White-crowned Sparrow (immature)

[Kurt Bowman]

I was able to finally get a loaner from Canon to try out the R5. I just got it late yesterday and decided to try some backyard photography this morning. This was a frame from my first action sequence with this camera and I have to say I really think the animal eye detection rocks on this camera.
Thank you Brian Sump for spending some time with me to go through your preferred AF settings!!
Canon R5
600mm f/4
1/8000 at f4, ISO 1600

[arash_hazeghi]

nice frame Kurt, love the BG, to my eye the head doesn't look quite tack sharp as if the AF locked on the body? it's not from shutter speed because it was fast enough. Was the RAW sharp ?

there are some e-shutter rolling artifacts on the leading edge of the primaries.

TFS

[John Mack]

Going to have to agree with Arash. Can't beat that timing though.

[Kurt Bowman]

I have to admit Arash, I am a bit confused. It looks sharp on my monitor, so I am not sure how to respond. Maybe my eyesight is starting to go? I am saying that honestly and not to be a smart butt. Plus even if the focus point fell to the body, the bird is parallel and the head is on the same focus plane as the body. Even at f4 that should be enough DOF at my distance to have a sharp head. What am I missing? Either way I don’t want to sound ungrateful, because I really appreciate the critique. I just wish I could figure out why I’m not seeing the same thing.

[arash_hazeghi]

Hi Kurt it could be simply a sharpening issue that is monitor dependent that’s why I asked if the RAW was sharp. Is the RAW was sharp tweaking the post processing sharpness can easily fix the issue.

I have had plenty of shots in the past where body is tack but the head is soft even when the bird appears perfectly parallel so that’s possible.

cheers

[dankearl]

It is sharp enough but not TACK sharp so I can see what Arash is referring to. I thought the same thing when I first looked.
I have see several of the "eye detection" shots where it does not seem like the focal point is on the eye..
Not getting into Camera wars but the old fashioned GRP Nikon setting seems to get focus pretty well...
now that the rolling shutter thing has been pointed out, I look and see it on a lot of shots...I would not use that setting.

[David Roach]

Pretty much perfect and beautiful canvas for me. The complimentary colors really work. TFS

[arash_hazeghi]

It is sharp enough but not TACK sharp so I can see what Arash is referring to. I thought the same thing when I first looked.
I have see several of the "eye detection" shots where it does not seem like the focal point is on the eye..
Not getting into Camera wars but the old fashioned GRP Nikon setting seems to get focus pretty well...
now that the rolling shutter thing has been pointed out, I look and see it on a lot of shots...I would not use that setting.


Hey Dan rolling shutter is not a setting. It is a camera limitation. The sensor read out is not fast enough so when something is moving rapidly it creates stair case like artifacts. Looks like canon has not been able to solve this issue. Granted pretty much all other MLIC cameras have it with the exception of the Sony A9 series.

I think it’s not a big deal for small JPEGs but it will certainly show up in large prints or when displaying full size on larger screens. Using mechanical shutter can help but then it negates the blackout free EVF experience

[Kurt Bowman]

Hey Dan rolling shutter is not a setting. It is a camera limitation. The sensor read out is not fast enough so when something is moving rapidly it creates stair case like artifacts. Looks like canon has not been able to solve this issue. Granted pretty much all other MLIC cameras have it with the exception of the Sony A9 series.

I think it’s not a big deal for small JPEGs but it will certainly show up in large prints or when displaying full size on larger screens. Using mechanical shutter can help but then it negates the blackout free EVF experience

Arash, do you think this is something which can be fixed via firmware upgrade? Asking because I own the A9ii now and am thinking about going back to Canon. It’d be nice to know if it’s something they can fix through firmware. I like the results of the Sony, but selling all my Canon gear seems daunting and I don’t like the placement of the focal point button on the Sony. I use back focus and find myself accidentally hitting it and moving my focal point causing missed shots. I feel torn.

[arash_hazeghi]

Arash, do you think this is something which can be fixed via firmware upgrade? Asking because I own the A9ii now and am thinking about going back to Canon. It’d be nice to know if it’s something they can fix through firmware. I like the results of the Sony, but selling all my Canon gear seems daunting and I don’t like the placement of the focal point button on the Sony. I use back focus and find myself accidentally hitting it and moving my focal point causing missed shots. I feel torn.


Hi Kurt, no this is a fundamental hardware shortcoming, it needs a new sensor design from ground up.

Switching gear is pretty expensive I agree and may not be worth it... one thing I wouldn't myself do is buy a Canon EF 600 III if you don't have one already. It's only a matter of time maybe less than 2 yrs, before an RF 600mm f/4 comes out and the current lens will easily lose 50% of its value on the used market and would be difficult to sell as all folks with $ to spend will have readily moved to MILC....

BTW, unlike DSLR's with MLIC back focus method doesn't make a lot of sense...

cheers

[Mike Poole]

Hi Kurt, no this is a fundamental hardware shortcoming, it needs a new sensor design from ground up.

Switching gear is pretty expensive I agree and may not be worth it... one thing I wouldn't myself do is buy a Canon EF 600 III if you don't have one already. It's only a matter of time maybe less than 2 yrs, before an RF 600mm f/4 comes out and the current lens will easily lose 50% of its value on the used market and would be difficult to sell as all folks with $ to spend will have readily moved to MILC....

BTW, unlike DSLR's with MLIC back focus method doesn't make a lot of sense...

cheersSorry for the thread spoil kurt, ive only viewed on my phone so far so not fair to comment on the shot, but this is to Arash -

Arash, I know you're not an R5 user but im about to be (!) - are you now using the shutter button for AF? Is there a specific advantage?

Mike

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

[arash_hazeghi]

Sorry for the thread spoil kurt, ive only viewed on my phone so far so not fair to comment on the shot, but this is to Arash -

Arash, I know you're not an R5 user but im about to be (!) - are you now using the shutter button for AF? Is there a specific advantage?

Mike

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk


I always used shutter for focus, I want the camera to be focusing all the time.

[Arthur Morris]

Hi All,

Interesting discussion. I am not sure if the first primary is damaged or the result of rolling shutter. Note the other damaged primary feather.

Mike --There is no such thing as Eye Detection AF. Face detection plus Tracking AF-C is capable of tracking bird's the eye with a tiny box. But, having seen the work of Brian Sump with the 600 III/R5 with the adapter, and many of the raws file of Geoff Newhouse with the R5/RF 100-500, and having used (and recently purchased) an R5/RF 100-500 myself, I can tell you with 100% confidence that Face detection plus Tracking is hit or miss not only for flight photography but for relatively slow-moving birds at close range. Yes, the technology is remarkable but it is far, far from perfect.

Is FD + Tr amazing? Yes. Is it science-fiction like? Not at all. If my life depended on making a single sharp flight shot I would want only an a9 ii in my hands. That said, the R5 offers the best AF of any body ever (but possibly, for the 1DX III which I have never used).

As always, I think that the very best results with FD + Tr AF-C will be achieved by those with lots of strength, great hand-eye coordination, fast reflexes, excellent stamina, and superior fine motor control.

Not to mention that it is possible to do everything right, have the system track the eye of a bird in flight, and wind up with a soft on the eye image.

Kurt: which 600? Which adapter? What AF method were you using? If you have DPP 4 (it's free), please let us know where the AF point was. The feet are incredibly sharp, sharper than the face and eye.

BTW, this image is really neat and plenty sharp enough for web presentation.

with love to all, a

[arash_hazeghi]

Artie this is not damage it is a text book example of rolling shutter, maybe you need zoom a bit to see it

rolling shutter artifact refers to horizontal bands in the image, it will look like stair-case artifacts at the edges ...


189749

[arash_hazeghi]

Hi All,

Interesting discussion. I am not sure if the first primary is damaged or the result of rolling shutter. Note the other damaged primary feather.

Mike --There is no such thing as Eye Detection AF. Face detection plus Tracking AF-C is capable of tracking bird's the eye with a tiny box. But, having seen the work of Brian Sump with the 600 III/R5 with the adapter, and many of the raws file of Geoff Newhouse with the R5/RF 100-500, and having used (and recently purchased) an R5/RF 100-500 myself, I can tell you with 100% confidence that Face detection plus Tracking is hit or miss not only for flight photography but for relatively slow-moving birds at close range. Yes, the technology is remarkable but it is far, far from perfect.

Is FD + Tr amazing? Yes. Is it science-fiction like? Not at all. If my life depended on making a single sharp flight shot I would want only an a9 ii in my hands. That said, the R5 offers the best AF of any body ever (but possibly, for the 1DX III which I have never used).

As always, I think that the very best results with FD + Tr AF-C will be achieved by those with lots of strength, great hand-eye coordination, fast reflexes, excellent stamina, and superior fine motor control.

Not to mention that it is possible to do everything right, have the system track the eye of a bird in flight, and wind up with a soft on the eye image.

Kurt: which 600? Which adapter? What AF method were you using? If you have DPP 4 (it's free), please let us know where the AF point was. The feet are incredibly sharp, sharper than the face and eye.

BTW, this image is really neat and plenty sharp enough for web presentation.

with love to all, a

I think you hit the nail on the head. This is a tough shot to get, even with all the skills you mention.

I had the opportunity to use an R5 in the field, (I borrowed it). It had the 400 DO II and the TC attached, one of my favorite lenses when I had Canon. The so-called eye-tracking AF was all over the place, all it took was for the bird to move its head away for a moment and then the camera seemed like it was on crack cocaine! a half baked gimmick if you ask me.

Honestly I don't take Canon's claims seriously anymore after the so many years of using the 1D cameras, their product simply does not do what they promise it does, in a consistent repeatable way that is. They just can't do it. I could be wrong since I haven't seen Kurt's RAW file but I also think the camera really locked on the feet/body rather than head although it may show the square on the head area.

:)

[Arthur Morris]

Arash, Many thanks for the rolling shutter explanation in Pane 14. I agree on the FD + Tr being all over the place for birds in flight but for close subjects it is usually amazing provided folks have the correct set-up.

much love, a

[Kurt Bowman]

Hi All,

Interesting discussion. I am not sure if the first primary is damaged or the result of rolling shutter. Note the other damaged primary feather.

Mike --There is no such thing as Eye Detection AF. Face detection plus Tracking AF-C is capable of tracking bird's the eye with a tiny box. But, having seen the work of Brian Sump with the 600 III/R5 with the adapter, and many of the raws file of Geoff Newhouse with the R5/RF 100-500, and having used (and recently purchased) an R5/RF 100-500 myself, I can tell you with 100% confidence that Face detection plus Tracking is hit or miss not only for flight photography but for relatively slow-moving birds at close range. Yes, the technology is remarkable but it is far, far from perfect.

Is FD + Tr amazing? Yes. Is it science-fiction like? Not at all. If my life depended on making a single sharp flight shot I would want only an a9 ii in my hands. That said, the R5 offers the best AF of any body ever (but possibly, for the 1DX III which I have never used).

As always, I think that the very best results with FD + Tr AF-C will be achieved by those with lots of strength, great hand-eye coordination, fast reflexes, excellent stamina, and superior fine motor control.

Not to mention that it is possible to do everything right, have the system track the eye of a bird in flight, and wind up with a soft on the eye image.

Kurt: which 600? Which adapter? What AF method were you using? If you have DPP 4 (it's free), please let us know where the AF point was. The feet are incredibly sharp, sharper than the face and eye.

BTW, this image is really neat and plenty sharp enough for web presentation.

with love to all, a

Hi Artie,
I used the 600mm f/4 IS version II and the adapter they sent me was the one with the focal ring. I don't have the paperwork in front of me so I am not sure of the specific model but can let you know. I was using Servo, AF Face for animal, eye detection was enabled and made a couple small adjustments to case 2. I basically applied the AF settings Brian shared with me. I will look into getting DPP to find the focal point and let yolou know where it shows up.

[Mike Poole]

Hi All,

Interesting discussion. I am not sure if the first primary is damaged or the result of rolling shutter. Note the other damaged primary feather.

Mike --There is no such thing as Eye Detection AF. Face detection plus Tracking AF-C is capable of tracking bird's the eye with a tiny box. But, having seen the work of Brian Sump with the 600 III/R5 with the adapter, and many of the raws file of Geoff Newhouse with the R5/RF 100-500, and having used (and recently purchased) an R5/RF 100-500 myself, I can tell you with 100% confidence that Face detection plus Tracking is hit or miss not only for flight photography but for relatively slow-moving birds at close range. Yes, the technology is remarkable but it is far, far from perfect.

Is FD + Tr amazing? Yes. Is it science-fiction like? Not at all. If my life depended on making a single sharp flight shot I would want only an a9 ii in my hands. That said, the R5 offers the best AF of any body ever (but possibly, for the 1DX III which I have never used).

As always, I think that the very best results with FD + Tr AF-C will be achieved by those with lots of strength, great hand-eye coordination, fast reflexes, excellent stamina, and superior fine motor control.

Not to mention that it is possible to do everything right, have the system track the eye of a bird in flight, and wind up with a soft on the eye image.

Kurt: which 600? Which adapter? What AF method were you using? If you have DPP 4 (it's free), please let us know where the AF point was. The feet are incredibly sharp, sharper than the face and eye.

BTW, this image is really neat and plenty sharp enough for web presentation.

with love to all, a

Cheers for your thoughts Artie,

I have to say, they choice to go with the R5 was driven purely by finances - money no object I'd have chosen Sony but I wasn't brave enough to tell Mrs. P she couldn't have a new kitchen because I (as a hobbyist) needed a better keeper rate for BIF!. Interesting to see the discussion on the rolling shutter. Hopefully one day Canon will eliminate the issue.

[Mike Poole]

Kurt - apologies again for the thread interruption.

Having had a better look at the frame, I agree with everything already raised. Great timing and for web use this works well. Great colours and light, love the wings up pose. I'm sure I'd have posted it if it were mine

Mike