Ever seen a pink robin?

[pietillidie]

Ripping shots and story, Tannin.

I smiled when I read this article because this is exactly what happened to us:

'Simple and wholesome': Melburnians get into birdwatching in lockdown

[think positive]

ok Tannin, ill give you enough notice to get the apple crumble cooking!!!
i just found you page, ill check out the pics more later, i love that you have the settings on it! superb shots!

ive tried a few times to get the little bright blue birds, is this a wren? i got this almost by accident at the zoo in June,



since we are allowed to take pics again, i went for a quick walk this evening, ended up helping a little old guy with his dog, he was holding it above his head to prevent a golden attacking it, scary stuff, this woman had 2 dogs and lost control of both. i took the 70-200 as it was getting dark and its F2.8, wish i had the bigger zoom, a pelican flew over me into the sunset, i got pics but id prefer a closer one!!

funny i walked out the front door and there were 2 little black and yellow things in our tree! apparently they have a next, got a couple of shots, ill process them after the footy!

[Tannin]

Yep, Jo, Superb Fairy-wren.

Black and yellow could be any of several, but possibly New Holland Honeyeaters.

A 70-200 will do if that's all you've got, but I generally find that a quick clout over the ear with a 100-400 fixes most mutts.

Errr ... was that the question?

[stui magpie]

I've seen that black and blue bloke too, and I generally found a sift kick to the guts works best.

[partypie]

I saw a red or scarlet robin upk near the end of st Kilda Pier years ago, the only time I’d seen one in Melbourne.
Living in south west WA the wrens, robins, thornbills, parrots, magpies, Eagles, swan, ducks, hawks, etc etc are a daily sight. The COVID restrictions have been relaxed for nearly three months but it seems that the lack of activity and traffic for a few months has resulted in more birds and mammals about the place. We have a family of critically endangered ringtail possums living in our front yard, which hasn’t happened before. Hopefully Victoria reaps a similar benefit.

[think positive]

my sister just bought an apartment near the MCG, shes a cop and works out of the city office, She said you can hear birds singing as you walk through the city. id love to go in there and shoot with so few people around!
Tannin that hooded Robin shot is amazing, can i ask what the 2.1 degrees means? and is that a prime 600mm????

shot through the window to the backyard, uncropped at 600mm (not prime 150-600mm sigma contemporary!)


out the front tonight the honey eater i think



and 1 lucky dog

[ronrat]

Jo, who stole my dog. Pretty much a dead ringer for Tukky the wonder poodle. Certainly same colour. Although thunderstorms here now and she is whimpering.

I hope the dog has nature of mine which is brilliant.

[pietillidie]

Great photos, Jo. That honey eater looks like a postcard or a page from one of the classic bird identification books.

[Tannin]

Nice ones Jo. You have a Common Mynah - feral pest species imported from India, a New Holland Honeyeater, and a White Rhinocerous (or possibly a dog, I get them mixed up).

Yes, a 600 prime, one of these: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-600mm-f-4-L-IS-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

I bought it to replace the 500/4 here: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-500mm-f-4.0-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

(I still have the 500/4, though I'm not using it. They sell for so little now that I find the idea of parting with it difficult. Many buyers seem to think that it's similar to a 150-600/6.3, and it isn't. Not even close. You'll see a heap of pictures on my website taken with that wonderful lens.)

The "2.1 degrees" was a vain and misguided attempt to deal with all the silly business about "equivalent focal length" people carry on with. Instead of converting actual focal length into a rather daft "35mm equivalent focal length" - which would only make any real sense if you converted the aperture as well - I started quoting the angle of view, which is a much better measure. Unfortunately, no-one else does it and no-one knows what it means. Next time I do a code upgrade on the website, I'll tell the content management software to stop doing that as it's a bit pointless.

[think positive]

Thanks guys, PTID that’s a big compliment, Thankyou.
Hope Tukky is ok, thanks to the owner this one survived, was just terrified though.

God Tannin! That lens! I played with one in the canon shop, a lot lighter than I expected! Yes I’d keep both too! I got both my L lenses 2nd hand they really stand the test of time. I couldn’t get the bigger zoom for a reasonable price so I opted for a new sigma contemporary 150-600 instead, although I have to say the 100-400 L with the 1.4 extender is only 40mm behind it, one day I’ll put them side by side on the sam3 subject and see the difference.

Thanks for the explanation, I just bought a second hand 5Dmk2, so I guess I’ll see first hand the difference it makes compared to the crop 7D. I do appreciat3 the equivalent info, when I started with studio lighting I couldn’t figure out why my 50 didn’t give the same results as the Meg Botton tutorials! The 35 did! I traded both for a sigma art zoom that is F1.8, I love it!

[Tannin]

Good choice! Sigma Art series has a fantastic reputation.

A 5D II eh? Hmmm! A wonderful camera in search of a ... no ... let's just quote what I wrote in another place some years ago:

--------------------------------------------------------------

Members familiar with my posts will recall many and various grumbles about the Canon 5D II focus system. Representative terms employed include "primitive", "outmoded", "clumsy", "sub-par", and "worst-of-breed".

Well, I was wrong and I apologise.

Before I go into detail, let's review where the 5D II fits into things and refresh the memories of Nikonians and Pentaxians who might not have followed Canon models as carefully as they follow their own kit.

The 5D Mark II was Canon's second consumer-level full frame DSLR. It came out in 2008, replacing the pioneering Canon 5D (now known as the 5D Mark I). The 2005 5D Mark 1 was the first consumer full-frame DSLR, and for a long time the only one. (The first full frame DSLR was the Canon 1Ds Mark II, which arrived - for those few who could afford it - in 2003.) The 5D Mark 1 was very successful. It was essentially a full frame sensor in a body changed as little as possible from the then-current Canon semi-pro crop body (the 20D), using all the same controls Canon users were already familiar with. Its weakest point was the focus system, which was slightly inferior to the 20D's. Possibly this was done for cost reasons, or perhaps they didn't want too many pros buying a 5D instead of a 1Ds II at double the price. In any case, for the landscape and wedding photographers the 5D 1 was aimed at, autofocus speed and flexibility was not a major issue.

The 5D Mark II came along in 2008, and was a huge success. On release and for some years afterwards it was regarded as having clearly the best full frame sensor of any non-pro camera. The recipe was familiar: a semi-pro body similar to the best Canon APS-C model (at that time the 50D), matched with an outstanding hi-resolution full frame sensor. The focus system, for reasons never satisfactorily explained, was unchanged from the old Mark 1. According to rumour, Canon had planned an all-new and much better AF system for it but run into trouble and, as a stop-gap, gone back to the old Mark 1 system instead. Perhaps that is true, who can say? Whatever the reason, the otherwise excellent 5D II shipped with an autofocus system which was not only inferior to all other then-current Canon DSLRs (including the cheap 450D at a fifth the price!), it was also somewhat inferior to discontinued older models such as the semi-pro 40D, 30D, and 20D, and entry-level 400D and 350D.

Understand that the 5D II has never had problems with focus accuracy - it takes beautiful sharp pictures - it just takes too long to focus and is fussy about locking onto details other models have no difficulty with acquiring, and all 9 focus points are squeezed into the centre of the viewfinder, only covering about a third of the screen. With a 5D II, there is not much benefit to selecting a focus point: they are all so close to the centre point that you might as well just use the centre point in the first place.

Don't misunderstand: it's a wonderful camera in all other respects. I bought one and used it for years, and when that first one was stolen I bought another one the same. But the focus system is constantly annoying.

However, today I used the 5D II in a different way and discovered that despite owning one for years I have been mistaken about the AF system all along.

Let me work around to this by explaining my usual system first, and then coming to what was different about today. Normally I travel with four bodies. (This may seem excessive, but there is method in my madness. For one thing, I spend a lot of time in the dusty outback and don't like to change lenses.) The first rule of bird photography is that you can hunt for a rare and special bird for weeks without success, but the moment you don't have a camera ready, the damn things turn up and laugh at you. Many of my most memorable bird encounters have started with a chance sighting from the car. For this reason, I never travel without a camera ready for instant action, by which I mean set up with a suitable lens, and already configured for bird work: medium ISO (typically 400 or 800), AF servo, high-speed shutter repeat, aperture set (close to but not quite wide open mostly). With birds you practically never get time to change a lens. Also, I love to find landscapes along the way. So I generally do this: 7D on the 500/4 (ready for unexpected birds). 1D IV on the 100-400 (dual purpose: birds and landscapes). The 5D II gets the 24-105, also for landscapes. The 5D II is good for this: you get that wonderful low noise and detail resolution, and although you often have to focus and recompose, landscapes don't usually fly away, so that's only annoying, not disastrous. Meanwhile the poor little 50D sits neglected in my camera bag, no doubt forlornly hoping that I'll want to use the fish or the 10-22 and give it a chance to show that it can still take a decent picture if I ever let it. On arrival somewhere, ready to do some serious birding, I usually swap the 7D and 1D IV over - this puts the best camera on the best lens, and puts the camera with the most reach on the 100-400, which is otherwise a bit short for birding on APS-H.

Today was different. First, my 7D is broken and the new 7D II hasn't arrived yet. Second, the weather was no good for birds (cold and windy, poor light) but excellent for rural landscapes - bare trees appearing out of the mist, rain on the cropfields, distant landmarks picked out by stray beams of sunshine poking through the clouds, there were all sorts of possibilities. So I set off for a day of landscapes. With no 7D today, I put the 5D II on the 100-400 (making it effectively a bit shorter, which is good for landscapes) and used the 1D IV on the 24-105. These were the two lenses I expected to want most (and as it happened the only two I used all day). Finally, just in case some wonderful bird turned up, I put the 50D on the 500/4. (Not ideal but what the hell? After all, the 50D was my best birding camera once, back when it was new and my beard wasn't grey.)

Of course, the 1D IV was a joy to use, as it is with any lens. I love this camera. It's like driving a fine sports car, and makes all my other bodies feel like beaten up old trucks, even the 7D. The 5D II, on the other hand, was horribly sluggish with the 100-400. I've used the combination before, of course, but possibly not on a day with challenging light conditions (mist, rain, weird light, low contrast) and not-so-crisp subjects. (By not-so-crisp I mean, for example, a rounded hillside rather than a sharp-edged building.) Only once before have I ever seen the 100-400 so slow to focus, and that was when I abused it by mounting it on a 1.4 teleconverter making it into a 560mm f/8 and using the old 1D Mark III. Today, it was dreadful! Not just annoying, harmful. For example, because of the slow focus I missed a shot of a misty landscape with a train going through it. By the time the AF locked up, the train was gone, and they only run a few a day out here. In the end, I had to swap the bodies over, putting the 5D on the 24-105, which was within its measure. Later on the light improved and I swapped them back. And later still, I wanted a shot of a small, well-timbered volcano looking into misty light near the setting sun. The 5D II simply refused to focus. It hunted with excruciating sluggishness and eventually settled on a setting that was simply wrong. After mucking around with it for a minute, I swapped the 100-400 onto the 1D IV and it acquired the correct focus immediately and without the slightest fuss. Although I didn't do the logical thing and try the ancient 50D out on the same task, I've used 20D and 40D and 50D often enough in the past to feel confident that they would cope just fine, albeit not quite as effortlessly as the 1D IV.

So I was wrong about the 5D II. It does not have the most primitive, outmoded, clumsy, sub-par autofocus system of any SLR I've ever used, it has by far the most primitive, outmoded, clumsy, sub-par autofocus system of any SLR I've ever used. I apologise humbly for my previous errors, and can only salvage my pride my pointing out that at least I was 100% correct when I said it was worst-of-breed.

PS: Yes, there is a 5D IV in my future. Or possibly a 1D X. Or at very least a 5D III. By all reports the 5D III and 5D IV AF systems are in the same class as the 1D IV - i.e. superb: as much better than average as the 5D and 5D II were worse than average. But I have no intention of retiring the 5D II. AF aside it's still a wonderful camera which makes great images. It will simply get demoted to wide-angle duties. (Shhh! Don't tell the 50D. It feels neglected enough already.)

------------------------------------------------------

2020 update. I still have the 5D II and still use it. These days my best two cameras are 5D IV and 7D II (these usually go on the 600/4 and the 100-400 Mark II) , while the other two main lenses (24-105 and 16-35) go on two of the three spare bodies - 5D II, EOS R, and 1D IV. I shouldn't have bought the EOS R. It has some great strengths but is the most annoying camera I have ever owned. The fact that it hasn't been good enough to push either a 12-year-old 5D II or an 11-year-old 1D IV into final retirement speaks for itself.

[think positive]

wow, thanks Tannin, thats really good info. and now if i strike the same focus problem, i wont blame my self!! I bought it on a whim, a wedding photographer had it as a backup, it was fairly low shutter, around 41k i think, $760 with a genuine battery grip and battery and charger, which fit the 7Dmk11, so i can leave one charger at the other house. last night i finally finished the studio shoots i was editing, (2 little girls who made it so so easy, but i really really overshot it!! so many pictures!!, and the little 6 year old whos mum wanted me to edit out her nasal feeding tube - on 300 pics!!) just going to drop onto USBs and print a couple, then im going to watch John Greengos tutorial on it, thats how i mastered the 7Dmk11.

while the sensor got cleaned and a button repaired at the canon experience shop, they let me play with the latest 1DX, i thought it would be too big for me, but it feels so good in hand! maybe one day!! thats my dream camera.

i do love the sigma Arts, the 18-35 F1.8 is incredible, and i also picked up a 24-105mm F4. Yours is the canon i take it? I have the 2 canon L lenses and the 105mm macro is a canon. other than that i stick to Sigma now, i had a 100-400mm Tamron but sold it as it seemed a bit soft, I replaced it with a second hand L lens, i think mk2, and there is no comparison. I notice you leave the long lens on in the car to be ready, i have done that but it worries me! do you put on the floor on a blanket or something, or in a bag? Actually i just bought a sling bag i could leave in the footwell open with the camera/lens in it. Oh and one of those hard cases, which has a removable padded bag inside that would be ideal. I probably baby my camera a little too much!!

is the 1d 11 you have an early 1Dx ive never heard of it. good to know about the mirrorless. too expensive to change lenses over anyway!

[Tannin]

OK. Working backwards, the 1D IV is a Canon pro model, quite old now.

They started with the 1D in 2001. It was the first Canon digital pro camera. It was APS-H format; that's 1.3 crop - half-way between the common APS-C format (1.6 crop like your 7D) and full frame like your 5D II. Later, Canon added a 1Ds ("s" for "studio") which was slower but higher resolution with a full frame sensor.

Those two were replaced in 2004 by the 1D II (APS-H for sport and journalism) and 1Ds II (full frame for studio work).

In 2007, those two were replaced by the 1D III (APS-H again) and 1Ds III. I bought a 1D III. Fantastic camera! Some 1D IIIs developed a peculiar focus system problem that couldn't be entirely fixed. (Mine was fine, but that was just luck.) Canon was very, very embarrassed and did two things: (1) released the original 7D (the Mark 1) just to show how very, very good they can be at focus systems, and (b) replaced the 1D III with the 1D IV - broadly similar, still APS-H, but slightly higher resolution and an all-new AF system. My 1D III was stolen around that time so I bought a 1D IV with the insurance payout. Wonderful camera!

Later again, Canon unified the 1D/1Ds sport and studio lines into a single full frame model, called the 1D X. They abandoned APS-H (sadly) and stopped making high-res pro bodies (equally sadly). Since then the 1D X has been replaced by the 1D X II, and now the 1D X III.

The 1D X was already out when I bought my 1D IV but I didn't want one - it's not really suitable for wildlife as it has very low pixel density. It (and its more recent replacements) are great for sport and journalism, but for wildlife you are better off with a 7D II or a 5D IV and for high-res things like weddings and serious landscapes, you are better off with a higher res 5D IV or a very high res R5 or 5Ds/r.

There is nothing quite like the Canon pro cameras once you hold them and use them. They just work without you having to think about it, everything just falls to hand as if by magic. A really well-made sports car is similar, people tell me. I compare them to really fine musical instrument.

[Tannin]

You will be fine with the 5D II Jo. So long as you don't expect anything much from the AF system, it is otherwise an excellent camera - quite outstanding when you realise how old it is. I can look at, say, a landscape taken with my 5D IV next to one taken with the ancient 5D II and not see any real difference. There are a few small usability features the 7D II has that you'll notice aren't there, but no show stoppers.

Oddly enough, I've never owned a Sigma lens. They used to be pretty unreliable back in the day, but they are way, way better now.

Currently I have the Canon 600/4 II, 100-400 II, 70-300L, 100L macro, 24-105/4 Mark 1 (the newer Mark II isn't any improvement, so I kept the old one), Tamron 85/1.8 (nice!), Canon 40/2.8 pancake (cute!), 35/1.2L Mark 1, 16-35/4, TS-E 24 Mark 1, and a delightful Tokina 10-17 fisheye zoom. Oh, and the 500/4 but I'm not using that.

The Tamron 100-400 is indeed weak. It is built to a price. The Canon 100-400 Mark II is awesomely good. Far and away superior to anything else in its class.

Here is a test for you: take your 100-400 II and shoot some tests at 400mm, both hand-held and with a tripod. Repeat the test with a Sigma 150-600. (Or any other cheap 600.) Now crop the 400mm shots to the same field of view as the 150-600. Blow them both up to the same resolution. Compare. Chances are, you'll find that the Canon results are better.

If my 100-400 II was 18 years old, I'd marry it.

[stui magpie]

I used to have one of these, that's the extent of my camera knowledge.