MtManMD Loc: Beaverton, Oregon

I was out at the refuge and found myself amongst flocks of song birds at a parking area. I did some side-by-side shots out the car window, trading back and forth between the R5 full frame body with RF 100-500mm L lens (my go-to combination) and the newer R7 APS-C body with the 800mm f/11 economy lens. How do you think the images compare?

Distance was about 25 ft. or less from subject. The 20 ft. minimum focus distance of the 800mm resulted in a lot less shots with that combo because the birds were close in a small space, and that lens struggles to focus when near the minimum distance.

Handheld with arm resting on a bean bag. I slightly cropped most of the R5 shots so image size would be comparable. Most were shot at 1/3200 and Auto ISO ranged between 2500 and 6400 on most, with Topaz DeNoise often coming to the rescue.

The 800mm f/11 performs pretty well when you have good light. It was slightly sunny, with sunlight through thin clouds most of the time.

Canon R5 Full-frame, RF 100-500mm

(Download)

Canon R7 APS-C, RF 800mm f/11

(Download)

Canon R5 Full-frame, RF 100-500mm. I love those red eyes!

(Download)

Canon R7 APS-C, RF 800mm f/11

(Download)

Canon R5 Full-frame, RF 100-500mm

(Download)

Canon R7 APS-C, RF 800mm f/11

(Download)

Canon R5 Full-frame, RF 100-500mm

(Download)

Canon R7 APS-C, RF 800mm f/11

(Download)

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Today's newest lenses, especially all the mirrorless models, are all exceedingly sharp. It's really down to photographer technique over equipment. Have a look at your settings, both shooting and processing.

I checked the details of only the 2nd R7 image, the second robin (?) that faces to our left. The image reports ISO-6400 at a shooting speed of 1/3600sec. You probably could have obtained the same frozen bird at 1/1600sec and a corresponding lower ISO. The focus looks like it was on the beak rather than the eye, where those perfect details on the tip of the beak would make the image better if they were on the eye. Check your AF position and / or eye-tracking settings for this image.

Look too at your LR export processing. The colorspace is not sRGB, where you should have a user-defined export that standardizes your JPEG output to sRGB, and possibly a lower pixel resolution.

Great comparison set!

MtManMD Loc: Beaverton, Oregon

Thanks Paul. Good information, and I appreciate you commenting. I'm learning! This is the first set of photos where I've used DPP and Lightroom to process. Being retired helps a person to get out and shoot often, and to spend the time to dig deep and learn PP software.

DPP showed the focus point mostly on the eye and was the reason I choose the image. However, I also noticed the eye was not as sharp as the beak after processing. That much telephoto up close is unforgiving for precise focusing.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

AF isn't perfect, no matter how much we expect it to be, now in Feb 2023. At the shutterspeed, it's not that the bird 'moved'. You just shoot in a burst and hope one is perfect and clearly better than the others in the stream. For the LR User Export, just get the parameters, including a standard renaming of the output files into a reusable folder and save as your standard user export. Give a useful name like JPEG-Online.

agillot

For smaller birds , 800mm is it [ that is what is use , 800 f8 older 80 s] .On the other hand large birds , the zoom is more flexible . You can be too close with a fixed 800 on a blue heron , the zoom would fix that .So the ideal would be a 150 / 600 .

junglejim1949 Loc: Sacramento,CA

Interesting comparison and nice set. Thanks for sharing

ejfin Loc: SF Bay area

Thanks for sharing

Nalu Loc: Southern Arizona

I’m inclined to think the zoom is a bit sharper than the “inexpensive” 800mm f/11, but it may have to do with the shorter focal length and operator issues than the quality of the glass.

ncribble Loc: Albuquerque, NM

MT Man thank you for this interesting comparison. To my naked eye, the R5 and 100~500 gave you more distinct images. If available, would not the best comparison have been the R7 with the 100 ~ 400 lens?
Garcias,
Norm

Earnest Botello Loc: Hockley, Texas

Great series, Monte.

Jimmy T Loc: Virginia

Thanks for sharing some great shots and info . . .

suntouched Loc: Sierra Vista AZ

BTW- Not to be picky but that bird is not a Robin but a Towhee.

I have the Canon R7 with the 600 mm f11 lens and the R6 and 100-500 mm lens. I have gotten good enough images with the former and super images with the latter. However at the end of the day the shot that is closest and requires less cropping is usually the keeper. The R6 is very ISO friendly and gets used in low light conditions. My experience has been the R7 is good for images up to about 3200 ISO. After that the exposure needs to be spot on and minimal cropping required to get a clean shot.

MtManMD Loc: Beaverton, Oregon

Thanks for the bird ID. I haven't had a chance to look them up you myself.

I've got some great shots with the R7 and 800mm, but they've been more of an exception rather than consistent. And I love the R5 with the 100-500mm.

MtManMD Loc: Beaverton, Oregon

Thanks Jimmy.

MtManMD Loc: Beaverton, Oregon

Thanks as always Earnest.