Canon R5II - long term review and comparison to the R5 and Sony A7RV.

Canon R5II with Canon EF 100-400 L using EF-RF adapter. Probably my most used combination this year for bears along the Quinsam River in the fall and on our Safari trip to Tanzania.

Canon R5II compared to the original R5 and Sony A7RV, three camera I own (or runtil ecently did). I have been using Canon cameras since the late 1990s and have used many Canon and Sony digital SLRs over the years starting with the original digital rebel and many APSC cameras, through all of the 5D series cameras and even a 1D. On the Sony side I started with the A7R and have been using many of the A7R series as my main camera for a good number of years now.

When Canon finally started to get into mirrorless cameras it took them a while to come out with something that I thought was more useful that the 5DS. The first R series cameras were quite underwhelming with mediocre specs and autofocus that was less than stellar compared to the Sony cameras. The R5 came out with many of the features that I was looking for, mainly an autofocus that was similar to the A7R4 that I was using at the time. I purchased the camera shortly after it came out but it turned out to be a rather big disappointment. The version I had was very buggy, which was really unusual to me for a Canon product. I couldn’t rely on it when things counted as it would error out and need to have the battery removed regularly just as I hit the shutter button. This was a shame as the autofocus was really good, the quality of the images was great (very close to the 5DS at low ISO and so much better as the ISO increased) but this camera almost made me sell off the rest of my Canon gear it was so frustrating.

When the R5II came out I was a little nervous about spending that much money in hopes that I would be happy again with Canon. Turns out it was a good decision and this camera is as stable as any of my previous Canon cameras that I had come to rely on, and the improvements over the R5 for the type of shooting that I do was well worth the upgrade. For the first time in quite a few years I have a Canon camera that is as good as my Sonys and is in some ways better (at least for a camera of similar cost right now).

improvements from the R5 to the R5II

So first off let’s look at the improvements on the R5II. The sensor is the biggest change going from a relatively standard CMOS sensor to a stacked sensor. This allows us to actually use the electronic shutter most of the time without much in the way of noticeable rolling shutter in any but the fastest moving things. The second thing is the camera’s reliaablity. I have now had this camera for more than 6 months and I can’t remember a single system crash. The autofocus may be slightly better but the R5 was actually very good. At this point in some situations the Canon is better than my A7RV and in other situations it is the other way around but both do the job in a way that I expect it to work in better than 99% of cases that I will be shooting.

The new pre-capture feature is fantastic and I hope this is something that will come to a similarly priced Sony camera soon. This is great for moments where you are waiting for action to happen and would often just miss the defining moment by a fraction of a second. I can now quickly set up for pre-capture and know that unless I’m completely looking away when something happens I will have a good chance of getting the shot. The 30 fps shooting is also very nice to have although I have found that I usually set it for 20 fps and have the front depth of field button set up to increase back to 30fps when I feel I might need it. That is something that I find a bit annoying since when you hit that buffer limit the camera completely stops shooting unlike the Sony that just reduces the number of frames per second.

Canon R5II with the only RF lens I currently use, the RF 14-35 f/4 L. I like the extra field of view from our EF 16-35 but both lenses work well on this camera.

The R5 was actually a good camera and was pretty equivalent to the A7R5 that I also use regularly, it was only the reliability of that camera that really was the issue and now that the R5II has come out without those issues and with the improvements noted above, it is possibly a slightly better camera than the Sony. There are other issues with Canon though that make it difficult to just go with one or the other.

RF mount and cost

The new RF mount and the lack of reasonably priced Canon lenses and the total lack of third party lenses is still a big issue. I have now owned a Canon mirrorless camera for a few years and at this time I have only purchased one RF lens. I picked up the 14-35 f/4 lens when prices were a bit cheaper. This is a good lens but I can’t really say it is sharper or than much more useful than the 16-35 f/4 EF lens that we still own and use on the 5DS. I mostly use the EF 100-400, EF 500 F/4 II, EF 100 f/2.8 IS macro, EF Sigma 35 f/1.4, Tamron 85 f/1.8, and Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 lenses with the EF to RF adapter and don’t currently see much reason to purchase much more expensive RF glass.

I have put most of my money recently into FE glass for the Sony system, including Tamron 35-150 f/2.2.8, Sigma 500 f/5.6 and am looking at other new Sigma super telephoto lenses in the future. There are some very good RF lenses out there but they are so expensive and not that much better (if at all) than the recent Tamron and Sigma lenses and even some of the next tier lenses that have improved significantly in the last few years that I don’t see a good reason to make new investment in Canon glass. This may in the end be the reason that I do at some point finally move off of Canon completely. The main saving grace is that the EF lenses that I have work well on the current camera and ones like the 500 f/4 II are so good I can’t get anything better currently for a reasonable price other than maybe the Sigma 300-600.

Top view of the Canon R5II. I really like the on/off switch in the new location which makes it quick and easy to turn on the camera while bringing the camera and lens to my eye. I rarely switch to video unless I’m on a tripod so having that switch on the left side of the camera is good for me even though I know other people don’t much like it.

Comparing R5II with the Sony A7R5

This may be a bit of an unfair comparison since Sony currently doesn’t have a stacked sensor camera to compete in the price range of the Canon R5II or the Nikon Z8 so this is really the only option and it is a bit dated now compared to either of those cameras. That being said the Sony A7R5 is a workhorse of a camera. The autofocus is excellent and for the most part on par with the R5II. A maximum of 10 fps though really is limiting now (although I thought it was perfectly adequate for many years). The electronic shutter is basically unusable on this camera except possibly for landscapes but I have no idea why you would want electronic shutter over mechanical in that case other than maybe some camera shake for certain shots. Image quality on both of these cameras is fantastic. I do like to have the extra pixels on the Sony when I need to crop in on animals but I am very happy with the image quality on the 45mp Canon sensor. There are subtle differences when it comes to high ISOs but for the most part I get a similar quality image from both even up to 12800 ISO (I pretty much never shoot higher than that).

When it comes to handling this is very subjective. At this time I prefer the Sony due to the number of buttons and dials that I am able to set up the way I like to shoot. On the Canon I find I have to do multiple button combinations to get the same thing done or use the touch screen (which is not useful when I have the camera up to my eye). I have both cameras set up so that I rarely have to go the the main menu, things are either available directly via buttons and dials or via the quick menu for a few things that I don’t use regularly. The more I use the Canon again the more I get used to the button layout and the only thing I find annoying is changing ISO. This isn’t a game changer because I shoot most nature photography with auto ISO. When I’m shooting landscapes I don’t mind taking my eye from the viewfinder for a few seconds.

The back of the R5II looks very familiar to anyone having used Canon cameras over the last 20 years but that viewfinder is huge and is a big improvement over the previous version. Not quite as many programmable buttons as the Sony A7RV which does mean I need to go to the quick menu more often than I would like but maybe other photographers prefer the touch screen which is only useful for me when on a tripod shooting landscapes.

the view finder

Speaking of the viewfinder, this is another nice improvement over the R5 and there are features that I have not yet used. The new viewfinder is significantly better in terms of me being able to see through it. I wear glasses all the time and with the R5 I found that if I shot anywhere other than with the sun behind me I was getting glare into the viewfinder that was washing out the image. The new one seems so much better maybe just due to the different shape and size but I really love looking through it now. The new eye autofocus is the one thing that I have yet to try. I want to and would have fun comparing it to my elan 7e which also had eye autofocus but for the most part the cameras autofocus works so well I don’t need another way to focus on an object. I may change my mind after trying it out but that would really just be a bonus.

The LCD screen on the R5II is good and useful but the Sony A7R5 has the best articulating screen out there and really every company should adopt a similar type of articulation. I’m not that picky about the resolution of the LCD so I haven’t really noticed if one is better than the other. For people that shoot with the LCD screen instead of the viewfinder this may be more important. For most of the things I do both screens do the job well enough.

There are so many interesting features on these cameras that I use only a few times a year; exposure bracketing, time lapse, focus stacking, are all things I sometimes do and each camera has something that helps with those types of shots.

Out in the field

I have now had a good amount of time shooting with the R5II after 3 months straight shooting black bears during the salmon spawn this year and a 2 week safari to Tanzania.

First off I can say that this camera is reliable and stable and works as it should which is fantastic. It is really nice being able to use the electronic shutter with the 30 frames per second and being able to be completely silent. The pre-shooting also came in very handy as I waited for bears to launch after a salmon. I have the camera set most of the time now to 20 frames per second with the depth of field button on the front of the camera set up to increase to 30 frames per second when needed. I also have one of the memory positions set so that I can have pre-shooting quickly. I really would like to have it set up so that I can turn on and off pre-shooting with a single press of a button. Not sure if that is an option now on newer firmware but I hope it can be added if it isn’t already.

Autofocus seems to be very similar to the R5 and that is not a bad thing. The R5’s autofocus was very good and the R5 II may be slightly better but I’m not seeing any significant changes. It tends to be a bit better than Sony for capturing the eye on far subjects but lags a bit behind Sony when it comes to subjects close to busy backgrounds and still struggles a bit to find a bird or animal under those conditions. Sony used to have that same sort of issue back with the A7RII but the latest cameras are much better even with very contrasty backgrounds. It is certainly possible that this could be improved via firmware updates but we shall see.

At the moment I have few RF mount lenses, and all of the long telephoto lenses I use for nature photography are EF mount. The 500 f/4 IS II is still an amazing lens and there still isn’t a replacement for it. The pictures from that lens are spectacular which is good since it was the main reason I bought this camera. For the subjects that I have been shooting this year the 100-400 L II has been the most used lens and again has not been given a direct update on RF.

Black bears on the river tend to be in dark conditions but are relatively close. This is where the R5II really shines. Under these conditions I am often shooting higher than ISO 3200 to be able to stop the action and as long as I have the subject reasonably large in the frame I am able to get shots at ISO 6400 and even 12800 that are usable with a bit of noise reduction in post. Compared to the old Canon 5DS this is amazing as I really wouldn’t consider shooting above ISO1600 with that camera which limited the action shots I was able to get in the past. Although the detail is not quite at the level of the Sony which has 61 MegaPixels most of the time the difference is not extreme. I do still find that things like feather details are still a bit better with the Sony but only nature lovers tend to look that close.

The main reason I bought the R5II was to be able to continue to use my EF 500mm f/4 IS II. This lens is my favourite birding lens and with the 1.4 teleconverter as seen here I get fantastic image quality and am able to track subjects quickly. I don’t know if Canon will ever produce a new 500mm but I doubt it will come in anywhere near the same price as this gem.

The reason I have dropped my shooting speed down to 20 frames per second is mainly due to the buffer in the R5II. Although it is better than previous 5 series cameras it still runs out fairly quickly and when it does shooting stops completely. I don’t tend to put the shutter down until the buffer is full but I will tend to do short bursts as the action is happening and have hit the buffer more often than I would like. I have missed shots due to the fact that the camera won’t allow any more shots until it clears. Would love to see an update so that it would act more like the Sony which slows down but continues to shoot once the buffer is hit. I have found that at 20 frames per second I don’t hit the buffer nearly as often and for the most part the subjects I have been shooting it is fast enough to ensure I get the best wing position or the action at the right time more often than not.

In the end what I can say is the R5II has become my favourite Canon camera of all time and I’m finding it to be as consistent and capable as my trusty A7RV. For nature photography I would say it is Canon’s best camera up to this point in time.

What's in my bag for Tanzania

Option 1: In the left side Canon R5II with EF 100-400 lens attached, 14-35 f/4 RF lens, set of magnetic filters. On the right side we have the Sigma 500 f/5.6, Sony A7R5 with 35-150 f/2-2.8 lens, DJI Osmo Pocket 3, Canon 1.4x EF teleconverter.

We are not long term planners, usually deciding on trips a few weeks ahead and then just doing our own thing without a major schedule or others to rely on. This year we decided to finally do an African safari, basically a trip of a lifetime for us, but we are doing so with 3 other couples. This is a photography trip and we are all nature photographers so at least we will have the same priorities for the most part. We started planning this trip more than 8 months ago so for once I have plenty of time to consider what I need/want to bring with me from a gear perspective. I normally carry a long telephoto zoom and a big white telephoto prime for much of my photography closer to home but I don’t think this is going to be the best gear for this trip. Taking that gear on a number of planes would also be challenging so I have really had to think about what we are going to be shooting, the distances from the subject, how much gear and how heavy my bag will be.

I’ve watched a number of different youtube shows from other photographers on different safaris to try to get some idea of what will be most useful that can all fit in one backpack. The general consensus seems to be that unless the trip is mostly birding you will not really need a super long lens. 400mm is likely as long as will be needed most of the time and with some of the bigger animals you may be close enough to need a normal or wide lens. I always like to do some landscape work while traveling so most likely an ultrawide zoom will be good to have. To keep things light and still have a good assortment of focal lengths zooms will be most practical.

Based on all of that, I think I have determined that the types of photography I will be doing will be closer to the bear photography that I do in the fall where we have larger subjects often at medium to fairly close distances and in low light. To this end I have put together a set of kit that I think I will take on the trip and have been using that most of the time during salmon season this year.

The gear includes the following:

• Canon R5II

• Canon 100-400 EF f/4-5.6 L

• Canon EF 1.4x teleconverter

• Canon RF 14-35 f/4 L

• Sony A7R5

• Tamron 35-150 f/2-2.8

• Sigma 500 f/5.6

I will also be bringing along the DJI Pocket 3 and the Sony ZV1 for capturing video as we are shooting. I have also now a new MacBook Air m4 plus a number of external SSD drives for backing up pictures and videos each night.

Accessories going in one of the bags are the Macbook air, 2 small cases of memory cards, extra batteries for all cameras, card readers for CF Express type A and B as well as for SD cards, external SSDs for quick backup of files each night and the trusty Sony ZV1 for quick videos.

To hold everything I have 2 options, a PGYTech Onemo 2 35L camera bag shown above or the Gura Gear Kiboko 16L below. The PGYTech fits everything above fairly easily but with the Gura Gear I would need to leave the 500 Sigma at home. That bag would not have worked at all originally since it can’t fit a large laptop but now with the macbook air I can take either easily. I haven’t made the decision yet but am leaning towards the smaller bag at the moment.

For Option 2 in the Gura Gear bag which is significantly smaller I have the Canon R5II with the EF 100-400 lens and the Canon EF 1.4 teleconverter.

Side 2. I have the Sony A7R5 with the 35-150, Osmo Pocket 3, and the Canon 14-35 f/4. This bag has plenty of storage for all the accessories and a small area that will fit the Macbook air.

During Salmon season this year I have mostly carried the Canon R5II with the 100-400 lens and the Sony A7r5 with the Tamron 35-150 lens and have found this to cover fairly well what I am shooting. Most of the time for these medium sized mammals at distances of between 10-40 metres these lenses have worked out well. I’m hoping most of the time the shooting will be similar from the safari vehicles based on what I have heard from other photographers.

If money were no object, I would absolutely prefer to have a low light beast like the Canon 100-300 f/2.8 along with a couple of teleconverters which would allow for a great range plus good low light performance but that lens is significantly out of budget and I’m hoping Sigma will come out with a new version of their 120-300 at some point for FE mount at a much more reasonable price point.

The 35-150 has turned out to be a very versatile lens for both photography and video. I think that this lens may stay on the Sony camera for much of the trip especially for many of the large animals that we will come across and for more environmental shots with the animals.

The 100-400 range will likely be sufficient for most of the other nature photography and I’m expecting that we will have pretty good light much of the trip. The 1.4 teleconverter is for just in case we see some birds that I can’t pass up the chance of capturing.

If I have the 14-35mm lens on the Canon for some landscape or wide environmental shots then I might switch to the 500mm on the Sony to ensure that I have a long telephoto ready for big cat action. The Sigma 500 is such a light and small super telephoto prime that it may be worth bringing even if I don’t use it most of the time. Salwa will have a 16-35 in her bag if I do need a quick wide angle shot on the A7RV and the Canon is busy.

he main reason for the wide range of the lenses on a trip like this is because most of the time we will be in a safari vehicle and will be unable to get out to change perspective so we will absolutely have to do so with the zoom lenses.

Salwa similarly will be bringing a set of lenses that cover the gamut from 16mm to 560mm with a 16-35 f/4, 24-105 f/4, 100-400 f/4-5.6 and a 1.4 teleconverter all on her Sony A74. It is likely she will be doing a lot more video than I will and she is very comfortable with this lens setup that she takes on most of her video shoots.

The other little things we will be bringing:

• Many memory cards for all the cameras.

• SSDs for backup

• Insta360 X5

• Filters (ND and polarizers)

• DJI wireless microphone

• On camera microphone

Otherwise we will have minimal clothing, a bit of medicine incase of any trip related issues and not much more. Can’t wait to get out there, planning a trip this far ahead is very difficult for us to not get too excited too early. Hopefully I haven’t over examined this with all the time I have had…sometimes overthinking is bad :)

I will revisit my decisions once we come back from the trip to see if we ended up having what we needed or if we should have brought other gear. So far things are working well enough for shooting black bears on the rivers edge and elk out in the fields.

Sony A1 II - Seemingly a disappointment, but a fantastic camera

Sony A1 II

My thoughts on the latest flagship camera from Sony and what it means for the gear I will purchase in the near future.

My opinions on how the new A1 II compares to other options are clearly biased by how I use my gear and what gear I currently use most of the time so likely won't be the same as your thought process but maybe these thoughts will help you to make your own decisions.

Quick summary of specs on the new camera:

• 50.1MP Stack CMOS sensor (same as A1)

• in body image stabilization up to 8.5EV (improved over A1)

• updated subject recognition algorithms and hardware with new automatic subject selection option. (mostly same as A7RV or A9III)

• Continuous shooting at up to 30fps (no change from A1)

• pre-release capture from .03 to 1 second (similar to A9III)

• up to 8K 30p/4k 120p video (I don't believe there are many video changes from the A1)

• 9.44M dot viewfinder (I believe slightly updated for refresh rates).

• 3.2 inch 2.1M dot fully articulating tilt rear screen (introduced on A7RV)

• body design from the A9III

Nearly four years after stunning the photography world with the A1, Sony has released the next version in that line.  Sony has kind of gone the way of Canon and made what looks to be a not very exciting update and more of a small incremental upgrade.  But also, much like how Canon does these things, the update turns out to improve the camera in many ways that don't seem exciting but really do improve the use of the camera.

A few months ago I was watching the Canon forums when the R5 II came out and the discussion were very nearly the same and they are now with the Sony A1 II. There were those that thought the R5 II was barely an upgrade at all since it didn't do much more for the type of photography they were interested in and then there were those who thought it was a very useful update.  I think I firmly land in the later camp since when I sold my R5 it was in hope that Canon would come out with a higher MegaPixel stacked sensor camera so that I could enjoy the silent shutter that those with the A1 had been using for years.  Now we are seeing the same conversations around the A1 II.  It seems to be a reasonable update for an already excellent camera (just like the R5 II was) but unless you are interested in the physical improvements or those few added features then it was quite disappointing for those that wanted a release to match the original A1.  I do believe that we are more used to this type of update from Canon (5DIII - 5DIV for just one example) than we are from Sony as they really have given us ground breaking new tech in both the A1 and A9 series cameras in the last few years.  I do currently own the A9 II which again was not a significant update from the A9 and we had to wait for the next iteration for something brand new again.  I do think we are starting to get to a point in camera technology where we will not be seeing such great leaps especially since the cameras we have now really can do so much that we couldn't do before.

Back to the A1 II.   What we have here seems to be taking all of the things that Sony has added (that have been improvements) to other cameras over the last 4 years and put them in here.  The improvements to the rear screen that is on the A7RV, the body of the A9III, new autofocus chip (with machine learning algorithms) that I believe was also from the A7RV and a few other software features like the pre-shooting that Canon and Nikon have but Sony didn't until now.  Those types of updates are similar to what we saw on the A9II based on what had changed at that time.  Of those changes I think the only one that could have been put in the A1 (at least in theory) is the pre-shooting since it really should just be a software solution.  I doubt that feature will be added to the A1 as a future firmware update but it would really be a nice thing if they did so.  We have some solid updates to make the A1 II Sony's best camera but I can see where it is a disappointment to many because there isn't really anything substantially new on this camera that either was already on other Sony cameras or is catching up to the other brands.

So what are the benefits of these improvements?  Let's take a look at what you are getting if you already have a previous generation Sony camera of some sort.  If you already own the A1 you would basically get the newer body including that rear screen that both tilts and also swings out to the side.  It also has the new customizable button on the front that by default allows you to go to a faster number of frames per second very quickly.  You also get the new AI (machine learning) based chip with the latest algorithms for subject detection and a new mode that isn't on any other Sony camera that automatically detects the subject type so you don't have to tell it you want to detect birds instead of people or any other combo.  It seems like most other things around shooting speed and capabilities are the same as the original A1 including mostly the same video capabilities which may be one of the reasons that many people are disappointed in the update.  I have never used the A1 personally but I have seen the improvements in subject detection that I got when I updated to the A7RV compared to both the A7RIV and the A9II.  Those updates were significant in terms of how quickly and effectively the camera was able to pick up both animal and bird subjects and was much better at getting the eyes of those subjects.  I also found that it was better at getting locks on a subject even in conditions where the background is very busy and contrasty.  This is something that I have to deal with a lot and I have slowly seen improvements with each iteration of Sony's tech since the original A6000 started to be able to quickly focus even though it didn't have much in the way of subject detection.  I'm assuming the A1 was similar but possibly a little better than the A9II so I think the A1 II is going to just be that much better but you may only notice that improvement when going back to the older one.

If you currently are shooting with the A9 or A9II upgrading to the A1II would get you all the benefits above along with a stacked sensor that can now do 30 frames per second instead of 20 and has 50 MegaPixels instead of 24.  While I enjoy using the A9II for the silent shutter I do find the lower resolution to be limiting for getting that detail that I prefer to have in my nature photography (once I know what I can get it is hard to go back to lower resolutions).  There is also more room to crop for those times that you just can't get as close as you would like to your subject.

If you are shooting with the A7RV the main thing that you might be missing is that stacked sensor.  What this gives a nature photographer is a fast silent electronic shutter for those times that any noise can change the behaviour of your subject and an electronic shutter where you don't have to worry about artifacts in your image due to the slow readout of that A7RV sensor.

Currently I have to choose between that beautiful high resolution sensor of the A7RV and the high frame rate of the A9II so that I can increase the possibility to capture just the perfect moment.  When it comes to my landscape work there really isn't any benefit of that electronic sensor and the A7RV is very nearly the perfect camera but for capturing interactions between birds or animals that A9II can sometimes be nearly perfect.  It would seem that the A1 II could be the best of both worlds if it wasn't also currently more expensive than buying both the A7RV and the A9II (used), but then again the A1 already had many of those benefits.

If you currently have any other Sony camera (and do mostly photography and not so much video) then the A1 II is the best camera you can get but also by far the most expensive one.  Be aware that like most technology there are diminishing returns as you move up to the highest end gear.  Most of the time the difference between an entry level camera and those just below the top tier gives more return than the difference between that second tier and the top but as you get deeper into any hobby this is often true.

Comparing the A1 to the flagship (or equivalent) cameras from other companies is much more difficult as most people who are looking for these top tier cameras are unlikely to switch to another company since the cost of purchasing a whole new set of lenses at that level would eclipse the costs (and benefits) of the differences in those cameras.  For the sake of just understanding the differences we have Canon with the R1 which to me is more like the A9 series than the A1 and the R5 II which at nearly $1700 USD cheaper than the A1 is actually pretty comparable but doesn't have quite the same buffer as the A1 II and does have some interesting new autofocus tech.  If you are currently using Canon then the R5 II is a great choice for a top tier nature photography camera.  Nikon has taken a different approach to a similar set of technology with both the Z8 and Z9.   The Z8 is significantly less expensive than the A1 II (and the R5 II) but is quite compelling in the technology that it has.  The autofocus is not quite as good as the other two, the frames per second is lower (for raw images) and it has no physical shutter which can still be useful.  On the other hand, the Nikon systems has been quite busy with a very good set of nature photography lenses that go from around $2000 USD, with options all the way up to the price of a small car.  Sony has more 3rd party options but not as many interesting prime lenses and Canon has a much more limited selection of glass (mostly great at the highest end).

What would (did) I purchase?

This is a very difficult question.  I currently still have a lot of good EF lenses but I don't see myself investing in the RF glass and the 3rd party options are pretty much nonexistent.  I currently have a 500mm F/4 IS II that is not getting as much use as I would like and selling EF primes is not really going to get me much so that I could purchase either a big Sony or Canon RF lens so the purchase of a R5II has been an option to allow me to continue to use that 500mm for at least another 5 years with a pretty great camera.  On the other hand we currently own a bunch of Sony cameras and a used A1 might be a good choice to have almost everything I want by trading in some older gear. If I could sell the 500mm I might be able to pick up a 300mm f/2.8 used which would be great for bear photography in the fall. In all likelihood I would keep the A7R5 and have the A1 and I would be pretty happy without completely breaking the bank.  If money was not a consideration I would absolutely pick up an A1 II as that camera has everything that I would like to have in a camera.  This is a tough question and I will likely wait to see how the A1 drops in price (both new and used) over the next couple of months as well as see if anyone is interested in any of my older gear.  It is never easy when money is the limiting factor.

UPDATE: (I waited a few months and ended up purchasing the Canon R5 II to use with my 500mm lens. This camera currently is proving to be much better than the R5, no crashes and the stacked sensor allows me to use the silent shutter nearly all the time. I do think this combination will be useful for quite a while or at least until I could trade up to the A1 II and the new Sigma 300-600 f/4….but that is another story)

Second tier Nature photography setups from each brand.

From a few years back carrying both Canon and Sony gear while shooting elk in the Cataloochee Valley

If you are, or want to be, a nature photographer there is a bit of gear that is actually necessary to be able to do so.  Most of us are aware of the high-end gear, those huge lenses that cost as much as a small car, and the high speed, high resolution cameras that the companies show off with all the latest tech (or so we are told), and if price was no object, or if it is your full time job and can write the expenses off, then this article isn’t for you!

For those of us who do this as a hobby (or slight obsession) we can't always afford the biggest and most expensive even if we might dream big.  20 years ago this meant that what you could produce with mid-range gear was unlikely to be on par with what was produced by that from the top tier. Over the past 5 years, with the improvements in autofocus, frame rates and noise levels of current sensors along with the massive improvements in sharpness of almost all lenses, the gap between a 2nd tier set of gear and the best of the best is not nearly as wide as it used to be. 

There is still a lower, more inexpensive tier that when I started was very slow and not very sharp. Even beginners looking to get into nature photography can find "reasonably priced" long telephoto lenses along with useful crop sensor cameras that are adequate enough, that is until they start looking in depth at the details. The lowest tier is how many photographers get into nature photography.  They either already have a camera that they may use for other genres of photography or they are just looking to purchase their first camera.  At this point most will figure out they need a longer telephoto lens to be able to capture birds or animals and they often start with a typical 70-300 or 3rd party superzoom.  Back in the early days of digital photography these lenses were really subpar both in terms of sharpness and with how well they could focus on a moving target.   This didn’t matter too much at this point, as getting those first shots was a huge part of getting hooked on this type of photography.  You could finally get a reasonable closeup shot that at least resembled what you may have seen on National Geographic back when magazines were a thing.

Over time, if you kept on with nature photography, you may have started the incremental journey to better gear.  This is where the 2nd tier fits in and it basically consists of all of the options for nature photography except the cost prohibitive top tier cameras and the big super telephoto lenses. Below I’ve summarized the useful gear combinations I would have in my camera bag and the reasons why I made those choices depending on what I'm actually shooting.

Canon

Let's start with Canon since that is also where I started my journey.

First off let's start with the camera.  My current choice for a second tier nature camera would be the R5 mark II and up until recently I used the original R5.  This camera is not considered the top of the line by Canon but I think for many nature photographers it may well be their first choice. Currently the first tier is the R1 and R3 which may be comparable but neither has the resolution of the R5 II which, for me, has almost always been more important than how many shots I can take per second.  There will be some people who like the larger camera and battery in the field, but I have found that it is just as easy for me to carry a few batteries (warmed in my pocket) and I actually prefer to have the smaller body since I mostly hold the gear by the lens. I do not find balance to be an issue as much as weight.

Now this camera and its predecessor have fantastic autofocus for animals and birds, and the new R5 II has a stacked sensor to allow for silent shutter without artifacts due to that quick sensor.  If you are moving up from a crop sensor camera or lower resolution full-frame camera, you will find the results to be pretty amazing and you will be able to crop into your shots significantly when you can't quite get close enough to the subject (which happens more often than we would like).

Now the issue at the moment on the Canon side of the world is with finding good but not too expensive second tier lenses for nature photography.  The 100-500 RF lens is good and sharp but quite slow at the long end and is a challenge to use with the teleconverters since you don't get the full zoom range when teleconverters are attached.  This may not be a big issue if you mostly don't shoot in low light.  This is also not an inexpensive lens coming in just under $3000 USD.  A good alternative is the EF 100-400 f4.5-5.6 IS II which is very sharp and a little brighter but doesn't have that extra reach.  It does however handle the 1.4x teleconverter very well and gives you a full range of 140-560 at around f/6.3-f/8.  There is also a new RF 200-800 f/6.3-f/9 which gives a significantly long range but at the expense of being a very slow lens and it extends with a very long zoom throw.  Now the leap from this second tier to the top tier lenses on the Canon front garners a huge price increase and there are not any choices between these lenses currently and the big white primes or the 100-300 f/2.8.  If you find the 2 Canon RF lenses useful then you have a solid base system but your choices are a bit limited at the moment unless your budget is closer to top tier. There are currently no 3rd party lenses for RF that can be used and 3rd party EF lenses are more on the beginner side of things (except for a few older Sigma lenses that you might be able to pick up relatively cheap).

The two major options on Canon for 2nd Tier are below.

Canon R5 II

Canon R5 II, RF 100-500 f/4.5-7.1 approximately $6900 USD

Canon 100-500mm

or slightly lower cost option:

Canon R5 II, RF 200-800 f6.3-9 approximately $6200 USD

Canon 200-800mm

Sony

Sony on the other hand does have their long telephoto lenses in a similar range to Canon but the options are quite different.  There are however not as many choices on the camera side at the moment.  The best choice from my perspective is the A7RV which has a 60 MP back side illuminated sensor but does not have a stacked sensor like the Canon (or Nikon).  This camera can shoot at up to 10 frames per second with the mechanical shutter and has an electronic shutter which is basically useless for anything other than static subjects as the readout time of this sensor is one of the longest of any current camera.  For the same price range, there is also the A9II which does have the stacked sensor but has "only" 24 MP sensor and does not have the latest autofocus algorithms which I also use. For the most part, the A7RV is, for what I do, the best 2nd tier choice at the moment from Sony. 

Unlike their competitors, Sony doesn’t currently have a high-megapixel stacked sensor camera at a 2nd tier price point, and likely won't for the foreseeable future now that they have just released the A1 II for their top tier option. 

On the lens side of things we have the standard 100-400 f4.5-5.6 that is very sharp.  This lens is still not cheap but has a good range and has been a staple for nature photographers for a long time.  The standout lens for me is the 200-600 f/5.6-6.3 and is likely my most useful lens.  This is a relatively slow lens but has a bunch of features that make it amazing.  The internal zoom and short throw on the zoom make it really easy to use.  It is not quite as sharp as the 100-400 at 400 but is sharper than using a 1.4 teleconverter on that lens at the top end of the zoom range which is really where I use the lens the most.  There are a number of other options depending on your requirements from 3rd party lens makers that are very high quality.  The Sigma 500mm f/5.6 is a reasonably priced very light and small prime lens that is a fantastic option. Keep in mind that Sony will not allow you to use teleconverters with 3rd party lenses.  I would consider the Sigma and Tamron 150-600 options to be more of a beginner lens option but Tamron does have a really useful 50-400 f/4.5-6.3 which may be a little slow but is great for those times that you may need more zoom range in the field.  If you are doing more environmental nature shots, Tamron also has a really fantastic 35-150 f2-2.8 lens which is rather unique in the market compared the to usual 70-200 f/2.8 that all companies have.

The two options I would look at currently for Sony E-mount are ( I currently own both lenses and the A7RV):

Sony A7RV

Sony A7RV, FE 200-600 f/5.6-6.3 approximately $5300 USD

Sony 200-600mm

or

Sony A7RV, Sigma 500 f/5.6 approximately $6100 USD

Sigma 500mm f/5.6

Nikon

Nikon has probably the most interesting options at the moment for 2nd tier gear with a reasonably priced Z8 stacked 45 MP camera with some fantastic features for nature photography and after some of the latest firmware updates, has much improved autofocus that at least is close to what Canon and Sony currently have.  This camera is similar to Nikon’s top tier Z9 camera but with a smaller body at a price that is much lower than the Canon R5II and equivalent to the Sony A7RV. 

On the lens front, Nikon has the typical 100-400 option and much like Sony now has a 180-600 f5.6-6.3 which also is an internally zooming and relatively inexpensive option that provides very similar quality as the Sony option.  That lens and the Z8 are likely the least expensive high quality option out there at the moment and would be the combination I would likely advise people to choose if they were not currently already using gear from one of the other companies even though I have never really used Nikon gear for any length of time myself. 

Nikon also has some options for prime lenses that no one else currently has that are considerably less expensive than the usual big primes.  There is a 400mm f4.5 for around $3000USD, a 300mm F mount f/4 at $2000, a 600mm f/6.3 at $4000 USD, and if you really want to go big an 800mm f/6.3 at $5700 USD.  These are all Phase Fresnel lenses which make them significantly smaller and lighter than other options (much like Canon's older diffractive optics lenses) and give lens options with prices in between the normal 2nd tier and the $10000 plus top tier primes that currently no other camera system offers.  Tamron is also starting to produce some of their lenses for the Z mount including that 50-400 that I mentioned earlier.

Nikon Z8

Nikon Z8, Z 180-600 f5.6-6.3 approximately $5400 USD

Nikon 180-600mm

or

Nikon Z8, 600 f6.3 approximately $7500 USD

Nikon 600mm f/6.3

Other Options

There are few other companies that really try to offer good options for nature photography and are close to but not quite the same as the 2nd tier options above.  OM systems is definitely showing some promise but is held back a bit by the lower resolution sensors on the micro four thirds platform even though there are some very good lens options that are relatively small for the effective focal length. They have telephoto lens options from 70-300 all the way to 150-600 at many different price points.  The examples I have shown below are rather expensive but if you want relatively small and light gear these are some of the better options currently.

OM Systems

OM system is a great option for those who want long effective focal lengths (narrow field of view) but with a smaller and lighter set of gear.

OM1 II, Olympus 300mm f/4 approximately $4600 USD

OM 300mm f/4

up to

OM1 II, OM 150-400 f/4.5 with 1.25 teleconverter $9400 USD

OM 150-400mm

FUJIFILM

Fuji has a couple of options now with the H series cameras and their higher end lenses that can compete with the full frame cameras but have no room to move to top tier later.  Fuji also has a new 500mm option for their medium format cameras which may be an option for certain types of nature photography but that system is still a bit behind in terms of autofocus even though the image quality would be superb.

Fuji X-H2, 150-600 f/5.6-8 approximately $4000 USD

Fuji 150-600mm

up to

Fuji X-H2S, XF200mm f/2  approximately $7500 USD

Fuji 200mm with teleconverter

and

Fuji GFX 100S II, GF 500mm f/5.6 approximately $8500 USD

Fuji GFX 500mm

There is a lot of superb gear out there at the moment that allows a photographer to do things now that only the highest end gear could do a few years ago.  None of this gear is cheap but over time you can build up a pretty useful setup that should continue to give you excellent shots for years to come.  If you currently are invested in one of the companies above it is likely best to stay in that system from a cost perspective since you can get fairly close to the same level of gear on all of them.  If you are currently looking to move up to this level of gear and are not invested heavily already then Nikon offers a compelling set of options at the moment to get up and running.  Sony and Canon may make changes to their line up in the near future to change that perspective but Nikon looks pretty good right now.  Seems like an interesting conclusion from someone who has been using Canon gear for 35 years and Sony for around 12 years. A venture to another system, at this point, is unlikely.

Sigma, Please bring it back!

Sigma 120-300 for Canon EF mount. I do miss this range of telephoto goodness.

For many years my go to lens for nature photography, especially for lower light conditions, was the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8. This was by far the sharpest lens I had ever owned at least until the Canon 500 f/4 II. At the time on my 5D II and 1DIV the autofocus was pretty reasonable, at times a little slower to track than my Canon lenses but even with the 1.4 and 2 times teleconverters it was very usable.

Great Grey Owl hunting in a farmer’s field near dusk on a very cold winter day. Taken with Canon 1D IV with Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 and 2x teleconverter.

At the time I was shooting owls and needed something that was capable of keeping the ISO down to a maximum of 1600 for as long as possible as those cameras really started to get noisy past that point. My Canon 100-400 push-pull at the time was a much lighter lens, and the focus was a bit faster but the image quality just was not in the same ballpark and the smaller apertures made it not as useful at dusk or dawn.

Canon 1D IV with Sigma 12-300 and 2x Teleconverter at 600mm. Even cropped in this lens made the best out of the APS-H 16Mpixel sensor.

As I moved to mirrorless cameras over the last 10 years or so with the improvements in low light capabilities I was able to get away with current 100-400 and now the 200-600 lenses in many conditions.  Recently I moved to the west coast of Canada into an area where nature photography often takes me into deep woods or leads me down narrow river basins in search of bears and other fun stuff.  The light in these areas is challenging at best and the sun disappears behind mountains to an extent that I'm finding that to get a reasonable shutter speed for the action I'm shooting at 10000 ISO or greater at F/5.6 or 6.3 depending on the lens I have.  I have also found in these situations that I don't as often need >400mm and am often less than 300mm for most shots.  This is a range where having a large aperture telephoto zoom would really come in handy again.

Some very low light as the sun was dropping low in the sky on a cold winter day. This shot has been brightened considerably but I was able to get the shot at 1/2000 second and still have a usable ISO.

Now Canon has recently come out with a 100-300 which looks to be a spectacular lens but they have also typically priced it out of reach for most of us who aren't as daffy duck would say "I'm rich,I'm wealthy, I'm comfortably well off".  Nikon has also a 120-300 f/2.8 but for their older mount which you can pick up a bit cheaper than the Canon but they don't have one for the Z mount.  So this brings me to my opening statement....Sigma could you make a new 120-300 f/2.8 lens?  I'm certain that you can make it much lighter than the original, and hopefully still make it for a "reasonable" price.  With the improvements in Sigma lenses over the last few years I could see this being an amazing lens.   I did recently purchase the Sigma 500 f/5.6 which is a fantastic lens for the E mount (although I would really love to be able to use it with teleconverters....not Sigma's fault it would seem).  This light super telephoto lens gives me hope that they could produce the lens I want and likely make it significantly lighter than their original and with the new autofocus and even just the same optical capabilities it would quickly become my goto lens again.

Some of my favourite images were taken with the Sigma 120-300 and even though this was a heavy lens it was still very useful for action shots. Not bad tracking for a bird coming straight towards me with that Canon 1D IV and a third party lens.

Now for the dreamer - to make this lens perfect for my use it would either need to be usable with the teleconverters or even better come with a built in 1.4 or 2 times teleconverter.  That would likely boost the cost a bit but I have a feeling that lens would rarely come off my camera at that point.

So Sigma, if you happen to read this, get in touch if you need someone to help you test out this lens in the field :)

My love/hate relationship with the Canon R5 and what to do with the R5 Mark II.

Canon R5 Mark II image from Canon’s web site.

I have been using Canon cameras since before the year 2000 and up until recent years they have been the main tools that I have used for photography for most of that time. Other than in my youth with various film cameras I started actually doing photography as a hobby when some of the first digital cameras were coming out. The first I bough for myself was the S400 elph and since that time I have progressed through the Canon lineup and relied on these tools for both pleasure and work.

Canon cameras that we have owned and used over the last 25 years. S400 elph, s95, sx50 HS, original digital Rebel, Rebel xti, Rebel t1i, 20D, 50D, 7D, 5D, 5D II, 5DIII, 1DIV, 5DS, m50, R5, and Elan 7e. I currently still own the s95, 5DS, m50 and the Elan 7e.

About 2 months ago I sold my Canon R5 with a couple things in mind.  I knew there was a Canon R5II coming soon and the rumours looked like it might be a camera worth keeping my 500 F/4 II lens to use.  I also figured that Sony would need to come out with something similar in the near future and it is likely that one of those two options will decide what gear I will be using for the next few years.

The R5 was a good camera…not a great camera and not one that I could rely on to get the shot when the moment happened.  The picture quality was great, nearly as good as the Sony A7RIV and A7RV which are currently my main cameras.  The autofocus is great, pretty much on par with the Sony A7RV and a bit better than the A7RIV when it comes to tracking wildlife which is what I really need it for.  The biggest reason I have not moved fully away from Canon over the last few years is that big white lens that I bought for a lot of money that I really can’t afford to replace with either a new RF or a Sony FE big white.  I also have most of the old EF lenses that I still use with both my DSLR 5DS and SLR Elan 7e.

I enjoyed shooting with the R5 most of the time however there were two issues that really made it difficult to use when I needed to get that shot.  The first is the battery life and with the long lens it seemed like if I was below 50% battery focus became a challenge.  The second was how often the camera would crash.  This last one would happen with any lens (RF or EF), under just about any conditions (landscape with single shot or tracking for nature) and was pretty much completely unpredictable.  I might not occur for hours on a shoot and then pop up a couple of times or it might happen constantly for a while and then just be fine again for a while.  It got really frustrating when I was waiting for a bird or animal to do something and as soon as it did the camera would lock up needing to have the battery removed and I would lose all chance to get the shot during the action.  I have been using Canon cameras for more than 20 years and have never had issues like this with any other one.  On the forums it seems that many people also had this issue and a number of firmware updates tried to address it but never fully did (I felt like the last ones made things a bit more stable but that might have been wishful thinking).

Catching the moment. Eagles fighting over some Salmon. These are the types of shots I can rely on capturing with the Sony A7RV but worry about with the R5. The hope is that with a camera like the R5 Mark II we could silently capture 3 times more images in that interaction and not worry about the camera crashing at just that moment.

I have been using both Canon and Sony camera systems pretty much since I tried the Sony A7R when it came out.  This was a very slow camera but had some amazing resolution for the time.  Over the years Sony has improved just about everything on these cameras and they are now a very stable and useful tool even if some people think they are not exciting to use.  For me a camera is a tool that just needs to work and make getting the shots as easy as possible, and that is what they have done for me over the last few years.  They also have the advantage of being useful for video which means Salwa has switched over from Canon completely now since her job has become more about video than photo in recent years.

From my perspective at the moment there are only a few things that I think might be a compelling reason to get a new camera right now.  Stacked sensors is one of them.  When the Sony A9 came out with the first stacked sensor camera and the ability to take completely silent shots and also shoot at a high number of frames per second I knew that it was a technology that I was going to want.  However I was not willing to use a lower resolution camera to get that and the price was pretty much out of reach.  The A1 solved the first problem but price was still an obstacle.  Then Nikon came out with the Z8 which was really close to what I wanted but I did not want to get into a third set of lenses or sell off the Canon gear at that point.   So I have been left waiting to see what Canon and Sony would do in response to a reasonably priced high resolution stacked sensor camera.  Sony doesn’t seem to be in a hurry since no one has managed to match the specs of the A1 even after  nearly 5 years on the market.  I have a feeling they have a camera sitting on a shelf ready to come out when it feels like matching or beating Nikon and Canon but I don’t know when that will/might happen.  The rumours of the Canon R5 having exactly what I have been waiting for and at a (sort of) reasonable price have had me watching and waiting and now starting to watch whatever reviews are going to be out there for this camera.   

With that out of the way let’s get back to Canon’s recent announcements for the R5II.

The specs are pretty much perfect for me.  Same resolution as the R5 as I was quite happy with that before.  Improved autofocus is a bonus as it was really good before.  The stacked sensor seems to be fast enough for the type of shooting I will do and will be great for trying to get silent shots from a hide or when I’m close enough that the subject might notice the sound and possibly stop if from catching a meal or just make it nervous.  I really try to ensure that my presence doesn’t change  how the animal/bird acts as much as possible.

There are a few bonus additions that I can see from early reports.  The viewfinder is a bit bigger and the eye control autofocus is now in this camera (hopefully better than that in my elan 7e). There is a new battery which may help with some of the issues I had before and I’m hoping Canon has improved power usage with the new camera.  Full size hdmi port is nice since I do use monitors quite often.  They have moved the power button and changed how they move from stills to movie shooting.  Both look better although I would prefer the power switch to be under the shutter button.  Pre-continuous shooting is another nice addition as I have definitely just missed the moment many times. Everything else to me was either already what I needed on the R5 or a nice incremental improvement and it doesn’t look like they have taken anything away (the old cripple hammer…as Camera Conspiracies would put it). 

The only initial issues I have heard so far have to do with the size of the buffer and with pre-continuous shooting of .5 seconds which may have some issues with heating up the camera.

Now comes the big question…do I buy this camera?  Unlike when the R5 came out, I think, this time I’m going to wait for a while to see if this camera also has glitches like the R5 and how well it actually performs.  I will also give it a bit of time to see if Sony is going to come out with something in the same range and price soon and it is has some amazing new thing that I didn’t know I needed.  I won’t wait too long as I do miss using that big white prime but if I don’t end up buying the R5II that lens will likely be looking for a new home.  So to answer my original question, yes I do believe the R5II is a worthy upgrade but I’m not yet sure when or if I will actually do so.

It really has been a good few years to be a nature photographer.  We have gone in the last 20 years from mostly slow tracking of subjects with 1 (or a few) useful focus point(s) to full screen tracking with object recognition that allows us to automatically focus on the eye of a rather small subject while in fast motion.  This also allows us to compose shots exactly how we want them while the action is happening. We have gone from a couple frames per second to a point where I no longer would need to use the fastest available on a regular basis.  We can even get the shot before we hit the shutter button now (oh how many shots I have missed by just a split second).  We have resolutions now that make printing a pleasure and allow for useful cropping when we still can’t quite get close enough to our subject.  Even mid tier cameras and lenses now can do the job.  It is much easier to get into nature photography now (just as big a jump in some ways as moving from film to digital).  Even if I don’t get this new camera, I am able now to get shots I never thought I would be able to get consistently and each new feature is like a bit more icing on the cake.

Fujifilm GFX100 II - is this a camera system for people who do both wildlife and landscape photography?

Like many photographers I have looked at medium format cameras as a possible next step up in that search for, well just more.  More resolution without making the pixel size smaller, more color depth, more dynamic range possible…mostly just more.  This also has meant in the past more weight, more money but less choice.  

The more money aspect is still true but to a much lesser degree than in the past.  The GFX100 II is coming in at around 7500 USD with lenses mostly in the 2000 USD range making it likely only about 30-40% more expensive for a camera and 3 lens kit than what I would currently carry.  That is not bad compared to when most medium format cameras were starting anywhere from 15 to 50 thousand a few years ago.  If you are purely a landscape photographer you can get into this system now for less than 10000 quite easily.

The more weight has been mitigated in many of the latest medium format cameras themselves but the lenses of course have to deal with the physics of optical elements and that is difficult to make smaller and lighter but still cover a bigger image circle.  For many landscape photographers that is not a big issue as wide angle up to short telephoto lenses are available and are only slightly larger than their 35mm counterparts.  That is not an issue for me as it seems Fuji have a pretty good assortment of lenses that will cover what I would shoot for landscape.  The bigger question for me is could I start to use a system like this for some of my nature photography.  I’m not expecting it to replace what I use for bird photography but for many of the animals I shoot I can get away with 200-300mm equivalent focal lengths and now that Fuji can focus relatively quickly and shoot a few frames per second we seem to be on par with camera systems I shot with a few years ago like my Canon 5DS.   That is a system I managed to use for wildlife photography for a good number of years and even though the newer mirrorless systems have made that feel like ancient technology I was still able to get what I considered great shots.

It would be interesting to see if I could do as well or better now with something like the GFX 100 II.  There are a number of situations that I think would work well, shooting black bear during the salmon run, or elk and Big horned sheep during the fall rutt.  These are scenes in which I often want to capture nature in action with more of the environment they are in.  These shots would be for larger prints in which the animals are often a much smaller portion of the scene but I want to have a great amount of detail still in both the subject and the surroundings.  The challenge of course with this is still related to the physics of optics as the larger format also tends to mean a shallower depth of field which can be nice for separation but not so much when you want the whole scene in focus (or at least multiple animals interacting).

So camera wise it would seem that we are in a good position.  The new 100 II has image stabilization, reasonably quick continuous autofocus, it can shoot up to 8 frames per second.  These are all things that are on par or better than my old Canon 5DS and then we have 100 megapixels and 16 bit color depth.  The next question is about the lenses.

So this is what I can see is currently available or coming for GFX line.

20-35 f/4

23 f/4

30 f/3.5

30 f/5.6 TS

32-64 f/4

35-70 f/4.5-5.6

45-100 f/4 OIS

45 f/2.8

50 f/3.5

55 f/1.7

63 f/2.8

80 f/1.7

100-200 f/5.6 OIS

110 f/2

110 f/5.6 TS

120 f/4 OIS Macro

250 f/4 OIS

500 f/5.6 (coming next year???)

So this gives us a pretty good range of lenses from 35mm equivalent 16mm out to currently about 200mm and possibly 400mm by next year.  For landscape I would be very happy with a 20-35, 100-200 and one of the 32-64/35-70/45-100 to give me close to what I usually carry around now.  For nature photography the 100-200, 250 and future 500 sounds like a great setup (along with the teleconverter) to allow for most scenarios for shooting black bears, Bighorn sheep, elk and deer.  Not enough for birds or for sea life around Vancouver Island that it is difficult or not appropriate to get that close.  Without the 500mm a setup like this would come in at between 17 and 19000 USD.  Not a small amount of money but I have certainly spent more than that on my current systems.

So, now that we know that we have a camera and at least one lens combination that could work for limited animal/bird photography (and a fantastic system for landscape) does this make sense for someone like me?  Currently I would say that about a quarter of the time I spend outdoors is doing landscape photography and 3/4 is nature.  Of that time I would say that still most of it I need a long telephoto lens at a minimum of 400mm and usually longer.   I would guess that about 25 % of the time that I would be able to use shorter telephoto lenses so that the current options for medium format would work.

So then it comes down to what is important to me since if I had money to buy all the gear I want I would certainly have this as one of my setups.  Sadly, I’m not (as Daffy Duck would say) rich, rich, I’m independently wealthy.  So choices will continue to need to be made.  I would like to take this from a thought experiment and try out the Fujifilm at least to see if the results come close to my expectations.  That being said, I also wish to be able to afford something like the Sony A1 so that I could shoot very high frame rates silently for what is likely a much higher percentage of the subjects I like to shoot.  With those two cameras being in the same price range purchasing one of them may be within possibility in the next couple of years but both is very unlikely so I’m going to need to see what my priorities are….or continue to wait and see how technology like this might come down to that second tier in the camera world.

We shall see what the future brings as currently I have been keeping both Sony and Canon camera systems around with much the same lens lineup.  This doesn’t make sense long term if I was going to have two separate systems it would make sense that they overlap somewhat but there should be a good reason to use one over the other.  Currently the only reason is that I have a big white lens on the Canon side that I am unwilling to replace as the cost of those have gone up significantly in the last few years.  So until that changes I won’t likely sell off what I have in the way of Canon gear.

It’s good to have so many interesting choices out there now and things are continuing to get better so I’ll see if I can try out some of these options and wait for the right opportunity.

Nikon - you’re certainly tempting me!

In the last year Canon and Sony have been relatively quiet at least for those of us who are looking at nature photography tools.  Salwa and I are  currently quite highly invested in both of those companies with multiple cameras and a significant number of lenses for both.  For the most part we are very happy with the gear that we have for photography and video work but….and this is quite a but….Nikon has been turning my head quite often with the gear they have been putting out.

The first things that caught my eye were the PF primes.  The 500mm f/5.6 in particular with the Phase Fresnel design (similar to the DO or Diffractive optics from Canon) was so small and light in comparison to my Canon 500 F/4 II that the aperture reduction seemed like a very worth while thing to deal with.  The price difference ($3300 USD compared to the $9000USD I paid for the Canon a number of  years ago) also made that lens into something that was quite reasonable and didn’t feel like having to make a decision between it and my next vehicle.  This lens seems quite sharp, not sure how it compares directly with the Canon 400 f/4 DO but those who I know that have it are very happy with it.

Nikon 500 f/5.6 PF lens, a relatively small but mighty prime.

Canon 400 f/4 DO II lens.

At the time a couple of great and inexpensive lenses was an interesting but not alluring thing especially since there wasn’t a camera to pair it with that could focus anywhere near as well as the cameras I had (A7RIV, A7IV, R5) even though the Z7 had some fantastic image quality.  This brings us to the Z9 and now the Z8.  Both of these cameras have upped the game for Nikon significantly and although they don’t quite match the competition in all aspects they are very competitive.  It is the price that is the real game changer at the moment.  With those two cameras we are getting very close to the capabilities of the Sony A1 for significantly less money, with the Z8 coming in around the same price as the A7RV.  Now I really like the A7RV and it does everything I want except for fast silent shooting and up until the Z8 came around I thought that was going to be out of reach unless I wanted to shell out significantly more money for the A1….now I’m a little jealous and really waiting to see how Sony responds.  My Canon R5 is mostly keeping up with the A7R5 but pretty much has the same limitations.

Nikon Z8

The latest thing from Nikon shows me that they really want to lure in nature photographers and that is the announcement of the 180-600 f5.6-6.3.  This lens looks like almost a clone of the Sony 200-600 with the only real differences I can see being the extra 20mm and the black color.  This is another great move by Nikon as the 200-600 lens I think is the best value lens for nature photographers at the moment.  It is pretty sharp, relatively inexpensive, has internal zoom, fast (enough) autofocus and is on my camera likely 80 percent of the time.  For those people who want good reach, good quality, portability but don’t have 10 to 12 thousand dollars sitting around for a fast prime this lens hits the spot.  I think there is a pretty big niche of amateur and professional photographers that this lens will appeal to and now also to the Nikon version.

Nikon 180-600 f/5.6-6.3

Sony 200-600 f/5.6-6.3

Can’t wait to see if/when Canon and Sony decide to deal with this competition…currently I think Sony could come out with a camera that can compete and beat the Z8 very quickly since they likely have an equivalent to the Z8 sensor ready to go for themselves and they already have the 200-600 so they are only lacking in the Diffractive Optics area.  Canon has DO technology but and are likely coming out with a higher resolution stacked sensor for the D1 but the Z8 may have changed the game on them and they may need something close to the D1 at a much lower price than they likely would like to have out there.  The competition is going to be interesting again for a while, or so I hope.

Predictions and hopes for Sony gear in the coming year (or two). ( Updates now that the A7RV is out)

From the start of the mirrorless camera era Sony was quick to come out with both many cameras and many lenses each year.  This allowed Sony to quickly make improvements in a way that I never saw Canon or Nikon do during the DSLR era.  Sony also allowed/encouraged third parties to make lenses for E mount which has given Sony users a great assortment of cameras and lenses now to work with.  

New Sony A7RV with the 200-600.

Since the Sony A7IV and the last announcement that I can remember of a 16-35 PZ lens that still seems to be unavailable anywhere, Sony seems to have been very quiet.  Now on the sensor front, there seems to be some interesting stacked sensors for APS-C and some high resolution sensors that are showing up but no Sony cameras are coming with any of this updated hardware.  They were also the leader in autofocus technology but now Canon has caught up (and surpassed them in some ways) and Nikon is getting close as well.  Fuji still has some work to do :)  

Here are some of the things I would like to see from Sony in the next couple of years and things that I think might be just around the corner.

1. Sony needs to come out with a new APS-C higher end camera.  Something to compete with the latest stacked sensor Fuji and something to compete against the new 40MP Fuji and the latest APS-C mirrorless from Canon.  There is little doubt in my mind that a A6XXX or something similar with a stacked sensor and Sony’s autofocus would be a fantastic seller (and one that I might actually pick up assuming full frame stacked sensor cameras are going to continue to be out of reach of most pocket books).

2. Sony has some great super telephoto primes and an amazingly useful 200-600 but I think they need to get into the second tier telephoto primes hopefully using some sort of Fresnel optics (assuming they can come up with a method that isn’t the same as Nikon or Canon and end up in a patent war.  Nikon has built some game changing DO/PF type lenses.  Canon was the leader in this area but really since the 400DO II for EF I don’t know what they have been doing.  Lenses in the 3000-7000 USD are ones that nature photographers like me would consider much more often than a 12000-14000 USD lens.  Currently I actually bought the Canon R5 mostly to use on the 500F/4 since I can’t afford to shell out for one of the Sony super-telephotos (or the latest Canon for that matter).

3. While I really love the Sony A7RIV, it is time for an update to the high resolution end of the camera line.  I know that currently it is still just as good as anything out there from Nikon and Canon but the low light performance of that sensor is starting to show its age.  I’m sure there is a new one in the works, the question is are they going to increase the resolution or improve the low light capabilities…or both?  The next camera will likely also end up doing 8K video, which is a nice addition for a high resolution camera.  The latest Canon cameras are all coming out with mechanical shutter frame rates up and around 15 fps.  This would be a nice addition since these cameras are much too slow at getting the information off the sensor in electronic shutter to be of much use.  The last addition that would be interesting and would bring these cameras a little closer to current medium formats is having 16 bit colour depth.  Update - the A7RV is out, I now have it. Although it doesn’t meet all the hopes I had for it, the updates to the autofocus, back screen, viewfinder and processing have just made it a much more useful camera for nature photography. I still use the A7RIV for landscapes since the quality of the sensor output is identical but otherwise this is a great new camera. Would have been nice to have a bump in number of shots per second but I can live with this for now.

4. I would like to also see more power zoom (or at least video oriented) lenses for E mount.  The 16-35 is one that I will be buying as soon as it is available but as a nature photographer a telephoto PZ would be amazing.  Something like a 100-300 range would be a great all around lens for some of my video work.  If it was reasonably close to parfocal it would be even better. Update - I now have the 16-35 PZ lens and it just makes the statements above even more true…Sony lets get more of these.

5. My last one is more for the wish list.  I would really like to see Sony come out with a medium format camera to compete with Fuji.  What would be even better would be to partner with Fuji on the lens mount and the two of them really corner the market on the affordable medium market front.  This would also allow both Fuji and Sony to get a great set of complimentary lenses out for the mount.  Currently Fuji is where I would like to go for high resolution landscape but the lack of lens options is keeping it limited.  This may also open things up for Sigma and Tamron to start building for that mount.  I think that there is a chance for the “small” medium format to take over a larger portion of the “Full frame” camera market in the next 5-10 years.  

Lastly, Sony does need to come out with some new entry level cameras.  Currently they have an ok line up but since there is nothing new, people are starting to look at the latest from Canon and Nikon and forget about a Sony camera that might be competitive in many respects but because it is 2-4 years old they think it is out of date (and in some ways they are correct).  Replacing the A6000 series with a new line up would go a long way to at least make it look like they have new stuff for people wanting to get into photography now.

Canon EOS R5 vs Sony A7RIV

As a Nature and wildlife photographer there was a “holy grail” camera that I had been looking for.  High resolution, great tracking autofocus, and high number of frames per second for that tracking.  I had waited a long time for some company to come out with this camera and the first to kind of get there was the A7RIII and the subsequent A7RIV which I did buy to replace my A7RII.  A year (and likely a bit more) later Canon finally came out with the R5 which I also promptly purchased to replace the 5DS.

It seemed to take forever to get all the things I wanted in one camera and amazingly I now have 2 cameras that meet pretty much all my needs.  Now, after using both for quite a long time, it is time to compare them a little side by side for how I use them.  

I tend to carry a pretty simple combination of lenses with me.  I have a wide angle zoom (16-35 F/4) for both Canon and Sony, a mid range zoom ( 24-70 f/2.8 Tamron for the canon system and a Sony G 24-105 f/4).  I nearly always carry a 100-400 telephoto zoom for both systems and I have a very long lens for both systems (500 F/4 prime for Canon and the Sony 200-600 zoom).  Along with a couple of teleconverters I pretty much cover 16-1000mm and 16-840 for Canon and Sony respectively.

There are a number of reasons that I use both Canon and Sony, but that really doesn’t matter now.  Since I have both systems I find I use them both pretty much equally but take one out rather that the other often for different reasons.

I often take both cameras on any given shoot.  If I think I need both a long zoom and a wide angle I will take the Sony 200-600 and put the 16-35 or 24-70 on the R5.  If I think I will need to use the 500mm I will often also take the Sony either with the long zoom for those cases when a bird or animal gets too close for the 500 or I will put a wider  angle on the Sony for more environmental shots.

When it comes to wide angle shots (anything less than 100mm to me is wide angle :) ) I have really found very little difference between the two cameras.  At the long end the differences are really about the lenses.  The Canon 500mm F/4 IS II is the sharpest lens I have ever owned and is the main reason that I bought the EOS R5 as I didn’t really want to sell that lens and try to get the much more expensive Sony 600mm.

Of course with that amazing sharpness and detail available using that lens you pay the price of carrying a very heavy lens out on long hikes to find the animals and birds I shoot.  This is where the Sony 200-600 comes into its element.  It is a slightly heavier lens that the 100-400 but the extra reach is something that I always need and with the A7RIV the autofocus is really amazing….even with the 1.4 teleconverter.  This combination gets me to 840 mm with a 60 MPixel image which is really close to the maximum range I can get with the Canon’s 45 MPixels and 1000mm if I use the 2x teleconverter but weighs significantly less.

When it comes to the cameras themselves there are some great things about both and a few things that annoy me as well. 

I’ve had the A7RIV the longest and am very used to the way the Sony full frame cameras work.  Each A7 camera has evolved and improved over the last few years to become a very useful machine.  With all the buttons on the camera I am able to assign pretty much everything I regularly change to one.  This along with the quick menu means I really only go into the main menu very rarely…and usually anything I need in the menu more than once I have put in the custom menu portion.  

For birds and animals I regularly use two main autofocus modes.  Wide tracking is where I usually leave things and for the most part the camera will pick out the subject and hold onto it.  Again this has evolved to a point now that I don’t very often have to worry about complex backgrounds or how small the subject is.  However, I do still really need to consider my depth of field to ensure that I will have the whole subject in focus since this camera really doesn’t have useful animal or bird eye autofocus. Most of the time this is not an issue but this is one place the Canon is just better at this time. 

When wide focus doesn’t grab the subject or when I need to pick out a subject in the bushes or in a crowd I use the button on the long lenses to switch to single point or small group tracking.  Then I can get the subject to track and recompose the shot quickly or move the point with the joystick for quicker subject grabs.  The ability to have subject tracking in any autofocus mode  and starting with any (or all) focus points is really useful and something that the R5 cannot yet do (either all points or center point to start tracking).

The high plus mode on the A7RIV allows for 10 frames per second shooting and when I have the long lenses on the camera I pretty much leave it in this mode.  In this mode you get 12 bit images, but for the most part I’m ok with that for action shots.  From a resolution point of view using the 200-600 the images are good and sharp and with the 1.4 teleconverter the loss of detail is minimal for the gain in reach.  The big thing that you are giving up is the amount of light as this combo is f/6.3 at 600 and f/9 and 840.  If you can get the subject fully in the frame the images look good even at relatively high ISO (up to about 6400).  However, if the subject is still small in the frame and you need to crop afterwards the combination of high ISO and cropping will quickly reduce the ability to get a useful final image.  This is the main compromise for carrying a much lighter lens on longer hikes and most of the time it is worth it.

It has taken a number of years for Sony to get to the point that their system is where it is now (As I finish writing this the A7RV is now out and looks to have improved pretty significantly in both photo and video).  I find it highly reliable and predictable which is very important to me.  I know that I am likely to get the shot and I have good muscle memory for all the settings.   This took a long time since I learned photography on Canon but now I can use both systems quickly and easily.

The Canon EOS R5 is the first full frame canon mirrorless camera that I have used.  I have been using Canon digital cameras since the original rebel.  We have had rebels, everything from the 20D up to the 50D, the 1D IV and the 5D series I, II,III, and DS.  I loved using Canon DSLRs but also new that mirrorless technology was going to improve many things so bought into Sony as well while Canon sat on the fence for years with mirrorless.  

The R5 was actually quite a surprise after the R and RP.  Canon finally put everything (they had tech wise) into a camera again….something they had not done since the 5DII.  This camera promised a great deal and so far it has delivered amazingly well from a photo perspective.  This camera matches the speed of the A7RIV with a sensor that is almost the same resolution as the 5DS and an autofocus system that for the most part matches the Sony and even beats it in a few cases.  Being able to use EF lenses without much in the way of limits is fantastic.  There is one issue with that for me.  The EF to RF adapter from Canon has been out of stock everywhere since I bought the camera.  This means that I have had to pick up a third party Commlite adapter to be able to use my current batch of EF lenses.  Most of the time this works well.  The problem is that I do often get error messages where the camera shuts down.  It is mostly unpredictable and as such it means that I don’t take this system out when I absolutely have to get the shot.  UPDATE:  I did get the canon adapter and still had the error messages, these issues have been reduced but not eliminated in the latest firmware for the camera.

The good thing is that I either just have to turn off the camera or remove the battery and I can shoot again.  I have though missed shots of birds taking off or landing because of this.  Sometimes I can go hundreds of shots without the error happening other times it happens over and over again and can become quite frustrating.  For the next few years I will be relying on these adapters as I don’t expect to re-purchase RF version of the big whites any time soon.  In fact, with the price increases in many RF lenses I may not be replacing many of the EF lenses at all.  So far the only lens that I have bought is the 14-35 F/4 which gives me a little more wide angle than I have other than the 8-16 fisheye.  The recent news that Canon is discouraging 3rd party lenses on the RF side is another reason I’m not getting many new lenses for Canon.

When the R5 is stable the shooting experience is really quite fantastic.  The best part for me is the animal autofocus.  Canon has really come from behind to have the best animal eye focus tracking out there.  I have found it to get a birds eye even with the subject quite small in the frame.  Tracking feels nearly perfect, and you can easily switch subjects when multiple are in the frame.  The only complaint that I have is that unlike the Sony tracking is not available in anything but the wide area mode (or center point).  If you could use movable single point, or small group to pick out your subject but have it track throughout the frame like the Sony can then I think it would have everything I need.

For someone currently looking at both systems and thinking of starting to spend money on one or the other here are some comparisons between the two and my very biased opinion (it has to be biased, it is mine).

View finder

Sony A7RIV - 5.76M dot, 1.3 cm, .78x reproduction

Canon R5 - also 5.76M dot, .76x reproduction

Both are very clear and easy to use.  Tracking in the viewfinder is really amazing and just so much better than previous mirrorless cameras that I have owned.  Out in the field I regularly use the viewfinder to review pictures since the rear screens are often useless in the sun.  

For people who use glasses the Canon viewfinder is almost unusable if there is light coming at you from the behind and to the right.  I have to put my hand around my glasses and try to hit the shutter with my baby finger under those conditions.  I’m not sure why this is, I have used Canon cameras since the early 2000s and have never had this issue with any before.  I would imagine there are some third party eye cups that could alleviate this issue but I haven’t looked into it yet.

A big issue with the A7RIV is the light sensor with sunlight behind me.  This sensor seems way too sensitive and will for some reason trigger the back screen and will not go back to viewfinder when I put it to my eye.  Often times I have to turn off and on the camera to get it to switch properly.  This has actually cost me shots as I put my eye to the viewfinder to find a blank screen just as the action starts to happen.  Much like the Canon situation above I have not seen this issue with any other Sony camera I have used ( I have the A7III and tried to replicate the issue unsuccessfully in the same light).  

Blackout - Both cameras in the 10 fps mode act very similarly in terms of viewfinder blackout.  It exists, but is very usable for tracking.  I really don’t find either any different than using a DSLR where the mirror goes up and down.  Compared to the A7RII or A7R that I had previously both cameras are totally usable and I can get good results tracking even fast birds .  I have not yet used a A9 or A1 to experience the differences that technology brings to make a comparison with the latest technology.

Rear Screen

Sony A7RIV - 3 inch, 1.44M dots, touch screen (not for everything)

Canon R5 - 3.15 inch, 2.1M dots, touch screen.

Personally I like both the tilting screen of the Sony and the fully articulating screen on the Canon.  They both have the range of motion that I normally need when doing landscape or astro photography.  Even for video they both are great since I really have never used one of these cameras to see myself.  I think the one limitation for the Sony is not being able to tilt while vertical for low angle shooting.   The Sony screen doesn’t seem as clear as the Canon however I have noticed a few issues with the Canon screen becoming hard to see in very cold conditions (below -30 Celsius).

Canon’s touch screen has many more capabilities than the Sony, including the ability to use it for menu selection. For the most part unless I am doing video I find the touch screen to be more of a pain than useful so I don’t use either very often. I really prefer using the buttons and wheels which both work very well and very quickly on the Canon and Sony cameras.

Batteries

Sony A7RIV - NP-FZ100 2280mAh

Canon R5 - LP-E6NH 2950mAh

The newer Sony batteries have been amazing for anyone who used the original A7 batteries.  I usually have one extra batteries with me but rarely need it on a full day of shooting.  I have a vertical grip for the A7III but found that I would rather just carry the extra battery instead of making the camera bigger so have not bothered getting the grip for the A7RIV. 

Canon gave a newer higher capacity battery with the R5.  I have found that the battery life is significantly shorter than the Sony under similar conditions.  I have other older batteries for Canon but they don’t last very long especially driving long lenses along with the camera.  I usually carry 2 extra batteries on a day out and regularly go through at least half of the second.  This is not a huge issue for me, but it is good to know that you need to be aware of your battery situation before going out each day, unlike the older DSLRs where I could regularly go out for a couple of days on the same battery.  I will likely purchase a couple more of the new Canon battery since the high fps shooting seems to require a battery that is more than half full to shoot a the highest frame rate.

Adapters

Sony A7RIV - metabones (many others available for different legacy mounts)

Canon R5 - commlite and canon.

I have a Metabones adapter for Canon lenses (one of the older versions) that will work when necessary but I have the main lenses I use regularly in native FE so I don’t use the adapter much anymore.  When used the autofocus works reasonably well even for tracking but can hunt under some conditions.  It is a useful tool to have around for some special cases like using some wide primes for astrophotography.

For Canon I started using the Commlite adapter almost all the time (I only had the 35 f/1.8 RF native lens at the time). This adapter worked well for tracking with both the 100-400 II and the 500 f/4 IS II that I use most of the time along with both the 1.4 and 2x teleconverters.  There are glitches and errors that happen semi-regularly which usually require me to cycle the power and once in a while to remove the battery.  Compared to using the Sony adapter, the Commlite does not seem to limit the capabilities of the camera and lens combination.  I was  hoping the Canon adapter would reduce the error messages and possibility of missing shots but that turned out not to be the case and I still have issues that lock up the camera while shooting fairly often even with the new firmware updates (there is one new one at the time of writing this but it doesn’t claim to fix any of these issues).

Autofocus

Sony A7RIV - 567 phase detection points plus 425 contrast detection points

Canon R5 - Dual Pixel CMOS AF II (1053 Available AF areas when automatically selected)

Both of these cameras have autofocus capabilities that are so much better than anything I have used in the past.  With the addition of 10 fps and good tracking it has changed the game for me since I also like having a high resolution camera.  

Sony was the leader for tracking objects and eye autofocus up until the Canon R5 and R6 came out and is still really amazing.  The interface is really great, you can enable object tracking in any of the modes (wide, single point, small group).  I tend to use two modes most often.  Wide area for most situations allows the camera to pick up the subject and follow through the scene.  Often times the bird I want to shoot is being tracked before I get my eye to the viewfinder and most of the time it will not lose the subject.  When there is either a lot of branches between myself and the subject or when there are multiple subjects to choose from I tend to use the single point and either focus and recompose once the subject is tracking or move the point to where the subject is in anticipation of a bird taking off or the action starting or use single point with object tracking to get the initial focus.

For landscape I will use many of the different modes along with manual focus and peaking to help me get a better feel for my actual depth of field in front and behind the focal point.  This gives me a good idea if I need to do focus bracketing without having to look up charts.

The R5 has improved on the Sony capabilities in one major way for me.  The animal eye autofocus is not just usable, it is really quite amazing.  Up close, far away, in motion or in flight it just seems to work.  The only issue I have is that it only works in the wide mode (you can start with center point to acquire the subject or let the camera decide but you can’t use other modes like small group of points).  Most of the time this is not an issue since when there are a number of subjects you can switch eyes and subjects to focus on the animal you  want, but you are kind of limited when trying to acquire a subject that is back behind a bunch of branches.  In these cases I have to go back to single point but you lose object tracking and eye autofocus.  It will still work in terms of tracking what is under that focal point so I fall back to that when necessary.

I don’t do as much video as I do stills but from what I have tried both cameras seem to track moving birds and animals well in the simple conditions I have tried.

Although I know that the latest Sony A9 and A1 cameras are better and faster both the A7RIV and the R5 meet my needs and beat my expectations.  These cameras are just so much better than the DSLRs that I have used for so many years….going back to either my 5DS or the 1DIV seems like ancient technology after you have used these for a while.

Ergonomics

This section is highly subjective and relates to my person use cases.  Since I very often have very large lenses on the camera, the size of the camera has little effect for balance so I tend to prefer a small and light camera to help keep the overall weight down.  Both of these cameras are much lighter than the DSLRs that I used to carry around but both retain and even surpass those cameras in terms of usability.  With joysticks, multiple wheels for changing shutter speed, aperture, exposure compensation and ISO I have everything I need in most cases for changing the general exposure settings while having my eye to the viewfinder.  Changing ISO is a little easier on the Sony since I have the button on the right side of the wheel set for it and can press and turn with my thumb quickly.  The Canon requires a different button to be set up for ISO unless you have the extra function ring on the adapters or lenses.  

I usually shoot nature in Manual mode with Auto ISO enabled (so not really manual).  With this setup I can change aperture and shutter speed to match the situation and allow the camera to ensure the exposure is correct faster than I can for the changing light conditions I find myself in, with birds in flight or animals moving in and out of the forest edge.  I use exposure compensation to adjust when the cameras exposure calculations get messed up by overall dark or light scenes.  I have found that the Sony cameras exposures are most often better (the subject I am interested in is well exposed) than the Canon but since they are both pretty consistent in how they expose for a scene it is easy to adjust.  This is another benefit of the mirrorless cameras in that I can see the exposure as I’m shooting and adjust on the fly rather than having to chimp after a set of shots and adjust exposure based on pictures I’ve already taken.

In the end both cameras feel good in my hands and I don’t have much trouble using them interchangeably since I have them set up similarly.  I don’t tend to need to use the menus in the field often and have most of the options I do change either on programmable buttons, the quick menus or the custom menus.   

Images

If detailed images are something you find you need, or you need to crop because you can never get a long enough lens then these two cameras will not disappoint.  Due to the higher number of pixels and the lack of an AA filter the Sony detail is slightly better depending on the lens you put in front of the camera.  If you can fill the sensor with your subject to the level that you do not need to crop the detail level are amazing in both even up to 6400 ISO.  When cropping on higher ISO images  I have found the fall off to be quicker on the Sony in terms of loss of detail but I can heavily crop images at ISO 1600 and keep good detail for printing with a little noise reduction applied in Lightroom.  Neither camera stands out as being much better than the other in these cases and both are amazing compared to the Canon 5DS that I was using before in these situations.

In reality, these cameras are so good it is difficult to find a significant difference in terms of quality of image.   I still find it amazing that I can have the high quality, high resolution images at 10fps with full tracking and a good buffer in any camera let alone having two cameras that can do so.

Lenses

For the lenses I currently use the most both systems have excellent options. I usually carry a 16-35 (or close equivalent) F/4, a 24-105 F/4 or 24-70 f/2.8, and a telephoto zoom (usually a 100-400 or 200-600). I had invested heavily into a Canon 500 F/4 which for the price is something I will likely keep for a long time and do not have the cash to purchase long white lenses regularly so it is unlikely I will add another big white or get an equivalent on the Sony side unless I can get some sort of great deal in exchange for the 500.

Sony FE mount currently has what I consider to be the best selection of lenses on the market with excellent Sony native glass, high quality 3rd party selections and many different lenses for video as well as photography from many companies. There are also adapters to many older mounts if you need or want to play with them.

Canon RF mount currently has a modest selection of lenses available. Many of these lenses are excellent but they are expensive (often even more so than Sony native glass). Adapting EF lenses works very well even with Sigma and Tamron EF glass. There are very few 3rd party lenses for RF mount itself and Canon has not been overly eager to allow more. This may change in the future but currently is very much an issue for those people who might not be able to afford what Canon currently has out there or may want a lens that Canon doesn’t offer.

Conclusions

Based on my comparisons (and the fact that I still use both cameras on a daily basis my conclusion for those looking for a camera to by currently would be: 

If you currently are invested in Sony, the A7RIV is a fantastic camera for both wildlife and landscapes.  It is not going to be as good as the A1, and if you have the money I would get the A7RV that has just come out.  I will not likely upgrade to the A7RV as the improvement are useful but not enough to make me want to shell out the money.  If I currently was to upgrade I would go for the A1 as the stacked sensor is next level in changing the game.

If you are currently invested in Canon DSLR, and don’t care about brands then it is a crap shoot for which to purchase.  Both cases you can use your EF lenses until you decide to get native ones.  Sony has the benefit of many 3rd party lenses that are nearly as good as native.

If you are currently invested in Canon mirrorless (RF) then the R5 is in my opinion the best camera they currently have and well worth upgrading.

If you are outside of the Canon and Sony world currently, I think I would tend to point people to Sony not necessarily because one camera is better than the other but because there are so few real differences the lenses are what I would make the decision based on.  Currently FE has the most lenses available from inexpensive to amazing pro glass and you have Sigma, Tamron, and a host of other 3rd parties that produce fantastic options.

Canon EOS R5 - Nature photography first impressions

After a quick reply to a tweet about the Canon R5 from Downtown Camera asking when I could get one, I got a message from the person we have been getting most of our gear from for the last 15 years letting me know that if I wanted an R5 I could pick one up the next day…so, off I head to the big city to pick up a new camera and a new lens to play with. 

While I was in the camera store I checked out the new 100-500 lens and was pretty tempted but adding another $4000 CAD to the already large purchase was not really necessary since I have a perfectly good 100-400 II and 500 F/4 at home that should work well with the adapter. I did pick up the 35mm F/1.8 lens to ensure I had something to play with while waiting for the adapter to become available, and because it might be a reasonably good video lens for this system.

Commlite R to EF adapter

It seems either everyone is trying to get the EF-R adapters all at the same time or Canon is limiting the supply to try to urge more people to buy the new R lenses.  Either way, it was going to be months before I was likely to get one. In the end I went to Amazon and a Commlite adapter arrived at the front door the next day.  As you can tell I was very eager to get out with the longer lenses to see how this camera performs.

Bonaparte Gull. Canon R5 and 500mm F/4 IS II at F/4, 1/2000 sec, ISO 200

The bald eagles and osprey had already moved on from the Niagara River and so far there doesn’t seem to be much around to shoot.  There were, however, hundreds of Bonaparte gulls fishing along with the cormorants on the Niagara river near Lake Erie, so that became my first test case.  

Bonaparte gull looking for fish. Canon R5 and 500mm F/4 IS II at F/4, 1/2000 sec, ISO 320 in Black and White.

I set the camera up with the animal eye focus, with the rest of the autofocus settings left at the default settings.  The scene was relatively simple, a bird a few feet above the water and little background to be a distraction.  This is the best case, high contrast between the subject and the background.  Shooting with the 500mm F/4 IS II handheld and the birds between 25 and 50 feet away, I was able to lock onto a bird amazingly quickly compared to using my Canon 5DS.  Most of the time it locked onto the bird immediately and was on the eye if it was visible.  Compared to the Sony A7RIV and the 200-600 F/5.6-6.3 I could really see no difference in getting the subject and tracking.  While the A7RIV does not have useful eye focus for birds at this time, it is still able to get the bird itself just as quickly. The results of my first couple of outings with the R5 were impressive.

Greater Yellowlegs in the morning light. Canon R5 with 500mm F/4 IS II at F/4, 1/2000 sec, ISO 200

Using the camera in H+ speed I really didn’t notice much blackout in between shots and was able to track the fast moving Bonapartes consistently.  Again this felt the same as using the Sony A7RIV, and while I’m used to this, others might find they see more blackout than me.  One thing I did notice, and have since going to mirrorless cameras is that because the focus points go to near the edge of the scene, I can quickly focus on a clear image in the viewfinder with both the R5 and the A7RIV, and with the object tracking I can place the subject easily in the composition as I’m tracking.  With the 5DS I tend to have to use the central 9 point focus to track well and even if I move those points before I start, I usually end up having to crop later to get the composition I wanted.  This is no longer the case with the R5 so I’m more often able to get pretty close to the crop I want in camera as long as I have the length in the first place.

Shooting Canon R5 with commlite adapter and Canon 500mm f/4 IS II, a pretty fantastic combo.

Focus speed and accuracy with the 500mm and the Commlite adapter is excellent and for the most part the only shots I got out of focus were user error.  Buffer is certainly sufficient for the way I shoot which is usually bursts of 3-4 shots at a time, although there may be many of these bursts when the action is happening.  I never hit the buffer limit during this trial shoot on the R5.  Likewise I have rarely hit the limit on the A7RIV but I nearly always hit the buffer limit on the 5DS and the 5DIII.  This is a huge improvement for any non-1D series Canon as the last camera I had with a good buffer was the 1DIV.  

The sun shines on a field of flowers. Canon R5 with 35 F/1.8 at F/1.8, 1/6400 sec, ISO 100

I will be doing a good deal more comparisons as soon as I get a chance to be outdoors with something interesting - that might be snowy owls if they start heading back south again soon.

The other main use case for this camera is nature landscapes.  The fall colours are a great excuse to get out with the camera. I bought the 35 f/1.8 RF lens with the camera since I wasn’t sure if I was going to be able to get an adapter and this was one of the few relatively inexpensive lenses currently available for the R mount.  Although I find the autofocus on this lens to be a bit underwhelming, the visual quality seems to be pretty good.  

Very dry waterfall on a colorful autumn day. Canon R5 and 16-35 F/4 at F/6.3, 1/30 sec, ISO 400.

The Canon 16-35 F/4 is a lens that pretty much lives on Salwa’s camera (currently the 5DS) but I did manage to use it with the adapter for a while this past weekend.  I really love this lens, and adapted on the R5 it is really great.  I do think this will be a go-to lens as we start to do video with the R5.  

I have also used the 100 F/2.8 IS macro and the 100-400 II for a short amount of time.  Both lenses have worked well, in fact they both feel like they work better on the R5 than on the 5DS.  I have seen 2 errors when using the adapter over the past couple of weeks that both required me to remove the battery to get things running again.  It hasn’t yet happened when using a native lens but since it happens so infrequently I can’t be 100% sure it is due to the adapter.  

Praying Mantis taking advantage of the bugs on our porch screen. Canon R5 with 100 F/2.8 IS at F/5.6, 1/80 sec at ISO 3200 handheld.

The Canon R5 is a fantastic camera for a nature photographer. It has fast and accurate autofocus tracking, amazing picture quality, ISO is great at least up to 6400. There are so many useful features and I’m told it can do some pretty amazing video tricks as well.

other observations on the r5

1. Battery life is not great.  When compared to the DSLR it is pretty horrible but even compared to the Sony A7RIV it seems to have at best 2/3 the life.  To be fair, I nearly always use cameras with servo focus and I don’t turn off the camera during a hike but under similar conditions the R5 does not do well.  I really haven’t tested out anything to do with video so my observations here are purely from a photography point of view.  From what I have experienced so far I will need to have 2-3 batteries for a day of shooting.  With the Canon 5DS I would rarely need a second battery unless I was tracking focus all day with the 500mm.  To put it into perspective, I can also usually get through a day of shooting with the Sony A7RIV with a single battery but always carry a second one especially when using long lenses.  I don’t really find this to be a huge deal, bringing a couple of extra batteries does not add that much weight but it can make a difference when I’m away from power for more than a few days of shooting.  The new battery that comes with the camera is definitely longer lasting (as it should be), which means that I will likely be picking up a few more of those instead of relying on the extras we have already.

2. Ergonomics are pretty good.  If you are used to Canon 5 series DSLRs then this will feel pretty similar but just a bit smaller in your hands.  I personally do not prefer having a huge camera with the 5D being almost too big. The R5 and the A7RIV both feel great in my hands.  I find the new mode dial to be a bit odd but I’m getting used to it since it needs to house all the new video modes.  Button layout is very similar to the 5D which is a good thing in some ways but disappointing in others.  I’m used to the layout, that is good.  I was hoping for more custom buttons as I have become used to having on the Sony cameras.  I like to be able to use buttons for most things I change regularly and although Sony’s menus can be deep and convoluted, once I have the items I use most often on a button, I rarely go into the menu when shooting.  There are a couple of buttons you can reprogram on the 5R but I would have liked a few more.  For many people this last complaint may be mitigated by the use of the touch screen but I rarely like to take my eye from the view finder to change things if I don’t have to.  I would really love to see the back wheel be replaced with a wheel and four buttons like on the A7 series.  It took a while to get used to not hitting one of the buttons while spinning the wheel, but now it is just fantastic to have the extra four buttons all within normal reach of my thumb.

   On other Canon cameras I have exposure compensation set on the back wheel for modes other than Manual and you have the ISO button on top. With the R5 I have the same setup but since there is no ISO button, I have it set for the extra wheel on the lens. For adapted lenses though I can only change it with the touch screen unless I use up one of the other buttons but that will still mean pressing that button and then moving one of the dials. On the Sony it is set for the right side of the wheel, so press the wheel and then turn all in one motion. On the other hand, the location of the exposure compensation dial is hard to change while shooting on the Sony so nothing is perfect.

3. The touch screen is great for when I’m on a tripod.  It is very responsive, easy to use and has great functionality. I like the swivel screen, it will be amazing for astro photography.  I don’t use the touch screen much handheld and the settings allow it not to get in the way without having to turn it off unlike the Sony where I just turn it off unless I’m doing video.

4. Thank you Canon for bringing back the joystick after the trial with the original EOS R. I use it constantly with gloves on in the winter.

5. Top screen:  I guess this is a nice to have, but everything on that screen I can see in the EVF or the back screen.  So it is neat but really I could easily live without it.  I know some people love it and it doesn’t get in the way so I’ll just mostly ignore it.

6. Eye cup:  Now this is my first real complaint.  This eye cup is just not as good as the ones on the 5D series.  As a person who shoots with glasses I get a lot of glare when looking through the eye piece if the sun is anywhere to my right.  This is the first camera I have ever used that I have seen this problem.  I’m sure there will be some sort of accessory that I can use to fix this issue since it may just be for people like me who try to shoot with glasses on.

7. Autofocus modes - it would be nice if you could have object tracking (and eye tracking) associated with each of the focus modes.  I will often use single point or small group to acquire initial focus when the subject is slightly obscured but want the camera to track that specific bird.  You can have it acquire from the center point initially but not from any given focus group.  This works really well on the Sony cameras currently even if their eye autofocus is not as good with animals.

8. Tracking autofocus is easily as good as the Sony A7RIV in almost all use cases.  It is better than the Sony when it comes to eye tracking of animals and birds.  This seems almost instantaneous and has often gotten focus before I see the bird clearly in the frame.  The only times so far that I have had issues is where the bird is flying near a complex background like along a line of trees.  The R5 often is unable to get initial focus in these cases, however if it does get focus before going into these areas it usually keeps focus on the bird.  This was a problem as well with earlier Sony cameras like the A6000 but has gotten much better since the A7III.  I wouldn’t be surprised to see some of the algorithms improve with each software update.  It may also be something that can be improved with the autofocus adjustments in the menus but in the default settings it currently is not quite as good under those conditions.

9. One thing I have to get used to again is how Canon’s evaluative exposure metering works.  If you are used to Canon cameras then this will not be an issue but Sony cameras tend to meter in a way that I find closer to what I see.  The good thing is that both systems are internally consistent and all I have to do is remember that when I’m using the Canon cameras I have to increase compensation often by a stop in situations where there are a lot of grey clouds in even part of the image.  This used to be a bigger problem with older Canon cameras that would lose detail in the shadows, not so much of an issue now as if I make a mistake, recovering a stop or two is no problem.

10. Image quality - This is fantastic.  At low ISO I don’t see much difference between the R5 and the 5DS.  I do see a bit more detail in the Sony A7RIV.  This is great for large prints but it is mostly useful in nature photography for the ability to crop into a subject that is still too far away even with a large lens.  This is also where the image stabilization comes into play, with IBIS allowing handheld shots that are easily cropable as long as you have your shutter speed fast enough to handle the motion of the subject.  At high ISOs the R5 seems just a touch better than the Sony A7RIV and both are significantly better than the 5DS which I really wouldn’t shoot higher than 1600.  I will test the usable high ISO range as I get out with the owls again but so far I think 6400 will be usable even on slightly cropped images.

It may seem that I have found a lot to complain about on the R5 but really every camera has a few things that you would like to change or improve.  None of those are really things that would make me not want to use this camera, just as a similar list does not make me dislike the A7RIV.  So far I really enjoy using the R5, especially since I can use it with EF lenses that have been sitting on the shelf since Salwa’s 5DIII kicked the bucket and she has taken over my 5DS.  

I am planning on doing some comparison videos of using the R5, the 5DS and the Sony A7RIV for birds and animals during our next big trip coming up.  I will also take some time to shoot video on the R5 and A7RIV hopefully testing out tracking of animals in video for both.  I will likely do another blog or two as I try out other lenses and get more time in the field with this new toy.

Tripods - A Long Journey towards Stability

Out shooting the Lunar Eclipse with an assortment of cameras and tripods.

For the last couple of months I have been doing a lot of research on better tripod solutions for what we do.  I don’t tend to use a tripod often when doing nature/bird photography but I have been trying to slow down and concentrate a bit more when I’m doing landscape work.  We travel a lot, mostly by car these days and we hike out to most of the locations.  What I have been trying to do is find a good main tripod system that can easily go from video to landscape to wildlife use.  Once I have that I will take what I have now and make them more adaptable so that we can have multiple camera/video setups available quickly and easily.

A little History first 

We own a few tripods, my first was an adequate aluminum tripod with a ball head by Vanguard (Alta pro 264AT) that we picked up at a photography show in Toronto probably close to fifteen year ago.  At a little over $200 this was definitely better than the cheap tripods that were in all the camera stores at the time but not one of the expensive brand names of the time. 

My first tripod purchase, and still a sturdy tripod although I have switched up the head and legs with other options now.

As I moved more and more to longer lenses and nature in action, I found that a ball head was not the optimal design for following any motion.  I had bought a Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 lens which was hand holdable for a few minutes but really was the cause of many sore neck and backs while trying to wait for owls to hunt in the cold Ontario winters.  I picked up a Jobu jr. gimbal head and for a number of years kept that head on the Vanguard tripod.  

Jobu Jr. Gimbal style head. I have used this for years with the Sigma 120-300 and then later the Canon 500mm f/4 II. Great for those times that you are waiting for action and hand holding is just not going to do the job.

As my photography started taking me on longer and longer hikes, weight became more of a deciding factor in whether I would take a tripod on a given day.  I found a carbon fiber tripod on sale that cut a pound or two off the carry weight of the Vanguard and now had 2 tripods.  As so many stories go for me, this was just the start of trying to find the best tripod for what I wanted….almost like the game of trying to find the right camera bag, a seemingly never ending search for that “perfect” single setup that is never likely to exist.  

First video head, did the job but I really did not like the quick release plate.

On that route, as we started to do some video work, I picked up a Manfrotto  MHX-PRO Video head with the rc2 quick release plate, and then a Sirui monopod and Sirui two way head.  Salwa also got a travel tripod by meFoto that is quite small and packable but not sturdy enough for many uses.

These purchases were over a 15 year period and each one we found useful at the time and then found that they were all limiting or not working well in one way or another.  The video head was ok, but I really disliked the rc2 quick release plate. The ball head was adequate for holding the camera steady but it wasn’t ARCA-SWISS compatible and was not able to hold an L bracket.  I started to hate the center columns on both tripods, as they weren’t very tall without raising the column and then they were not steady enough once the column was up.  

Sirui monopod. Another good tool for when the big lenses get a bit to heavy.

This brings me back to a few months ago, I decided to start looking for a better solution as we were doing more video, more landscapes and since we were starting to film ourselves we needed to have a few tripods out with multiple cameras.  I know, just another excuse to buy something new. I think it was a pretty good excuse.

So what were the things I was looking for in a new tripod?

1. Sturdy, tall, relatively light weight sticks.

2. No center column.

3. Half ball for leveling

4. Easily removable heads so that I can change from a video head to a lighter ball head quickly.

5. A sturdy video head that can handle up to my 500mm f/4 with extras like a monitor.

6. A lighter weight but very solid head for landscape that is arca-swiss compatible.

7. Both head should be capable of panning for easy multi-shot panoramas

Seems easy enough, right?  Now we go down the rabbit hole of tripod reviews on web sites and youtube. 

Manfrotto 504HD Video tripod head with 75mm half bowl

I first started looking at video tripods and heads.  I reviewed fluid heads by Manfrotto, Benro, Sirui, 3 legged Thing, Sachtler, Miller, and Cartoni.  I looked for anything between $300 and $1000 and then started to look for reviews of each.  There are many reviews of “top 10” video heads out there, some are quite good.  In the end I narrowed the search down to the Cartoni Focus 8 Fluid Head ($675), the Sachtler Ace XL ($546), the Benro BV6 ($355) or BV8 ($589), Manfrotto 504HD ($363), 502A ($208), or 608 Nitrotech ($577), and the 3 Legged Thing AirHed Cine-S ($350).

The Cartoni and Sachtler heads were the cheapest in the line for those brands, and they go up quickly for the more professional models.  I read a few comparisons between those two and the manfrotto 504 and the benro BV8 and in most cases the less expensive heads kept up with the manfrotto, seeming to get consistent reviews of great value for the money.  The BV8 also got a number of good reviews in terms of capabilities but in each one they always had something that was holding it back in terms of quality control.

Side view of the Manfrotto 504HD Video Head, it is bigger than you think when looking at it on the web sites.

Comparisons of the different Manfrotto heads always seemed to come back to the 504 as the sweet spot for capability compared to price.

The one odd ball was the 3 Legged Thing head.  It peaked my interest because it was quite a bit lighter than the other options, but I had a hard time finding reviews that compared it to any of the other heads.  I had heard really good things about the company, but had no experience myself with any of their products. 

Since the video head is not what I will be using on long hikes, weight was less of an issue as I felt was the ability to manage the long lenses smoothly.  In the end, I ended up picking up the Manfrotto 504HD.  

top view into the 75mm half bowl

What about those legs?

Stage 2 was to look for tripod legs.  This one turned out to be a bit easier as I had been watching a number of landscape photographers on YouTube to get ideas for a trip out west (Canada and U.S.) and came across Nick Page and later a post he did on Tripods.  Not only did I really like his photography, he did a video on the tripods that he uses.  Pretty much everything Nick was looking for matched up to my needs so when he landed on the FLM legs, I decided to go take a look.  In the end we (actually Salwa bought me this for my birthday) picked up the CP34-L4 II carbon fiber legs at $683 which was higher than I was originally wanting to go but I think these will easily last me 10-15 years.

The final component was to get a tripod head that I could switch up easily with the video head for those times that I would be doing pure landscape work.  Since the Manfrotto head was quite a beast coming in around 5 pounds, I was also looking for something a little lighter to hike with. 

The problem here is that I want something sturdy, with an Arca-Swiss plate, that is easy to use and easy to get that precise positioning.  Leveling was not going to be a problem since I have the 75mm half bowl adapter .  This also meant I can change heads in about 20 seconds without any tools.  

Full height of the FLM 34-L4 II tripod.

So what kind of head do I get for Landscape?

Going back to a bunch of the landscape photographers I was watching, almost everyone was using ReallyRightStuff heads.  For a ball head the BH55 is a beast and seemed to be the one to beat, but the price was significant and I have been disappointed by ball heads in the past.  I started looking at alternatives both in price and in functionality.  Ball heads that seemed to compete well with the Really Right Stuff (and are not quite so expensive) are out there and there are many reviews and comparisons both on the web and on YouTube.  I narrowed down the search again to some similar brands to when I was searching for fluid heads and one other.  Benro, Sirui, 3 Legged Thing, had good options and Acratech caught my eye with their open ball head design.   The reviews of Benro all seemed good again except they always found one or two things that were lacking.  Sirui had a very good option at an excellent price and most people had no complaints as it was often labelled as the best value for the money.  3 Legged Thing again had people who really seemed to like it, but for some reason none of the models appealed to me.  The Acratech models were very intriguing but a number of reviews seemed to find issues in build quality.  It seemed like they were addressed but in the end I went with the cheaper option with the Sirui K-40X ball head and have attached it to a 75mm half ball adapter.

Sirui K-40X attached to a 75mm half bowl found on Amazon

The great thing is that we now have 4 usable tripods, 2 for each of us to shoot and two others for capturing videos as we learn to take videos of what we are doing and seeing.  Plenty to learn before we head out on what we are hoping will be a bit of a life-altering photo road trip.  More to come on that as we start to document our preparations and then the trip itself.  

Sirui K-40X attached to the FLM 34-L4 II tripod

I bought the stuff, so am I done?

Once I start researching things I often find options I never new existed.  One of those things that I have found are 3 way geared heads. These heads are precision oriented heads that you can turn in each of three directions.  A tilt forward/backwards, tilt side to side and pan horizontally.  At the moment I’m going to see if the ball head allows me to be precise enough in positioning the camera for those landscape compositions.  If I find I’m struggling to get the camera to stay in that one spot or if fine adjustments become a major challenge, I think I will take a look at one of the more affordable options in this class.  Benro seems to have a great option at a price point (GD3WH 3-Way Geared Head at $210) that may be worth trying out and most reviews are very positive.  The downside is that these heads are not very compact for hiking but at least they are not very heavy.  

I have managed to get 2 new quick-release plates by Andoer. I have replaced the plate on the Vanguard ball head with one of these so that I now have an Arca-Swiss compatible plate there. These have a lever clamp which is very quick.

Andoer quick release plate on the old Vanguard ball head. Giving new life to this tripod head.

I attached the second one directly to a Manfrotto rc2 plate so that I can continue to use the same Arca-Swiss plates on all cameras and switch quickly between all the tripods (except the big video head that uses a bigger Manfrotto plate).

Manfrotto MHX-PRO Video head with the rc2 plate and Andoer Arca-Swiss plate on top.

Last, I took the old Jobu Jr. and attached it to an Arca-Swiss plate. I got this idea from another company on the web who is starting to sell a gimbal head that can be attached to the top of a ball head. With the strength of the Sirui Head I can attach the gimbal directly to the ball head and continue to use the big lenses in seconds rather that needing to attach it directly to the tripod. This gives me 3 different combos that I can use on the new FLM tripod that I can change in the field with no tools. I also now have four different tripods all with Arca-Swiss plates that we can switch cameras on and off for video or photo work. We have 2 L brackets and a couple of standard plates for all of our cameras now.

Jobu Jr, on top of Sirui Ball head. Once locked in this is very stable, and means I can use the gimbal head within a few seconds with no need to remove the ball head.

Give me a few months to get some good use out of my new tripod combos.  I’ll either do a review here on the blog or try to do a video review.  

This is where we ended up. 4 tripods plus 2 extra head set ups for the new FLM tripod that can be changed in the field quickly. Notice that just about everything has ACRA-SWISS compatibility so that we can switch any camera onto any tripod (except when using the big Manfrotto 504).

Canon EOS R5 and R6 - Are these cameras for nature photographers too?

For a good 6 months or so we have been spoon fed little niblets of information on Canon’s proper entry into the mirrorless market. Sure we have 2 mirrorless cameras as a stop gap, but for anyone who already had significant investment in the 5D series level cameras the EOS R and RP left many of us wanting.

Currently I have a Canon 5DS and Salwa (WanderingPhocus) has a 5DIII. They have both been great cameras and we both have a long history with Canon. Many lenses from 8 mm out to 500mm, primes and zooms. Since Salwa’s 5DIII started acting up during servo AF, she has taken over my 5DS and I am now using my Sony gear exclusively. This has meant that I haven’t used my 500 f/4 much and have been really looking forward to a replacement that was a worthy upgrade.

On the 9th of July Canon had their big official announcement with the new EOS R5 and EOS R6, along with a bunch of other new stuff. I have been sifting through all the announcements and previews from Canon ambassadors since the announcement, piecing together what I can to determine if this is a camera for people who are primarily photographers. Let’s do a quick walk through of what is coming and when.

The EOS R5

Let’s start with the one I have been thinking will be my next camera. The Canon EOS R5 is a 45 MPixel camera that can shoot at 12 frames per second with the mechanical shutter and 20 fps electronic shutter. It has dual card slots (CFExpress and SD), a buffer for around 90 raw shots and dual pixel auto focus covering the entire sensor that is the latest from Canon. Not a lot of details have come out about using the camera so far except from people who are paid by Canon as ambassadors. Their reviews are gushing, of course, and they are making things look pretty amazing but really these are more adverts than reviews.

From a replacement for the 5DS, the spec seem pretty much what I was hoping for. Similar resolution and faster shutter and better buffer. We shall see how the autofocus works once it gets in the hands of more reviewers soon. I can’t wait to see how it stands up to the Sony A7RIV from a stills photography point of view. These specs alone are pretty much enough for me to make this my next Canon camera.

The EOS R5 ( USD $3899, CAD $4 billion) is suppose to start shipping at the beginning of August. While this is great, I am a bit surprised that Canon hasn’t allowed more independent reviews of the camera as it pretty much must be finalized and shipping now to be available in 3 weeks. This alone has me waiting instead of preordering a camera I have been hoping would come out for a couple of years. Canon usually puts out a camera that is underwhelming but stable and usable…except for when they came out with the 5D2 which was exciting and perfectly usable.

What about the other camera?

The second camera, the EOS R6 (USD $2499, CAD $still too much plus more tax) is a very interesting camera. It seems almost like a cross between the Canon 6DII and the 7DII. It has the speed and resolution of the 7D type cameras at 20 MP, but loses that 1.6 crop that some nature photographers enjoy. It has a body similar to the 6D II, not quite as resilient as the 5 series with a few things left out but at a price point that is more likely to entice a good number of photographers. Speed wise this camera loses nothing to the R5 with the same 12 and 20 fps and the same tracking autofocus system at least from the specs. The resolution though is interesting. The current 6DII is 28 MP and the 5DIV is 30, this is a significant drop back down to a bit less resolution than the 5DIII. This could be very good news for low light shooting as the sensor is rumored to be the same as that in the 1DIII. For me, now that I have both resolution and speed in the Sony A7RIV it is difficult to go back to the lower resolutions. This is mostly due to the fact that I am most often distance challenged when shooting birds and animals. Cropping is my friend, since I can not often get as close as I would prefer to my subject without either having it spook or change its behavior. For landscape work, I just like more resolution. This may not be a factor for many other photographers, and I suspect this camera will sell well as long as it is more responsive than the current EOS R and RP.

The EOS R6 will have 2 SD card slots. I would imagine this will be completely sufficient from a photography point of view and significantly cheaper as CFExpress may not come down in price for a few years yet.

ViewFinder and LCD screen

The viewfinders have 5.x MP resolution in the R5 and 3.6MP in the R6 with up to 120Hz refresh rates. Not much has been said about blackout time while shooting so we will need to wait for those independent reviews again. It is highly likely that the viewfinder in the R5 is the same one in the A7RIV. If so, and if implemented similarly it will be excellent to use in real life. The lower resolution of the R6 is expected but still will likely be better than the current Sony A7III (which is rather horrible but still usable) and likely on par with the A7RIII which was also very usable.

The LCD panels are the latest of the '“pull out to the side” style from Canon. With touch screen and useful variable angle tilt this will be pretty fantastic for those of us who would love to be able to get those different perspective shots. I almost never shoot birds or animals without my eye to the view finder but often have the camera in very awkward positions when doing landscapes…sometimes just inches above the water or way above my head.

A new Image File option

One of the new things that may be interesting to some photographers is the inclusion of HEIC files. These are what I’m hoping will be the replacements for JPEGs on the Net within the next year or two. HEIC files can be a higher bit depth lossy compression file (up to 16bit). Their adoption on the web is limited at the moment but for those times you need to shoot with something that has much smaller file sizes this is another great option while still having some leeway to edit the shots and retain the integrity of the image. Looks like Canon will include support for 10 bit HEIC which should be better than 8 bit JPEG while still about the same size.

Shooting speed

Let’s get back to the shooting speed. 12 fps with a mechanical shutter is pretty amazing and is in the realm of past 1D cameras. This is one of the things I have been looking for in a Canon camera for years - relatively high resolution and high fps with a reasonable buffer. I’m hoping that the CFExpress card will clear that buffer quickly as well. This is a huge step-up for Canon and looks to have gotten ahead of Sony as well. I’m very happy with the 10 fps and 61 MP of the Sony A7RIV and look forward to getting to use the same capabilities on my big white Canon lenses. The silent shutter is going to be the bigger unknown. On the Sony A7RIV the silent shutter is great for getting shots of a bird that might spook but motion in shots can have some really odd results. The Sony A9 series takes the data off the sensor quickly enough that it is relatively close to a global shutter. This is not the case with the A7 series and I haven’t seen any details for the Canon yet but suspect it will be similar to the A7RIV (I would love to be wrong on this). This is not unexpected, but is something you need to be aware of when shooting anything moving, especially anything rotating within the frame. For the same reason, anyone shooting in artificial lighting may also see issues as the light changes within the exposure of the image. This can result in banding as the read out of the sensor often skips lines as it progresses through.

Speaking of artificial light, I haven’t yet heard much about flash sync or whether it can be used with the electronic shutter. Since the max shutter speed is the same for this camera at 1/8000s in both electronic and mechanical shutter being able to shoot at really high shutter speeds with a high speed sync is not an option.

IBIS

Now this is a new one for Canon. They have stated over and over again that lens based image stabilization was better than sensor based. Finally they are coming to the game and they are making claims to have better stabilization than anyone out there with an estimated 8 stops. The one downside so far came from a site I read that stated EF lens stabilization would not communicate with the sensor based stabilization. This did not mean they would work at the same time, but would not necessarily be as good as with an RF lens. I will wait to see the reviews to see if this means that they lose a stop and still work amazingly well or if that means we might see issues when using both together. Worst case is that we turn off one and get the same image stabilization we had before which was pretty good for stills anyways.

Lenses and EF lens compatibility

Canon RF lenses have been highly rated so far, the canon ambassadors are gushing about the new 100-500 F/4.5-7.1 and as an owner of the current 100-400 I expect it will be pretty great. I do find it interesting that many people who thought the Sony 200-600 at F/6.3 was unusable except at high noon are now accepting of these slower lenses when they come from Canon. I have found the 200-600 to be fantastic for birds in flight and expect the new Canon to be equally great. If the EF lenses work well enough on the new R series cameras, I may hold off on getting any white lenses as the ones I have (70-300L, 100-400IIL and 500IIL) are fantastically sharp. Where I’m likely to venture is in the wider angle lenses as my 17-40L is getting a little long in the tooth and Salwa pretty much lives with the 16-35 f/4 when hiking and traveling.

I think I will cover the other lens announcements in a separate post as some are really new concepts.

There seems to be some language from Canon stating that the best performance will come with RF lenses, the question is going to be how good will the autofocus tracking and IBIS be with EF lenses. Since there aren’t going to be any big whites on the RF side of the world for a while I’m hoping that Canon has ensured that the performance will be good. From what I have seen, autofocus in live view mode on the 1DXIII with EF lenses is up to the task so I still have pretty high expectations.

Dual Pixel II - autofocus enhancements

This is the big question for me. Dual Pixel autofocus is pretty good for video but I really want to see how the improvements are with subject tracking for stills. The Sony A7III and A7RIV are really just so good that when I go back to my current Canon cameras I now feel like I’m missing something. My expectations are high, with face detect, eye autofocus and animal eye focus I’m really hoping that these cameras can meet my current expectations. It did take Sony a long time to get to the level they are now, many iterations with some pain along the way. Canon skipped much of that by not having a horse in the mirrorless race, now we see if they can catch up or even pull ahead within just 2 product cycles. The EOS R really didn’t match up in that sense, although there were many other reasons I didn’t find it worth picking up.

Button Layout - Touch Screen

Canon tried some interesting things with the EOS R in terms of button layout and ergonomics. Compared to the 5D series I never felt like the EOS R felt natural in my hands and getting things done felt more difficult switching between the 5D and EOS R than it was switching between 5D and A7 series. For what I regularly use on the back of a camera, the changes Canon made for the EOS R5 (and R6) bring everything back to where I like to have them. The joystick I find to be the most useful, as I find using the screen a pain when the camera is up to my eye. I also find that I change settings on the camera by accident continuously with the touch screen. It is a great tool for when you have the camera on a tripod but I really like to have the buttons available for that control as a second option. Bringing back the scroll wheel is also great although now that I have gotten used to the scroll wheel on the Sonys with the four corners as buttons I think I would have liked Canon to add that for some extra buttons on the back. Still, I can at least use the camera as I would have with the 5D easily with this layout. Back to the touch screen. I may complain about it but as long as I can turn it on and off when I want to it is still the best implementation of a touch screen I have seen on a camera. Sony needs to learn from this.

image from apotelyt.com

The top of the R5 is going to be the harder part for me, but in the end it will just mean learning a new way of doing things. I do wish the video record button was on the back like the Sony and would love to have the AF On button bigger like the Sony but in the end these are small things that will become normal with usage.

Battery life

First estimates seem low even with the new battery announced. The good news is that the new battery is backwards compatible with current Canon batteries and chargers that we have a good number of here at home. We shall see if Canon is being conservative with battery usage estimates or if we are going to be in a similar situation as we were with the second generation and prior Sony Cameras before they moved to the new and much better battery.

Video

This has been where most of the excitement has been over the last few months. We do shoot a bit of video, and are trying to do more as we continue to evaluate how to tell the Phocus stories. The specs looks fabulous, and the limitations that have now been circulating concerning heat will affect many video people but for the most part are not going to make or break our decision to buy these cameras. Sure, 4K at 120 fps would be really nice for some nature action slowed down, and I would love to experiment with grabbing frames from 8K footage (using it with a high shutter speed instead of twice the frame rate) to see what you can achieve. It would still be the most capable video camera we have so no complaints if it works to spec.

What to do, where to find more info

Currently it is hard to draw many conclusions other than that I’m ready to put money down unless early reviews show some major issues or flaws. Would love to get one in my hands to compare to the A7RIV but I imagine I will have to wait like everyone else. Would be fun to have it for fall migration, let’s hope it lives up to the hype.

Much of the information I have gotten is found at CanonRumors.com, a great site with a pretty good (at least most of the time) group of users and topics in the comment sections. DPReview.com is another great resource to see previews, reviews, and great videos by Chris and Jordan. Some other good resources and often just interesting videos can be found on YouTube with people like Tony and Chelsea Northrup, Jared Polin, and Max Yureyev. For a great video using the R5 from a Canadian Canon Ambassador take a look at Peter McKinnon’s channel.

Woodpeckers - A nature photographers guide for getting the shots you want

Pair of Northern Flickers on a cedar tree on the north shore of Lake Ontario. Taken on a Canon 1DIV with a sigma 120-300 and 2x teleconverter. f/5.6, 1/1600s, ISO1600 at 600mm.

Whenever you go into the woods, at some point you will hear that knocking sound.  Sometimes distant and not loud other times like a hammer on a tin roof.  This is a sound that always take me off-trail to find out what is making the sound.  From the tiny downy woodpeckers that you find almost everywhere, to the beautiful Pileated woodpecker, you will always see something worth taking a shot of and often get an interesting glimpse into their behavior.

Where to look?

In the woods of course - but I have found the best places to be in wooded areas near marshes where you will have many dead trees.  If you see holes in trees, then it is mostly likely that a woodpecker made that hole. Other birds and squirrels may now be living in that hole but there is a good chance it was originally made by a woodpecker.

Red headed woodpecker on the edge of a marsh in Spartanburg, SC. Taken on a Canon 1DIV with 100-400 lens and 1.4x teleconverter. F/8, 1/800s, ISO400 at 560mm

I often look for fresh wood chips at the bottom of a tree for signs of nesting.  

One caveat when looking in the woods is that flickers will often be found on the grass along with robins searching for bugs and worms.

Two Red-bellied woodpeckers active on a fall day in Spartanburg, SC. Taken in the late afternoon light on a Canon 1DIV with a 100-400 lens and 1.4x teleconverter. f/8, 1/1600s, ISO1600 at 560mm.

When to go?

As with most birds, the most active time is in the morning.  In the woods and under the tree canopy, woodpeckers can stay active all day.  Spring time is the best time of the year as they start nesting.  Not only are they more easy to find, they are often very vocal in the spring. 

Yellow-bellied sapsucker on a cool spring day in Haliburton, ON. Taken with a Canon 1DIV and sigma 120-300 lens and 2x teleconverter. F/5.6, 1/800s, ISO 800 at 600mm

What should you bring?

Most of these birds are relatively small, fast and tend to live in the woods which all tend to mean you are going to want to have a long, fast and stable lens and a camera that can handle high ISO well so that you can keep your shutter speed up as much as possible.  Currently I have the Sony A7III for lower light situations and the A7RIV for slightly better light or birds that are much further away since I can crop a considerable amount with that sensor.  If you can afford a long prime you will be rewarded with the best results, but a good long zoom will get the results as well although likely with a bit more noise.  I use the Canon 500mm f/4 (sometimes with a 1.4 teleconverter) on my Canon cameras and have been using the Sony 200-600 on the Sony cameras.  If you are hiking in to the spot, the Sony zoom will save your neck and back and you will still get the shot - the equivalent Sigma or Tamron 150-600 can also be a great choice as there are few other choices to get to that 600mm without breaking the bank.

Pileated Woodpecker in Edwin M. Griffin Nature Preserve along the Cottonwood trail in Spartanburg, SC. Taken on a Canon 1DIV with 100-400 and 1.4 teleconverter. F/9, 1/250s, ISO 400 at 476mm.

Even though you will be shooting in lower light I would still suggest that hand-held will yield better shots mostly because you will need to move around quickly to get a good angle and the birds rarely stay still for long.  If you can watch at a nest for parents to come back and forth with food, then setting up a tripod is well worth it as you may wait for a considerable time between birds returning with food.

Bring bug repellent. You may be standing for some time and the mosquitos will find you sooner or later here in Ontario in spring or summer.

female hairy woodpecker on an old fence post in Whitby, ON. Taken on a Canon 1DIV with Sigma 120-300 lens. F/4, 1/800s, ISO100 at 300mm

Shooting techniques

Since you are shooting small, fast moving birds usually in the low light of the forest, good technique is crucial.  For me, there are two main things that help me get the sho - this is assuming that you are already relatively good at getting clear shots with a long lens. The first is using your autofocus to good advantage.

Downy woodpecker in Cranberry marsh on a cold winter day in Ontario. Taken on a Canon 1DIV with Sigma 120-300 lens and 2x teleconverter. F/5.6, 1/1000s, ISO 1600 at 493mm.

In the woods, single point or a small group of focus points will tend to get the best results as the background and lower light will often confuse the autofocus systems if you try to use wide area tracking.  I have found great results with mirrorless cameras using single point with object tracking.  You can adjust where the point is for initially getting the subject but once you have object tracking you can move with the bird or adjust your composition without losing focus.  On my Canon cameras I will tend to use either single point or group of 9 in the center.  Without the object tracking I usually have to crop later to get the composition I want since I can’t move the points manually that quickly as these fast little birds change location and direction.

Pair of Pileated woodpeckers at the nest on the north Shore of Lake Erie. Taken on Canon 5DS with 100-400 lens. F/5.6, 1/2500s, ISO 1600 at 400mm

The second item has to do with the shooting mode.  I have found that shooting in manual mode with auto ISO gives the best results in the woods. This really isn’t manual at all and that is a good thing since the exposure can change easily by more that 5 stops as the woodpecker moves from branch to branch and tree to tree. If you want to catch the moment the bird is doing something interesting then letting the camera determine the final exposure is much quicker than I can do in that situation.  Exposure compensation and choosing a metering method that works for you is also pretty crucial.  I will most often leave the metering in multi on the Sony or evaluative on the Canon and adjust exposure compensation based on the general background.  In more harsh situations I will change to spot metering if I have one subject only.

Three Norther Flickers dancing around the top of a dead tree in a marsh in Spartanburg, SC. Taken with Canon 1DIV and 100-400 lens with 1.4x teleconverter. F/8, 1/1250s, ISO 1600 at 560mm.

In Manual mode I start with my shutter speed at 1/2000s and my aperture as big as my lens will allow.  Usually the birds are far enough away that I can get the entire bird in focus but I will shut down the aperture as the bird come closer. I start with the high shutter speed to ensure that I’m not surprised by interesting interactions and find that I wasn’t prepared and end up with shots that have motion blur.  Once I have assessed what the bird is doing I often bring the shutter speed down for some cleaner shots while the bird is not moving but try to remember to put it back up before I move on to the next bird.  This is a technique that works for me most of the time, try it if you like but there are many ways to accomplish similar results.

Red-headed woodpecker taking off with an acorn. Taken using a Canon 1DIV with 100-400 lens and 1.4 teleconverter. F/8, 1/4000s, ISO 1600 at 560mm.

What shots to get?

As in most nature photography you will often want to get the portrait shot with the soft background.  This is the “I got it” shot when you see your first one.  Of course there are times that you will just be happy to get a clear shot of any sort if it is a rare sighting.  Once you have this in your bag, then you can start looking at the behavioral shots and the interaction shots.  Whether it is mating dances, nesting, feeding, in-flights or hiding nuts, there are many interesting things to try to capture with woodpeckers since they don’t tend to be too interested in us as long as we stay relatively still.

Red-bellied woodpecker posing on a fence post in Lynde Shores Conservation area near Whitby ON. Taken using Canon 1DIV and Sigma 120-300 with 2x teleconverter. F/5.6, 1/640s, ISO 400 at 600mm.

Birds I have found and the ones I haven’t yet.

On the eastern side of North America, where I have lived most of my life, we have a decent number of species of woodpeckers.  Commonly I see downy and hairy woodpeckers along with red-bellied woodpeckers and northern flickers.  A little less often I get to see yellow-bellied sapsuckers, pileated woodpeckers and red-headed woodpeckers.  All of these I have been able to get shots of over the years and still enjoy capturing them as I see them. 

Pair of Northern Flickers facing off. Taken using Canon 1DIV and Sigma 120-300 with 2x teleconverter. F/8, 1/640s, ISO 1600 at 526mm.

There are a few species in the Carolinas and in northern Ontario that I have not yet had a chance to get good pictures of.  We did go searching a few times for red-cockaded Woodpecker that still has a small presence in South Carolina but we were pretty unsuccessful on those trips - another excuse to head back down to that area.

There are many good reasons to head up into northern Ontario for birds that live in the boreal forest.  Three-toed and black-backed woodpeckers can be found in these forests and are on my list for some boreal forest trips in the future.  Once I have found these I guess we will need to head out west to start finding new and more interesting species ( I say that a lot, and it is part of the nature focus long term plan).  Until then, we shall continue to enjoy the nature we see around us now.

Red-headed woodpecker trying to find a good location to store an acorn. Taken using Canon 1DIV and 100-400 lens with 1.4x teleconverter. F/8, 1/4000s, ISO 1600 at 560mm.

Sony A7RIV and FE 200-600…on to the next level

I haven’t really purchased a lot of camera gear in the last year, mostly due to two factors.  

First, I really have most of what I need for the types of shooting I regularly do.  In fact I have most of it in both Canon and Sony.  At this point I don’t “need” anything, but that doesn’t mean I still don’t keep an eye on what is coming out that might make it easier to do the photography that I like.

Shooting with the new Sony 200-600 on Malcolm Island, BC. Picture credit to Salwa Farah (WanderingPhocus.com)

Second, there hasn’t been much interesting new gear in the last year for me.  On the Canon side, they haven’t come out with anything that would make me want to replace my 5DS, and the lenses I have are exactly what I need from 8mm all the way to 1000mm (500 f/4 and 2x).  That may change if Canon finally starts to catch up to Sony in the mirrorless market but I can wait until they do.  On the Sony side of the world, things have gotten a little slower or the stuff coming out is either out of my price range or not really the type of gear that I need at the moment.

There were, however, two exceptions and although I didn’t “need” them, I really did think they would be useful additions to my kit.  

Sony A7RIV and FE 200-600 f/5.6-6.3

The Lens

First up was the Sony FE 200-600 G f5.6-6.3.  I picked this lens up in the fall just in time for a trip out to Vancouver Island and it pretty quickly became my go to lens for nearly any nature shooting.  Although this lens was not quite as sharp as the FE 100-400 GM, I almost never used that lens without the 1.4 teleconverter giving me a 140-560 but since I use it at 560 most of the time I was always at f/8 or slower.  That lens is still very sharp with the teleconverter but not as sharp as the native 200-600.  Like most nature photographers I rarely have enough length so this has been a fantastic addition to my gear bag.

thinkTANK backpack with Nature Quaternity - FE 16-35 f/4, Sony A7III with FE 24-104 f/4, FE 70-200 f/4, and Sony A7RIV with FE 200-600 f/5.6-6.3….1.4 teleconverter underneath for a travel kit from 16-840mm.

With this lens I went from the nature Trinity (16-35 f/4, 24-105 f/4, and 100-400 f/4-5.6) in my bag to now carrying more of a nature Quaternity in which I now carry the 70-200 f/4 that I often use for video work and the 200-600 in place of the 100-400.  This now gives me a range of 16-840mm (since I do still carry a 1.4 teleconverter in the bag) all in one thinkTANK bag that I can carry on a plane and actually hike with….pretty useful.

Snowy Owl taking flight on a very cloudy day. Sony A7RIV and 200-600 + 1.4 teleconverter. 840mm, f/9, 1/3200s ISO800

I used this new lens mostly on the A7III, with the A7RII usually on the 16-35 for landscape shots.  Great combo, 10 frames per second for fast moving subjects and nice resolution for things that weren’t moving quickly…or at all.  Now what if I could have both of those in one camera?  Never happen, you would think, or at least not with a good buffer.  Well, Sony basically said “wait, hold my beer” and then popped back late in the year with the new A7RIV.

Snowy Owl landing in a grassy field. Sony A7RIV and 200-600 + 1.4 teleconverter. 840mm, f/9, 1/1000s ISO1600

The Camera

Now this may not be the dream camera for all nature photographers, but it has been what I have been looking for pretty much since I got hooked on the resolutions of both the A7RII and the Canon 5DS.  Give me high resolution, the ability to crop in and still have enough for a relatively large print and also the ability to shoot fast burst with a pretty good buffer.  At this point really the only thing missing is the A9 silent shooting (stacked sensor) and 20 or more fps on one of these high resolution machines….still something to look forward to in a couple of years.

So, just before the holidays I picked up the Sony A7RIV and actually got a break in the horrible weather to see a few owls.  And as an added bonus, there was a sighting of a rare-to-the-area Northern Hawk Owl that was a particularly great test subject.  With Salwa out with the 5DS and 500f/4 with teleconverter, we were able to check out both the quality of the two combos and compare the usability.

If you have read this far you will likely be interested in my impressions of this combo and comparisons with previous Sony gear that I currently have.

Snowy Owl resting on a weedy knoll. Sony A7RIV and 200-600 + 1.4 teleconverter. 840mm, f/9, 1/1000s ISO1600

Internally zooming lens

The 200-600 is a relatively slow lens with a maximum aperture of 5.6 at 200 to 6.3 at 600.  This was a design choice made to allow for a relatively small and light  zoom lens.  The fact that they made this an internally zooming lens is one of my favorite features.  The weight distribution doesn’t change noticeably as you zoom, and since the zoom throw is only about a quarter turn, the entire range of this lens is accessible with only a small wrist movement. 

Portrait of a Northern Hawk Owl. Sony A7RIV and 200-600 + 1.4 teleconverter. 840mm, f/9, 1/2500s ISO800

The length and weight of this lens is easy to hand-hold (assuming you are used to using long telephoto lenses). It is definitely heavier than the 100-400 but still very manageable.  

This lens is really sharp, not quite as sharp as the 100-400 but sharper than the 100-400 with the 1.4 teleconverter.  The other bonus is that it is also pretty sharp at 840mm with the 1.4 teleconverter although you are now at f/9.

High Key image of a Northern Hawk Owl in flight. Sony A7RIV and 200-600 + 1.4 teleconverter. 370mm, f/8, 1/4000s ISO1600

Autofocus and Tracking

Autofocus on mirrorless cameras with long telephoto lenses was, up until very recently, not very good.  The 100-400 on the third generation A7 cameras was really good, even in relatively low light.  The A7RIV is even better and the 200-600 is also really quite fast.  Tracking birds in flight on either of these lenses and the A7III or A7RIV is actually faster than any setup I have used…Sony or Canon.  The biggest surprise is how well the autofocus works with the teleconverter.  I really don’t feel much difference in speed or tracking even at low light and relatively low contrast.  This was definitely where the A7RII was lacking with or without the teleconverter.

Young Male Snowy Owl. Sony A7RIV and 200-600 + 1.4 teleconverter. 840mm, f/9, 1/1250s ISO2000

The high resolution and telephoto power combo

The last big benefit of the high resolution/long telephoto combo is in the cropping.  It doesn’t matter how much lens I have, I still cannot….or sometimes should not get closer to my subjects.  With the A7III I can crop down for instagram or the web reasonably far and still have a usable image….although the noise becomes more noticeable with increased ISO.  On the A7RIV a similar crop is still printable and I can now crop in considerably more….or just improve how the shot looks as I don’t always get the perfect framing on fast moving birds.  Nice to be able to reframe and still have a shot that I can put on the wall.  The other bonus is that a landscape shot can be made vertical or vice versa and still have enough resolution to print.

Cropped in on a Northern Hawk Owl trying to stash a vole in a tree. Sony A7RIV and 200-600 + 1.4 teleconverter. 840mm, f/9, 1/3200s ISO800

The A7RIV itself is another really good step in the evolution of these cameras.  The grip is a bit more substantial.  It feels a bit different from the third generation but I really don’t find one better or worse…just a bit different.  The buttons are much better, easier to touch.  The joystick is easy to use even with gloves on.  

Snowy owl take off. Sony A7RIV and 200-600 + 1.4 teleconverter. 840mm, f/9, 1/1250s ISO2000

The resolution and speed of this camera are the real reasons I wanted it.  They are also the real reason that it is the best camera I have ever used.  In a previous article I pretty much asked for everything that I now have.  I do find it interesting that Sony is the company that has produced it.  As a long-time Canon user, I thought Canon would not only be the first to do many of these things.  I thought they would be the ones innovating like they did when they came out with the 5D and 5DII.  Let’s see how they respond as a new decade starts.

Birds in Flight challenges - Autofocus improvements over the years

Learning to use your tracking autofocus is not just a matter of pick up a new camera and point it at a subject.  I’ve been using Canon cameras for nature photography for about 15 years and have over time learned how to use what is given to me….starting with the Canon rebel and going to the 5D and 5DII we had a very basic focus system where I had to really learn to just use the middle focus point for most tracking.  I picked up a used 1DIV and my life changed….many focus points, quick tracking and relatively little to learn.

Blue Heron in flight at dusk along the St. Lawrence River. Taken with the Canon 5DII and 100-400L

The 5DIII and 5DS had a bit more configurability and for the first time I started using some of the focus groups and changing the configuration for the type of shooting I did.  At the time this was great and I didn’t really think it could get much faster or easier…..I was wrong, but it took quite a while to really get used to thinking differently and adjusting to a new camera brand and the way things worked within that system.

With all of these cameras and at the time I had one other major issue with respect to reach.  My longest lens was the 100-400 and if I added the 1.4 teleconverter I could get out to 560 mm but at a minimum aperture of f/8 which meant that I could only use the center point for tracking if in that configuration.

Red-tailed Hawk taking off at Cranberry Marsh. Canon 1DIV with 100-400L

Around this time I started exploring mirrorless cameras, starting with the panasonic micro 4/3 which gave some great telephoto range for a small system but was really only suitable for static subjects.  I then got a hold of the Sony A7R….fantastic image quality but the same issue for autofocus.  This all changed when the A6000 came out, an inexpensive apsc camera with some pretty fantastic autofocus tracking capabilities.  It wasn’t perfect but it was very fast and let you track across a much bigger proportion of the image than almost anything else at the time.  This system was pretty easily fooled by complex backgrounds and would sometimes back focus and lose the subject when you left it to do all the work by itself.  The one thing I did find was that it could get a subject and follow it significantly faster than anything else I had used at that time.

Brown pelican flying over my kayak in the everglades. Sony A6000 with 70-200 F4.

Things have only gotten better.  While all the camera companies have made improvements in autofocus over the last 10 years or so, none have made the quantum leaps that Sony has.  To be fair, they did have a long way to go at first to just catch up to Canon and Nikon but once they did they have continued to improve with each new camera in pretty substantial ways. 

At this time I have the A7RII and the A7III. The former was pretty close in capabilities with the A6000 I mentioned above, with a few software improvements but it will still lose the subject at inconvenient times and does not work as well in lower light.  The A7III however is just another level again.  

Ring billed gull with breaking waves. A7III and 100-400GM.

When this camera came out it was shortly after the A9 which I have never had a chance to really work with in the field but is a technical marvel.  The A7III was kind of the poor persons A9 but for two grand it really is much more camera than I have ever bought anywhere near this price point.  When it came out, I found it had really improved on the software to the point that just leaving it in all points focus I almost never lost a subject.  At that time choosing a subject to track was ok, but not great.  Sony came out with the latest firmware update which now makes it so that picking a bird out of a small flock and tracking that one bird is now pretty easy.

This now comes back to my learning curve.  Every improvement and change in these focus systems means I need to learn new techniques and adjust the way I think about getting the image.  It takes time to get good at using any of these new capabilities just as it did when I first started using aiServo with a center point on my original 5D or rebel.

Osprey landing in Sparkleberry Swamp, taken from kayak with Sony A7RII and 100-400 with 1.4 teleconverter.

That was a rather long winded way of getting to the point which is that as good as these cameras have gotten, in all cases you still need to spend the time to learn the camera you have to get the best out of tracking focus for nature photography.  I love the new features and things are much easier now, but to capture that swallow diving for a bug on the surface you have to know your camera and lens.  It needs to become second nature, even if you switch between brands as I do.  To do this I spend a lot of time shooting birds that I will likely never print or show anyone else.  I try to capture gulls and terns outside our house diving and twisting to see if I can anticipate a moment….and often miss over and over again until I finally get the feel for the birds movement and how to keep my lens on it throughout.

On Hunting Island beach with the Canon 5DS and 500mm f/4 II. Shooting tri-colored heron and snowy egret fishing as the tide goes out.

The most humbling lesson I have learned in that last few years was just after I had made a huge purchase.  I had been looking to buy a big telephoto for many years and had finally saved up to get the Canon 500 f/4 II.  I was so eager to show how great of shots I was going to get.  The first month or so was frustrating.  I could get great static shots, amazing details.  I found that my in flight shots were very inconsistent and that I was having a lot of trouble keeping a steady view on the subject.  It turns out it wasn’t the weight….I was used to using a sigma 120-300 f2.8 at the time which might have been a bit heavier.  Turns out it was the length.  It took me a good month to get used to keeping that lens on subject and keeping it smooth while tracking.  I had to learn it all again when I added the teleconverter to that combo.  

Tri-colored Heron fishing as the tide roles out on Hunting Island, SC. Canon 5DS and 500 f/4 II with 1.4 teleconverter

Along with that lesson, I have also learned that before I make a decision about how good a camera or lens is for tracking subjects and getting the shot I want I need to remember that it may not be better or as good as what I am used to immediately.  I need to remember to not fully discount it until I have really used it for usually a few thousand shots.

Osprey taking off along the Niagara River. Sony A7III with 200-600G

Latest Gear - Sometimes you can get what you wish for.

If you were to ask me what improvements I would like to see in the gear I have, I would likely tell you that I want a native super-telephoto lens that is reasonably affordable and a little sharper at the long end than the Sigma and Tamron equivalents.  To go with this lens I would like to have a bit more resolution but still with the ability to shoot at a burst rate that beats my Canon 5DS and my Sony A7RII.  Really, I’m pretty happy with what I have but that would be the icing on the cake at least until I win the lottery.  I would also say I’m pretty lucky to be able to afford to enjoy my hobby to a level that I have gear that I wouldn’t have thought was possible back 20 years ago.  But technology moves ever forward, and the improvements that I have seen in capabilities of cameras for photography and more specifically for nature photography just in the last few years are pretty amazing.

So it looks like I can now get just what I’m asking for at a price that, although not cheap, is within the realm of an active hobbyist. 

First to come out is the new Sony 200-600 f5.6 - 6.3.  This is a pretty interesting lens.  The relatively small aperture is a consequence of building a 600mm lens that can be both hand-held and affordable to people who could never justify more than $12,000 on a f/4 prime.  The big surprise to me was the internal zoom, something I have seen in the very expensive canon 200-400 f4 with the internal teleconverter and the 120-300 f2.8 Sigma which I did own and used almost exclusively with a 2x teleconverter for a number of years.  This is a feature I’m very fond of even if it makes the lens a little more challenging as carry on luggage.  

I have not yet tried this lens since I’m not on anyones radar as someone who influences other photographers….at least not so far.  If the reviews of this lens continue to be positive I will likely pick one up before my next trip out to Vancouver Island this fall.  I will obviously do some comparisons to the 100-400 Sony and Canon lenses that I use regularly as well as my 500 F/4.  We shall see if it becomes my go to hiking lens.

The latest announcement from Sony is the second part of the equation for what I picture as the best combination I can get for the money for nature photography (at least until the competition manages to catch up/or push past).  If you are not aware of the latest news, this would be the Sony A7RIV.  This looks to be a camera to match or beat the resolution of my 5DS but also have 10 frames per second and I’m hoping autofocus tracking as good as the Sony A7III.  

This may not be the camera for everyone, but I currently love the resolution of my A7RII and would like it to have the autofocus capabilities of my A7III and that lovely 10 fps and a buffer big enough for the types of bursts that I tend to do.  That would be 5 or 6 shot bursts as the action happens….usually not more than a couple of those bursts in a row so this camera should be more than sufficient for me.

If you have read any of my previous blog posts you will know that high resolution is something that I really like to have.  I won’t go into all the reasons it is important to me, but it really is.  I’ve relied on the Canon 5DS for this resolution for a number of years now.

The biggest question is not whether or not I will buy this camera, the question is will I replace just the A7RII  or will the A7III also end up sitting on a shelf most of the time.  I’m not going to get rid of my Canon gear….still waiting for Canon to come out with something that makes me want to upgrade the 5DS.

The only complaints I have seen about the new Sony A7RIV is the lack of improvements in the video department, the poor touch screen implementation, and the menu system.  For me none of these are reasons to avoid this camera.  I do most of my video on a Canon m50  on a Ronin S.  I will use the Sony A7III as well and maybe more so if this new camera becomes my main photo shooter.  It certainly would have been a bonus if the A7RIV would have 10 bit recording, 60p 4k recording and higher bit rates but I’m still pretty happy with the current capabilities.

The touch screen is something that I actually don’t use much even when reasonably well implemented like on the Canon m50.  I really do prefer buttons most of the time, but I would imagine that I’ll change my mind as the implementations improve.  I really do like the way the Sony A7III currently works as I can change almost anything I need to with my eye to the viewfinder….at least now that I have put a few features on the programmable buttons.  This is a good segue to the menus.  I’ve gotten used to both Canon and Sony menus now and if I had to go into either of them in between shots I would hate them both.  In reality I almost never go into the menu systems while out on a shoot on either system….both Canon and Sony, although very different are pretty good once you have used them enough to register some muscle memory.  I know this is not the case for many other photographers since I see this complaint ‘ad nauseam’ on the camera forums.

It will be interesting to see in a couple of months if  both Canon and Nikon introduce new competition to both this camera and lens.  Until then I’ll hopefully be happy shooting on some new gear as the fall migration hits and the owls come back.

ps: ordered and confirmed delivery of the 200-600 for August 9th. I will be able to get some practice with this lens before my trip out to Vancouver Island. Big thanks to our Camera Guy - Patrick.

High Resolution cameras and nature photography

Northern Cardinal - Canon 5DS with Canon EF500mm f/4L IS II USM +1.4x III. 700mm, f/5.6, 1/1250s, iso1600.

I used the Canon 1D mark IV for almost 5 years, it was a great camera and I loved the ability to get 10 frames per second to get a better chance of capturing interesting moments but I did very often find that I did not have enough reach.  I was often cropping my 16 MegaPixel pictures down to a point that they were ok on the internet but as soon as I tried printing them the details started falling apart.  As technology has been improving on all fronts in photography we started seeing higher resolution cameras that also had some reasonable tracking capabilities, although they were definitely much slower in terms of frames per second and how big the buffer was.  

Moving to a higher resolution camera, I bought the Canon 5DS originally for landscape and detail shots.  This camera with a 50 MegaPixel sensor was then as is still now the highest resolution full-frame camera on the market.  It had the pretty much the same autofocus system as the 5D III which at the time was pretty top tier, and really only the 1DX and Nikon equivalent were significantly better/faster at that time.  I started using it for high detail bird and nature shots and soon found myself using it  for action shots. I really got hooked on the detail more than the ability to get more shots per second.  This meant going back to what I used to do with older slower cameras trying to time my shots to ensure I got the precise moment in a action sequence….of course I missed moments that I might have gotten with the 5D IV but when I did get it, I often had a shot that was able to be printed much larger.

Red-shouldered hawk taking off. Canon 5DS with Canon EF500mm f/4L IS II USM +1.4x III. 700mm, 1/1250s, ISO 800. Original 8688x5792 cropped to 4178x4178. Printable at 300DPI to nearly 14 inches. Image posted at 2000x2000.

The ability to crop in on action is liberating since you can’t always get perfect composition while things are moving fast.  This allows you to keep action close to the center for good autofocus tracking while shooting and crop the composition that fits the shot afterwards while still keeping enough detail for a good size print.  This is starting to become less important with new mirrorless cameras that can focus just about anywhere on the sensor allowing easier composition while tracking, reducing the amount of cropping you need to do.  It is nice to have both resolution and full sensor tracking, and nice to have the choices after the shot.

Highly cropped image of a red-headed woodpecker. Taken with Sony A7RII using Canon EF 100-400 F4.5-5.6 IS II and Metabones adapter. 400mm, f/5.6, 1/1000s, ISO 400. Original shot 42 MegaPixels cropped to 1543x1543.

To get a sharp image, you always need to think about technique while shooting.   I shoot mostly hand held, even with the 500 and 1.4 teleconverter.  You need to be close to or even faster than the reciprocal rule (see explanation below) but the image stabilizers do give you a bit more leeway.  The other big bonus of this high resolution is in landscape photography and nature environmental shots.  People have asked me why I didn’t go with the 5DSR and the answer is pretty simple….I saw a refurbished 5DS on the Canon web site for nearly $1000 off the list price at the time I was looking for a new camera.  The difference to me was not worth another grand.  

Osprey landing in Sparkleberry Swamp. Taken with Sony A7RII from a kayak. Sony FE 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 GM OSS + 1.4X Teleconverter. 560mm, f/8, 1/2500s, ISO 1600. Cropped from original shot below.

Once I became hooked on the resolution, I started seeing that I could get both high resolution and better tracking/faster shooting.  I love the fact that technology is quickly improving to a point that I can do many things I thought were just not possible a few years ago.  As new cameras come out, you no longer need to choose between high resolution or high number of frames per second.  Sony A7RIII and Nikon D850 are already there, and I’m pretty sure that the technology in the Sony A9 will make it into higher resolution cameras within the next 3-5 years.  So far Canon doesn’t have anything in this space but I would imagine it is just a matter of time now that they have the EOS R.  They really just need to be able to process the data coming from the sensor a bit faster…..they have everything else in one camera or another. 

Since getting the Canon 5DS I have also gone high resolution on the Sony side.  Sony A7RII has also become critical for me, with the Sony 100-400 and 1.4 teleconverter I have reach and detail and can do tracking focus across nearly the whole sensor even at f8.  

I do still keep a lower (funny how 24 MegaPixel can be considered low resolution to me now) resolution Sony A7III to get that 10 frames per second and great low light shooting when I do need it.  That is a pretty great cheap way to get those capabilities. 

Osprey landing in Sparkleberry Swamp. Taken with Sony A7RII from a kayak. Sony FE 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 GM OSS + 1.4X Teleconverter. 560mm, f/8, 1/2500s, ISO 1600. Original 42 MexaPixel image.

Technique

Reciprocal rule:  Even with good image stabilization this is very important especially as you get to longer glass handheld.  Even though there may not be any difference in the amount of movement you have, you will be able to detect that movement more as your resolution increases.  Remember that if your subject is moving, you may still need a higher shutter speed to ensure that you stop the motion.

Cactus Wren taking off. Cropped image from Sony A7RII. FE 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 GM OSS. 400mm, f/6.3, 1/2500s, ISO 800.

Explanation: skip over this if old news to you.

In general for full-frame cameras the reciprocal rule is a good guideline for capturing subjects without ending up with some blur due to the cameras movement while the shutter is open.  To ensure sharp images of moving subjects you may need faster shutter speeds still.  

With no stabilization and reasonably good technique handheld you should be able to get sharp images with a shutter speed that is the reciprocal of the focal length of the lens.  This is definitely a guideline to start with and it is a good starting point.  So if you have a full-frame camera and a 400mm lens, a 1/400 shutter speed would be a good starting point for a subject that is not moving quickly.  If you are using a camera with a smaller sensor then multiply this by the crop factor for the starting point.

Now with the latest lenses and cameras that have image stabilization you can get sharp images at shutter speeds that are much slower (longer duration of the sensor being exposed).   I have found that on static objects I can get about 5 times (more than 2 stops improvement) on the Canon and closer to 10 times (more than 3 stops) on the Sony where there is both camera and lens stabilization.  Both companies will advertise that you can get more than that but this is what I have experienced handheld in most conditions.

Great Horned Owl from a perch high in a White Pine, far enough that I had to crop in significantly. Shot handheld with Canon 5DS with EF500mm f/4L IS II USM +1.4x III. 700mm, f/7.1, 1/125s, ISO 1600.

Subject movement: In these cases we are not taking into consideration subject movement or camera movement while shooting.

For moving subjects I will try to never get below 1/1000s and for small birds in flight I will normal double that again. I do this not because they are smaller, but because they move very quickly and I have to be closer to them. This will often mean higher ISO than I would prefer but a little noise is something you can work with, a blurry subject is most often (unless you are specifically going for that) going to mean a lost shot.

Female Mallard taking wing. Using fast shutter to stop wing motion….still a little visible at wing tips. Canon 5DS with EF500mm f/4L IS II USM +1.4x III. 700mm, f/5.6, 1/4000s, ISO 1600.

Hand held technique:  The longer and heavier the lens the more you will see the effects of your good or bad technique.   Holding your breath as you focus and as you hit the shutter can reduce some shake and I have found to be a good way for me to concentrate on being steady. Find a way to stabilize your arms, elbows in to your body if standing. If you can stabilize your body or the camera against a tree, fencepost even better.  

Young black bear in the fields in Cades Cove. I would often use fence posts to help steady my shots as I waited for action from these bear. Taken with Canon 5DS using EF500mm f/4L IS II USM +1.4x III. 700mm, f/5.6, 1/640s, ISO 1600.

Smooth motion while tracking: This gets more difficult as the lens gets longer and heavier.  When I first got the Canon 500mm it took quite a few weeks of shooting to get used to keeping a subject tracked even though I had been using a 100-400 with the 1.4 teleconverter regularly.  The length of the lens was a new challenge to keep steady as was the different weight distribution.  Every lens and camera combination has a different center of mass, and you hold them at slightly different points.  I have found that the only real way to adjust to this is more time practicing.  Panning is a difficult technique to perfect and it only gets more difficult as your resolution increases.  Smooth movements and smooth action on the shutter button will give you the best chance to get a sharp subject.  

Barred Owl hunting for Vole. Canon 5DS with EF500mm f/4L IS II USM. 500mm, f/4, 1/2500s, ISO 1600

What I’m hoping for in the Future and what I think is coming.

There are still times that having 10 or even 20 frames per second is useful, I have missed what I think was the best moment in a string of shots.  However, I have learned to work on the timing and when I get the shot I can do more with it than before.  I keep a Sony A7III with a 100-400 within reach for those moments that look like they will turn into faster action.  

What I would love to see in the next few years is a combination of what I already see either coming down from high end cameras or just putting a number of existing bits in one camera. 

The Sony A9 and the Nikon D850 as well as the Sony A99II that has been mostly forgotten have a good deal of the technology that I think will be common in a couple of years.  Currently and with the coming firmware updates the Sony A9 has most of the autofocus capabilities that I can currently imagine needing.  I’m sure the first implementations of animal eye autofocus will not be perfect but that will be fantastic as it improves to a point that all I really need to do is choose the animal/eye I want and then I can purely concentrate on the composition and action.

White Tailed buck in the fields near Whitby, Ontario. Canon 5DS with EF500mm f/4L IS II USM +1.4x III. 700mm, f/5.6, 1/200s, ISO 1600.

I do think that the electronic shutter on the A9 is what I would like to see on a high resolution sensor the most.  I realize that is also the most difficult and likely expensive thing to want.  Silent shutter would be amazing for nature, however the implementation in any camera other than the A9 means that it is only really useful for static subjects.  This is due to the amount of time it takes to access and push to memory all the the data from the sensor and currently means that you will notice motion artifacts in your shots on anything other that the A9.

Buffer is the next issue when looking at high resolution and high frame rates.  The ability to get >100 raw images before the buffer slows you down may seem like a lot but when action happens in nature I often will take 3-5 shot bursts and may need to do many of these until the action stops.  Examples might be bull elk fighting or herons chasing each other.  The solution to this will come in faster memory cards and larger memory buffers…both of these will increase cost of camera and not everyone will want to pay for it.

Really what I’m hoping for is a combination of the Sony A9 and the Nikon D850 and I know if it comes out I’m going to not like the price.  I do think a camera like this is coming, I just don’t know who is going to come out with one first.  Sony has already shown most of the capabilities and the A9 shows they are willing to put something out there.  Canon and Nikon both are likely to first try to come out with a fast 20-30 MegaPixel fast mirrorless camera for the upcoming Olympics and are unlikely to bother with a higher resolution one that also has high frame rates at this time since there are likely not that many sport shooters that are currently asking for that.  

A7III and 100-400 GM - how did it come to this?

Sony A7III, 100-400 GM lens and 1.4X teleconverter

There are a few standard combinations of cameras and lenses that are indicative of the type of photography that you do.  Canon 5DSR or Nikon D850 and 50 or 85 f1.2(4) for high res 35mm portraits,  and Canon 1DXII or Nikon D5 and 400 f2.8 for professional sports photography can be considered typical (I know there are plenty of others). Depending on what you do and if you get paid for it there are a number of camera combinations that people think of as apropos for that genre.  For amateur/enthusiast nature photographers it is often the medium resolution but reasonably fast midrange camera and a 100-400 lens.  This combination tends to be the most versatile setup that doesn’t fully break the bank (without going to third party lenses) and Sony took their sweet time providing something that meets the bill. 

I started playing with Sony cameras with the A7R and a wide angle lens for landscape work, I had a 70-200 for longer reach but the combination was not yet a good replacement of my canon setup for nature photography.  Sony finally announce a 100-400 lens and by that time I was using the A7RII which had good (but not great) tracking autofocus.  In single point tracking in good light this system worked well enough, but as you let the system do tracking with larger focus areas it tended to latch onto the background at just the wrong time....especially in backlight situations.  The 5fps was adequate but not great and the buffer was rather sucky.  Still this was a good combination to take out for higher resolution shots as I had my Canon 1DIV workhorse still at that time for the fast action.

Osprey shot from a kayak in Sparkleberry swamp on Lake Marion. 560mm at f/8, 1/2500s, and ISO 800 wide area continuous focus.

I got a good deal on a Canon 5DS and decided to retire my 1DIV but that left me with a bit of a hole for getting any burst shots and now I had no cameras with a buffer that didn’t leave me waiting in certain conditions. 

At that time I didn’t want to spend the money on a 1D upgrade as 20 MPixels felt limiting for the amount of cropping I often have to do and I didn’t want that big of a camera anymore.  The Canon 5DIV was compelling  but still expensive and the buffer was as lacking as the 5DIII.  Sony came out with the A9 that sounded great in terms of features but the price tag was pretty massive for a camera that I wasn’t yet sure if it would be all it was saying it was (turns out it was but I didn’t end up needing to spend the money). This is when the A7III came out with 10 frames per second, a reasonable 24 MPixel sensor with excellent autofocus and a buffer that can hold for the types of burst that I tend to do...quick small bursts but often many of those as things move by.  Oh, and the price was way better than expected for all that came in that package.

Wood ducks shot in crappy light against what used to be a challenging background. 560mm at f/8, 1/640s and ISO 6400, wide continuous focus.

I do a lot of bird photography as well as animals from bear and elk to alligators.  I don’t tend to have the issues that sport photographers have with picking out a single subject with a ball and tracking them through a sea of other similar subjects.  Usually I’m looking at a single subject or if a group I’m trying to get the closest one or expanding to get as many in focus as I can.  From that perspective the A7III wide focus group is amazing picking out and holding onto moving subjects quickly and effectively.  I can change to one of the other modes quickly and the joystick is excellent for quickly moving the points around ( I have tried the touch screen but so far I have found that I accidentally change the point with my face or finger without knowing it and often have to move it again as I bring the camera back to my eye.

Black bear in the cherry trees. Cades Cove, Smoky Mountains National Park. 560mm at f/8, 1/320s, and ISO 3200.

What do I like:

New battery - this was definitely one of the biggest issues with the previous versions of Sony mirrorless cameras and the fix was not just noticeable, it was pretty fantastic for a battery that is still fairly small.  This is really the only major thing that annoys me about the A7RII and the four batteries that I have to carry around with it.

Joystick - accessing focusing points was painful in previous cameras, this is still the easiest way to do so especially when you have gloves on in the cold.

Touch screen - pretty useful for tripod work but so far I have found I accidentally touch it when I don’t want to when my eye is up to the eyepiece….I have found this with all touchscreens from all companies so far. 

Weight - definitely lighter than the canon setup that I have and every pound counts when you are backpacking into a site.

Autofocus - This is likely the best feature of any of the latest Sony cameras, not only is the autofocus fast and the tracking excellent the feedback in the viewfinder makes it so easy to really tell that you are in focus and that the tracking is keeping up.  I can’t wait to see the updates that are supposed to improve on what is already pretty great.

Teleconverter - very sharp, all focus modes work even at f/8, I wish others would provide theirs with a nice little hard case like this.

Tripod mount - easily removable foot but once on it is not going to accidentally fall off.

Programmable buttons - on both camera and lens.  Between this and the function menu I rarely need to go into the menus when shooting.

On the Lens - Copied canon’s new 100-400 on the smooth/tight lock and the polarizer window on the lens shade.  Also copied them on the image quality….excellent on both.

Low light capabilities - I have been able to shoot in light conditions with this setup that I have never been able to before.  

Dual cards - redundancy for both stills and video

Red Morph Screech Owl after dark. 400mm at f/6.3, 1/13s, and ISO 6400. Kudos to the image stabilzer and ability to focus in almost no light.

What would I change:

Viewfinder - works well but I would love to have had higher resolution....I do realize that this was something that they did to reduce cost and differentiate this entry level camera from the more expensive ones. 

Silent shooting - this is a great feature to have and works well for birds at rest or animals moving slowly but I would love to see them improve the electronic shutter for action shooting.  This will likely come to us in the future as the technology from the A9 makes its way down the line over the next few years.

Touch screen - is ok, works well enough from a tripod for touch focus but Sony really needs to make these cameras so that you can do everything either by screen or by buttons/wheels....having multiple ways to accomplish things is very useful for tools that are used in so many different ways.

Vertical grip - I have the vertical grip and extra battery for this setup but have found that I don’t really use it that often.  I am very used to the feel of the Sony bodies now and they fit my hand.  From a power point of view, I just carry one extra battery in my pocket and that is usually enough for a couple days of shooting for me.

Great Egret in flight. 400mm at f/5.6, 1/2500s, ISO 400

Final Thoughts

I’m really looking forward to the updates to the firmware coming this spring to improve ‘real time’ tracking and especially to see how the animal eye focus tracking works.  I’ll very likely write something on that as soon as it is available. 

Although I would still love to have the A9 in place of this camera I am very happy with the extra money for a couple more trips as the A7III has almost everything I need.  Same goes for the A7RIII, if I didn’t have version 2 already I would likely have gone for it but it is really nice to have both a high resolution and a fast camera, both available at the same time. I’ll always be wishing for a little faster and a little more detail but really there is little to complain about with this setup.  If you are looking for a mid range nature setup this is a good step up from the typical apsc camera and 70-300 or even the 150-600 that many people start to get into nature photography.  It definitely is competitive with anything Canon and Nikon have in the price range ( approximately $2000 or so for the camera and $2400 USD for the lens)

Tech News - New release from Olympus

Olympus has been teasing a new camera for weeks now that could very well be a fantastic nature photography tool, but I don’t think that was the most important announcement for nature photographers.

First, the camera. The new E-M1X is a 20MP micro four thirds camera that can shoot 18 fps with full tracking autofocus using 121 on sensor cross type phase detection focus points that work with contrast detect focusing and what they are referring to as deep learning (AI) algorithms for object detection. It can also do 60 fps with the focus locked at the first shot. The with mechanical shutter it can do 18 fps single focus and 10 fps continuous. There are many other features including handheld high res, and other multi-shot modes (exposure bracketing that they are calling live ND). DPReview has already put up some great articles on the specs, sample shots and hands on reviews.

This is all great, but the real interesting thing that came out of this release was a notice that they are building a new 150-400 f4.5 lens with built in 1.25 teleconverter and they also announced a separate 2X teleconverter. From a nature photographers point of view this could be amazing. Equivalent reach of a 300-800 lens in a package that looks at least slightly smaller than Canons 200-400. With the 1.25 teleconverter you have a 1000mm that you can handhold. Depending on the minimum focus distance this could be a fantastic lens for birding (especially small birds) that I would really like to get a chance to use.

The 2X teleconverter will be very interesting as well, but I’ll wait to see on this one since I have yet to be really impressed with any 2X teleconverters from any company.

Who knows, this set of announcements could lead me right back to where I started with mirrorless cameras on the micro 4/3 platform. I do have one request for Olympus…please come out with animal/bird eye detect in your AI algorithms and you will have something for birders that won’t break their backs.