't used the R3 but that would confirm that the R5II batteries might not be powerful enough to drive the second motor, maybe the faster AF is due to algorithms and/or faster processors. It would be great if Canon were more forthcoming providing this kind of information.

Sep 02, 2024 at 05:53 PM

downhillonwater
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · R5II Birds In Flight

My fastest BIF test so far has been Common Terns at Delaware Seashore SP. Not Tree Swallows, but when they dive for dinner they are a damn close 2nd.
IMO:
- R5m2 autofocus is a big improvement on the R5. The camera did a better job keeping up than I did most of the time.
- There was a very contrasty sea wall on the other side of the inlet and when the birds got too far away the camera would often jump to the sea wall. I am, as yet, unsure of the best AF settings to prevent this.
- R5m2 drives the big whites faster then the R5 (600f4, 400f2.8, 100-300). This is most true when the bird is headed towards the camera.
- I was particularly impressed that the R5m2 tracks the bird's head or body and simultaneously the eye. It shows a box for each in the viewfinder. Bird turns its head and eye box goes away and comes back again.
- the eye control works well when you pick the right size focus area. I found a focus box about 10-15% of the FOV to be best. This size is large enough for the operator to get the bird into and small enough that the camera is not searching through too many pixels. Camera jumps right on the bird even with complicated backgrounds. Calibrating the eye control just before shooting and in the same light is beneficial.

A few pics on my Flicker. https://www.flickr.com/photos/downhillonwater/ Note that these were nearly full frame captures.

Sep 02, 2024 at 06:17 PM

adamx12m
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · R5II Birds In Flight

So this might seem a little crazy but experimenting R5ii settings running this video

with just a 35mm in front a 32" screen testing AF. I know it's not the same but interesting to see how the AF tracks which I'd think would be close to real world.

I've found Case auto + locked on just is super sticky AF, much more than R3 in any case setting that I've found so far. The R5ii seems to detect smaller objects and track as they get smaller into the distance better than R3. I wished I could get the eye control to work but wearing glasses I've yet with either camera to work well.

Sep 02, 2024 at 07:32 PM


FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.