Printable View
Greetings,
I own a 1DX and recently purchased a 600mm f/4 II, as I'm gearing up, literally, for the next migration season at the Bosque. Between now and then I'm going to buy and learn to use another camera body: the 1DX II or 5DS R. I'm looking for advice about which to buy next. Thanks.
What is missing from your 1DX that makes you want to buy a new camera?
Arash, thank you for taking the time to reply. And good question.
I just came back from a practice shoot at the Rio Grande Nature Center State Park. And used the 2X TC to get reach across a pond. More focus points would have helped. I want the quicker focus acquisition I've read that the Mark II offers. I've read mixed reports about increased dynamic range and low light capabilities. If those are available, I'd like to take advantage of those as well.
And, I want the latest and greatest.
Best.
Hi Jim,
If you need to use a 600mm with a 2X TC most of the time then you have to rethink your strategy as you are shooting in a non-ideal location (birds way too far). I have a feeling that instead of a new camera you need instructions to improve your skills and field craft. Consider taking a workshop with someone skilled in this art. The gear you already own was the best available until a few months ago and certainly capable of making world-class images.
The latest and greatest doesn't make you a better photographer unfortunately :S3:
hope this helps
I'm with Arash on this one. You didn't mention anything that the 5DsR is better at. The better AF of the 1D X MkII is great, but it's not earth shattering. The 5DsR is wonderful for landscape, travel and portraits, but you don't seem to have any issues in that regard. Finding ways to get closer will probably improve your photography more than any additional piece of equipment.
Thanks, Arash. I think David Salem knows someone in the Albuquerque area who might be a good teacher. My plan is to get whatever new gear I'm going to get, learn it and take instruction as the migratory birds begin to arrive in the fall. Meanwhile I'm shooting anything I can find. I was at the Bosque last weekend photographing grackles eating crayfish! And gear for its own sake is fun!
Hi, David. Pixels. That's the big difference in the 1DX and 5DS R, of course. I've been following Artie's use of the 5DS R and like what it's doing for him. I plan to use it primarily for non-BIF shots. Yep. Getting closer is probably my biggest issue. And I think Arash's solution is likely the best: workshop(s). I'm eager to get back to southern California next spring and try to set up some days with David Salem to learn how to shoot raptors. I'm new to this. And yes, I have good gear, and my gear is much better than my skill. I'm willing to work on that.
My gratitude to both of you.
An old man and his toys. I have it on good authority that I cannot take it with me. So thanks, fellows.
If you "must" buy something new, then the 5DsR is more different than what you already have. The pixels will be great for your non-BIF targets and the low fps will not be a big problem. Try it for landscape and travel, where it really shines.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Keener
David, With all due respect, the 5DS R is a great camera body for birds and wildlife... There have been lots of examples on my blog and some here on BPN for at least about nine months. There will be a feature by skilled photographer Patrick Sparkman on the blog soon on why he prefers the 5DS R to the 1D X MARK II for birds. Arash will love it :)Quote:
Originally Posted by David Stephens
That said Arash's new 1D X Mark II peregrine stuff is beyond amazing.... Different strokes.
a
Jim, You need to sign up for an IPT asap before you develop too many bad habits! See them all here: http://www.birdsasart.com/include-pages/ipt-updates/Quote:
Originally Posted by arash_hazeghi
a
Thanks, all.
Are you saying that the 5DsR is not a great body for landscape and travel? I suggested that if money were burning a hole in his pocket, then this would be the one to buy. Still, buyer beware if planning to shoot BIF with it. It's slow fps is a big draw back for many of us ordinary shooters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Morris
David, I hadn't wanted to reply before to "must", but this seems a bit much. I appreciate your observations about the cameras. That's why I asked the question. Thank you. As for money and pockets, perhaps you wrote in haste. Best regards.Quote:
Originally Posted by David Stephens
Hi Jim. I think I'm the 'someone in the Albuquerque area who might be a good teacher.' I own both the 1Dx2 and the 1Dx. And I recently spent a week with the 5DS R. Also I'm quite familiar with the Bosque as I've led workshops there for years. The 1Dx is a very good camera (more than good enough for the Bosque IMO), but the 1Dx2 bests it in a number of areas. The new camera has significantly better low light AF, all focus points active at f/8, a higher frame rate, a much larger buffer, and focus points that stay illuminated during AF. The 1Dx2 also does a much better job with shadow detail. The pixel count is marginally higher and high ISO noise is slightly better. If you're looking to replace your 1Dx, the 1Dx2 is the camera I'd recommend (especially if you're planning on doing a lot of BIF photography). If you're looking to add a second camera body to your bag I'd go with the 5DS R; those extra pixels can really make a difference for you when you're photographing perched birds. But high ISO noise, a low frame rate, and huge RAW files are the 5DS R's Achilles heel. It's not nearly as versatile a camera as either the 1Dx or the 1Dx 2, but it makes a great second body.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Brown
You are indeed. I have already signed up for the Bosque workshop with you and your two partners. Think I might have been the first. I'm looking forward to it very much. I sold a 1DX to a fellow who says he has gone on shoots with you. I won't print his name here without his permission, but he spoke very highly of you and the others. I think he went on a Costa Rica workshop.
I'm going to do pretty much what you suggest: 1DX II as primary camera and the 5DS R as one of the backups. Lenses for birds: 600mm f/4 II for long reach and the 300mm f/2.8 II for intermediate work. Any other ideas?
Thanks for checking in.
Jim
Read Ari's review where he uses the sweet 400/f4 DO II with the 2.0x TC-III on the 1D X II before you decide on the shorter lens. That 400mm is one sweet lens and Ari reports that the AF is stunning on the 1DX2.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Keener
As for my use of "must", I didn't mean it in an offensive way. I was attempting sarcasm about the disease many of us have, when money burns a hole in our pocket. Nothing wrong with that. Sorry if I offended.
Thanks for the input about the 400 f/4 DO II, David. You certainly agree with the experts, and it is something I'm considering. I can get emotional about gear, and the 300 f/2.8 II is one of my dream lenses. Plus the extra stop of light might be important in making the photographs for which I'm buying a 300 or 400: the early morning at the crane ponds at the Bosque. There are some extraordinary images to be made there, I believe, and the lighting is difficult. Again, thanks for the thought.
Jim, with either the 1DX2 or the 5DsR, f/4 is going to be plenty, thanks to the good high-ISO performance of the 5D and the stunning high-ISO performance of the 1D. The 300 and 400 are both Series II, so you'll full AF benefit from the 1DX2 with either.
I understand your attraction to the 300/2.8 II, as I had that same feeling, but then I shot with the new 400 f/4 DO II and was blown away. Teamed with the 1D X2, it's pretty much the ideal BIF lens, IMO, based on my limited shooting with lesser bodies and Ari's testimony with the EF 2.0x TC-III. I shoot my big white hand held and going to this neat little lens, with stunning IQ, it seems like a feather. Oh, and 33% more reach over the 300mm is a very important consideration for BIF.
Of course you could always wait for the rumored 600 f/4 DO!!!
David, you make a great case.
Doug, I'm 72. Wait?
Know what? I think you're correct. I'm borrowing the 400 DO from Canon next week. Thanks for staying with me regarding this.Quote:
Originally Posted by David Stephens
Don't forget that 33% more reach means that the subject with the 400 will be 1.77 times larger with a 400mm than with the 300mm. Why? The area of the subject is a function of the square of the focal length. As you well know, Jim, I am selling my 300 II and going with the 400 DO II. As early as the original The Art of Bird Photography I wrote, "Always choose a longer slower lens for bird photography over a faster shorter one..."Quote:
Originally Posted by David Stephens
Well, the best minds agree. I'm highly likely to purchase the lens soon.
