Ready for bird season?

[ebiggs1]

I am and I can't wait to get going again.

[Waddizzle]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"B&H lists the MFD on the "C" at 110.2 inches.  The "S" is listed at 102.4 inches."

OK.  110 inches is 9 feet (110/12=9, give or take).   Not 21 feet or am I missing something?  Certainly not as close as the 100-400mm but not 21 feet either.

---

It was just a guess from "off the top of my head."  Thanks for correcting me.

"  ..  but I doubt you are going to get that close to a bird. ...a wild bird that is !  "

Well, the posted shot obviously says it did happen.  The bird approached me, after circling around me for nearly a minute.

[ebiggs1]

Sorry for the confusion.  But what I meant was 'generally' wild birds will not let you get that close.  Birds in a Zoo or a backyard feeder get used to you and they will let you approach them easier.

This is one of the problems of forums, all that is said may not be  correctly said or understood by the other person.

[KingNine]

Also wanted to mention what a good shot that red winged black bird was!

[Waddizzle]

---

@KingNine wrote:
Also wanted to mention what a good shot that red winged black bird was!

---

Thanks.  This is what a subsequent shot from the same sequence looks like uncropped.

I'm not sure if I could have re-aimed and re-focused the 150-600 "C" fast enough.  He is in the process of turning around, and then lifting off in this shot.

[KingNine]

I would guess you would have been fine but I don't know how your copy you tried worked with your body. My 7d Mk2 in AIServo mode is lightning fast and even if they jump if I"m in focus mode I'm ususally good as the camera just tracks them. But what matters is you have the lens that works for you right? If you have the right tool to shoot the way you want to shoot then what else do you need?  

I shot a similar type of shot with a Red Winged Black Bird and it is one of my favs. I was using a friends 70-300 L when I took this. That grass isn't just lazily leaning right. The wind was howling that day. He was moving all around on that reed. Only a few shots were in focus. 

[ebiggs1]

"...I was not careful to take this image with the same settings..."

You shots are nice there is no doubt.  Good work.   The 100-400mm zoom seems to be just a tad better to me.  But the ISO wasn't the same. ISO 320 vs ISO 100.  And nearly 300mm vs 250mm, give or take, can make that difference.

DId you buy both lenses?  I had the 100-400mil and sold it because of lack of use after getting the big Siggy "S".  I might add if you want a 400mm lens to try the ef 400mm f5.6L prime.  You will love it, I know I do.  It is a unique lens.

[KingNine]

1: Thanks for the kind words on the two shots. I thought the 150-600 was the better of the two in these shots but the composition on my Canon shot was simply better so I too chose it to show people over the shot taken with the Sigma. Why I mentioned that I had not touched saturation was the color rendition of each image. They are booth amazingly tack sharp when I zoom in so there is zero edge there however the colors on the the Sigma lens are very well saturated while the colors on the Canon are more muted. Maybe I should have posted the full size images to really show differences. The little jpeg squares don't really let you see much.

2: I did not buy both lenses. Yes I would love to have the luxury of owning both but buying the Canon (even used) was really going to put a world of hurt on my pocket book (and my relationship with my wife lol). However I was prepared to go to bat to buy it and had already taken steps towards making her amenable to it. After seeing my results with the Sigma and getting images I liked better I could no longer justify the Canon purchase. I had considered buying the 400 prime as well but it is so specialized and I needed more "usability". I take too many shots near marshes where I can't zoom with my feet without swiming with gators haha. From what I understand you don't get any sharper at 400 than the Canon prime.

3: I was going to respond to the 21 feet thing but I see you guys already cleared it up. 9 feet is it for sure. Also, as mentioned by you guys, the speed of focus for recovery I will give to the Canon hands down over my Sig C. The canon is a milisecond faster on initial focus lock and probably half to a full second if focus is lost. I just ran into some issues with it yesterday trying to get some pics of migrating warblers in trees and brush. In the darker undergrowth I noticed it but it wasn't bad. I did think about whether or not the Canon would have recovered quicker or not but like I said it wasn't bad. (I have not used the S lens and will have to take ebiggs word on it's focus prowess)

I did love the Canon for really all aspects. It is such a great lens. It was the price and the extra 200mm of very usuable and croppable reach that I went for. It was mentioned earlier that the Sig might not be that sharp at 500-600 but I do not see that. I am getting tack sharp images wide open with it. I'm not haveing to stop down  to get them. Maybe one day I'll run a comparison test and see for grins if it indeed gets me sharper images but right now I'm very pleased with what I'm getting.

[ebiggs1]

" It was mentioned earlier that the Sig might not be that sharp at 500-600 but I do not see that. I am getting tack sharp images wide open with it."

Truth of the matter is, it is just as sharp.  Only the MTF chart collectors might say differently.  MTF charts have nothing to do with how well a lens does in the real world.  They are how well they do in a selective laboratory environment.  Most of us don't shoot in labs nor do we photograph charts!  Enjoy and use your lens without concern.

But I will add, you shoul notice a bit of an improvement shooting at f8.  I use my "S" most of the time, true, but I almost always use Av set to f8.  However when I pick up the "C" or the Tamron, I do the same.  It seems to me most if not all lenses do better down one stop.  Actually pretty true from either end, wide open or at the smallest aperture (back one stop).  One stop is more better!

I think Canon missed the boat not offering a 150-600mm zoom.  Rumors are there is one coming but you know how rumors go. Nobody on the planet makes better lenses than Canon.  That has always been Canon's strong suit.

Brand-N has a 200-500mm.  IMHO, I would prefer a 200-600mm over the 150-600mm.  How many times or much of the time do you use your 150-600mm at 150mm?  I would wager not often.

[KingNine]

I'm really enjoying this conversation. You are dead on about almost all lenses stopping down even 1/3 stops to get sharper images. Espescially older lenses from a few years back to further back. Lately it seems like Canon is trying to stick to the advertised apperature and making it sharp from begining to end on the more recent editions. Now it looks like Sigma and Tamron are trying to step up their game as well which bodes well for all of us. 

I'm scared to see what price Canon would put on a 150-600!! That baby would probably cost an arm and a leg. Maybe two legs haha. But I could see it being the ultimate bird lens short of their 500 prime. As for the 200-600 I'd be on the fence about it. I do use the lower register some but I guess I could give it up if got me even better performance out of the rest of the lens. At the moment I'm so impressed with it that all I could see improving woudl be focus speed though but I guess I'm still in my honeymoon phase with it though.

[ebiggs1]

"That baby would probably cost an arm and a leg."

According to the rumors, it would be in the same range as the Siggy "S" and ef 100-400mm II zoom.  Remember it is supposed to be direct competition to the crop of 150-600 zooms out there.  It is not an "L" lens.

"A rumor about a possible Canon EF 200-600mm f/4.5-5.6 IS lens appeared on the web. The lens is said to be not an “L” lens, and to have an indicative price of $1,700. A “budget lens”, so to say.

The EF 200-600mm f/4.5-5.6 IS would compete with Sigma’s and Tamron’s super-zoom offerings. Moreover, an external dedicated teleconverter may also be announced. A patent for an optical formula referring to a 200-600mm lens was spotted last year."

If they do actually come out with it, I will have one in a hearbeat.