Post your best bird shots!

[Richard Lane]

Really Nice Shot Razor and Welcome to the Forums!


I also like the vertical crop. If you could afford the new 500mm I would go for that one, if not then I

[HDNitehawk]

After I did the AF microadjustment for the 300mm F2.8L I was trying it out to see how it was working now with the 1D Mark IV. Performed fairly well. I bumped in to this guy while testing, this is a 100% crop at about 25 or 30 feet. F4, I/640 ISO 320 hand held. No flash, ambient in the shade. Probably not the most ideal conditions.


I call it "The Song Bird"





[View:http://community.the-digital-picture...neric/utility/]

[ddt0725]

I call it "The Song Bird"



<p sizset="41" sizcache="26"]

Yippeee!! Spring is in the air!! I can't wait until I see one of these guysin my backyard! Nice timing on this shot, HD and it is one heck of a sharp 100% crop! [Y]

Denise

[ddt0725]

I call it "The Song Bird"



<p sizset="41" sizcache="26"]

Yippeee!! Spring is in the air!! I can't wait until I see one of these guysin my backyard! Nice timing on this shot, HD and it is one heck of a sharp 100% crop! [Y]

Denise

[ddt0725]

Ok, this posted twice why?

[RazorTM]

Thanks for the comments and welcomes, all. I think that the 300 2.8 IS is not bad at all on the autofocus side, but the image quality takes a huge hit when combined with the 2x II. CA, distortion, sharpness, and contrast are all fairly bad. Here's a 100% crop of the egret's head. There's barely any detail in the feathers, and this is absolutely as sharp as I can get the images before they look oversharpened but still not very sharp:


www.flickr.com/.../5455301413][img][View:http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5138/5455301413_6ebf947310_o.jpg][/img][/url]

Also, this was shot at f/8. The combo is best at f/11, but the 500 f/4L IS is even sharper at f/4, wide open.

[HDNitehawk]

<div id="ctl00_ctl00_content_content_ctl00_fragment_121 6_ctl01_ctl00_PostForm__QuoteText"]


Thanks for the comments and welcomes, all. I think that the 300 2.8 IS is not bad at all on the autofocus side, but the image quality takes a huge hit when combined with the 2x II. CA, distortion, sharpness, and contrast are all fairly bad. Here's a 100% crop of the egret's head. There's barely any detail in the feathers, and this is absolutely as sharp as I can get the images before they look oversharpened but still not very sharp:



Also, this was shot at f/8. The combo is best at f/11, but the 500 f/4L IS is even sharper at f/4, wide open.
</div>

It's not that bad for a 2x. Doing a 100% crop on top of a 2x, making your a 300mm a 1200mm and expecting to see a lot of good IQ would really be a stretch. For me the 2x IQ on any lens isn't good enough, but its as good as it gets on any lens with the 300mm 2.8L.


It would be a better comparison for the 1.4x on the 300mm 2.8L for 420mm to compare it to the 500mm F4L bare. With the 300mm and the 1.4x the images are quit good. I find it very acceptable. Of course the naked 500mm will be just slightly better against the 300mm with an extender. Really, IMO I think mine puts out better IQ than the 300mm with no extender but not by much. I am going to upgrade to the II version when it comes out. Even if the IQ is equal (which I believe it will be noticably superior)I think the weight savings is a big plus. I just haven't decided on the 500mm or 600mm yet.

[RazorTM]

Can you handhold the current 500 for a long time? I've read a lot of reviews saying that it can only be done in moderation. Since the new 500 is lighter, I assume it can be handheld for longer, and that's why I've decided that I will buy the 500 II instead of the 600 II if/when I have the money for it. If the current 500's weight allows it to be handheld most of the time, I might seriously consider the 600 II instead...

[JJphoto]

7D, 700mm 5.6,f5.6,1/1600, iso800


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/600x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/15/3666.IMG_5F00_2234.jpg[/img]


thanks for viewing!

[HDNitehawk]

Can you handhold the current 500 for a long time? I've read a lot of reviews saying that it can only be done in moderation. Since the new 500 is lighter, I assume it can be handheld for longer, and that's why I've decided that I will buy the 500 II instead of the 600 II if/when I have the money for it. If the current 500's weight allows it to be handheld most of the time, I might seriously consider the 600 II instead...

Can I hondhold it. Yes. For a long time, not and be accurate. Of course I am always looking at somthing to support on, whether it be out of the truck window or off my knee. The 500mm is a big lens.


Its not all about weight, you have to keep in mind center of gravity and how the wight is porportioned. For instance, the 1D Makr IV has an option that you can change the AF stop button to an option that makes the AF point smaller for shooting birds in the bush or whatever. The buttons that actuate this on the 300mm and 500mm are out at the end of the barrell. Easy to reach on the 300mm hand held, but on the 500mm its harder to reach out to them. With the wimberley plate (if you hold the lens from the plate which I do sometimes hand held)on the bottom of the 500mm it balances just a little in front of the mount with the 1D IV attached. This is a natural V for my arm and elbow to be bent against my body to support the 500mm. If you add 2 1/2" of the 600mm even though it weights the same as the 500mmmore of the weight will be in the front of the lens than on the 500mm, this is because the front elements are larger on the 600mmthan the 500mm and more glass is going to mean more wieght on that end. Which means your arm will extended farther to balance, andwith less leverage for your arm to support that wieght itmayvery well be harder to hold even at the same weight.I wish there were one I could test all this on, but most likely when they are released I will be ordering what I choose blind.