cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Which is Which?

Tronhard
Elite
Elite

All that has been done is to drastically downsize the images for posting, in part by using a 1:1 format on both.  These were taken within seconds of each other, of the same bird (a Takahe), in available light, hand-held.

To me there is very little difference between the two images, so one can get the same FoV and general performance by using a large capacity camera, and putting it in crop mode with the short FL lens.

EOS R5, RF 100-500 1.6x crop 567mm(equivalent), f/9, 1/250sec, ISO-3200EOS R5, RF 100-500 1.6x crop 567mm(equivalent), f/9, 1/250sec, ISO-3200R6II, RF 200-800, 570mm, f/8, 1/640sec, ISO-400R6II, RF 200-800, 570mm, f/8, 1/640sec, ISO-400


cheers, TREVOR

"The Amount of Misery expands to fill the space available"
"All the variety, all the charm, all the beauty of life is made up of light and shadow", Leo Tolstoy;
"Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase" Percy W. Harris
14 REPLIES 14

shadowsports
Legend
Legend

Great side by side comparison Trevor!

~Rick
Bay Area - CA


~R5 C (1.0.6.1) ~RF Trinity, ~RF 100 Macro, ~RF 100~400, ~RF 100~500, +RF 1.4x TC, +Canon Control Ring, BG-R10, 430EX III-RT ~DxO PhotoLab Elite ~DaVinci Resolve ~Windows11 Pro ~ImageClass MF644Cdw/MF656Cdw ~Pixel 8
~CarePaks Are Worth It

Thanks Rick.  The two system configurations can yield very similar results, depending on the resolution one needs.


cheers, TREVOR

"The Amount of Misery expands to fill the space available"
"All the variety, all the charm, all the beauty of life is made up of light and shadow", Leo Tolstoy;
"Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase" Percy W. Harris

Tintype_18
Authority
Authority

Very difference to me but the first one seems to be more vivid and crisper.

Edit: Trevor, you have some unique wildlife in your country. Thanks for sharing the photos in the past and for those in the future.

John
Canon EOS T7; EF-S 18-55mm IS; EF 28-135mm IS; EF 75-300mm; Sigma 150-600mm DG

Thanks John.  Yep, NZ does have unique birdlife and reptiles.  I must admit I miss the macro mammals of other parts of the world though!   


cheers, TREVOR

"The Amount of Misery expands to fill the space available"
"All the variety, all the charm, all the beauty of life is made up of light and shadow", Leo Tolstoy;
"Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase" Percy W. Harris

JFG
Enthusiast

HI Trevor,  I agree with Rick, "great side by side comparison".. I also agree with you, there's very little difference between the two images.  The one taken with the RF100-500mm may look a little more vivid, and in my opinion, its only because the red on the beak is showing more, giving it more contrast.   This is  because the bird is looking to its left and showing more of the red on top of its beak.  Meanwhile, in the picture taken with the RF200-800mm, the bird is looking to the right, showing less of the red on the top of its beak, making it seam slightly less vivid (less contrast).  As for the body of the bird and its feathers, the two pictures are  very close with the RF 200-800mm lens showing a bit more depth of field than the one taken with the RF100-500mm.  All in all, the price difference and the additional 300mm, makes the RF200-800mm a very desirable lens, in my opinion.

Cheers,
Joe
Ancora Imparo

"A good photograph is knowing where to stand."
― Ansel Adams

"There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept."
–- Ansel Adams

"You don’t take a photograph, you make it."
--- Ansel Adams

Thanks for your observations Joe:
I think the difference in richness of the beak is, in part because it's in a bright patch of the light on it, whereas the other image has the beak in a shadowed area.  Also, the beaks are not absolutely symmetrically coloured, and one side may be more worn because the birds seem to have a left or right bias as far as digging with their beaks (like our left/right hand biases, but either way, they could be matched if I had made an effort in PP, but then that would have biased the results.


cheers, TREVOR

"The Amount of Misery expands to fill the space available"
"All the variety, all the charm, all the beauty of life is made up of light and shadow", Leo Tolstoy;
"Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase" Percy W. Harris

Trevor,  your side by side comparison is great the way you did it.  No biases whatsoever.  Also, it would be great if you did a side by side comparison between the 150-600mm and the 200-800mm..  Just a thought.  😃 

Cheers,
Joe
Ancora Imparo

"A good photograph is knowing where to stand."
― Ansel Adams

"There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept."
–- Ansel Adams

"You don’t take a photograph, you make it."
--- Ansel Adams

Hi Joe:
Sadly, I can no longer do that specific comparison, as I sold my copy of the Sigma 150-600c.  However, I still have my copy of the Sigma 60-600s, which is a somewhat different beast in many ways, but at the long end has the same FoV, which I did note when using them together.  Would  you be interested in that?


cheers, TREVOR

"The Amount of Misery expands to fill the space available"
"All the variety, all the charm, all the beauty of life is made up of light and shadow", Leo Tolstoy;
"Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase" Percy W. Harris

Hi Trevor, its been a while.  Hope your find yourself in the best of health.  I was just wondering if you got around to doing the comparison between the Sigma 60-600mm and the new Canon 200-800mm..  I'm waiting for Sigma to come out with the RF version of the 60-600 and for Canon to come out with the new R5 Mark Ii..   😆   However in the meantime I'm on the fence about the RF 200-800 f/6.3-9 because of the f starting so high.  I just wonder if one would be able to use it with low sunlight or even at sunset.  One thing is that when shooting birds, I'm now experimenting shooting with my lenses wide open and fastest SS possible, so I would be at 6.3 most of the time and letting ISO make up for the difference.  Let me know your thoughts, they're always appreciated. 

Cheers,
Joe
Ancora Imparo

"A good photograph is knowing where to stand."
― Ansel Adams

"There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept."
–- Ansel Adams

"You don’t take a photograph, you make it."
--- Ansel Adams
National Parks Week Sweepstakes style=

Enter for a chance to win!

April 20th-28th
Announcements