in practice equipment advise asked

[Jack van de Berg]

Hello,

(why and) Which Canon and Nikon Full Frame DSLR with clean HDMI output, which maximal Canon/Nikon super tele object (..., 500, 600mm) and which maximal Canon/Nikon tele converter (1.4, 2) are in practice most suitable for perched bird and bird in flight photography in low light conditions (in morning/evening twilight) with/without tripod and at what distance?

(how) do you make use of a monitor (e.g. Atomos Shogun flame with HDMI and XLR input) with focus peaking, zebra stripes functionality for manual bird photography?

(how) do you make use of audio equipment (e.g. Beachtek DXA-SLR Ultra with XLR input) with gain, limiter, VU meter, low-noise functionality for bird photography?

With kind regards,

Jack

[David Stephens]

Your chances for an informed response might be improved in the "DSLR Video Discussion & Critique" forum.

For still photography of both perched birds and birds in flight, in low light, on a full-frame camera, most Canon users here would suggest the EF 600mm f/4L IS II on a Canon 1DX II body, with and without the EF 1.4x and 2.0x TC-III. I'm not sure that I've ever seen a hand held video of a bird in flight, but I guess that it can be done. More likely, even though you could hand hold for stills, you'd use a very sturdy video tripod with a very sturdy fluid head.

[Jack van de Berg]

Your chances for an informed response might be improved in the "DSLR Video Discussion & Critique" forum.

For still photography of both perched birds and birds in flight, in low light, on a full-frame camera, most Canon users here would suggest the EF 600mm f/4L IS II on a Canon 1DX II body, with and without the EF 1.4x and 2.0x TC-III. I'm not sure that I've ever seen a hand held video of a bird in flight, but I guess that it can be done. More likely, even though you could hand hold for stills, you'd use a very sturdy video tripod with a very sturdy fluid head.

Hello,

David Stephens thanks for informing me.

At approximately what maximum distance of the bird are the image quality and pixel-level sharpness excellent and good when using EF 600mm f-4L IS II on a Canon 1DX II body with and without the EF 1.4x and 2.0x TC/III?

Has the Canon EOS 5D Mark III poor or unacceptable dynamic range, image quality, colour depth, noise, FPS, ISO, pixel-level sharpness shortcoming for perched and/or BIF photography in low light when using EF 600mm f-4L IS II with and without the EF 1.4x and 2.0x TC/III?

Kind regards,
Jack

[arash_hazeghi]

Hi Jack, your questions make no sense to me. You may want to ask someone to help translate or rephrase them to ask one question at a time.

best

[David Stephens]

Hello,

David Stephens thanks for informing me.

At approximately what maximum distance of the bird are the image quality and pixel-level sharpness excellent and good when using EF 600mm f-4L IS II on a Canon 1DX II body with and without the EF 1.4x and 2.0x TC/III?

Has the Canon EOS 5D Mark III poor or unacceptable dynamic range, image quality, colour depth, noise, FPS, ISO, pixel-level sharpness shortcoming for perched and/or BIF photography in low light when using EF 600mm f-4L IS II with and without the EF 1.4x and 2.0x TC/III?

Kind regards,
Jack

You're welcome.

The EF 600mm f/4L IS II is an exceptionally sharp lens at all distances, within it's specified range limits, and all f-stops, subject to diffraction at f/16 and beyond. Canon's MTF shows exceptionally flat response and as a practical matter, you will not find a sharper lens. In this focal length, you will not find a sharper lens. It's focus response on the very quick, but that will vary with the body that you use.

In good light, the 5D MkIII has excellent DR, IQ and color depth; however, it will be slow to autofocus when you combine it with 600mm and a 2.0x TC-III, particularly in low light. If low light is a big part of your shooting and you'll be using extenders, then the 1DX II is surely the way to go.

You're asking questions as if you're planning some professional shoot, but have no direct personal experience. Using a 600mm in low light on any body is a very deep dive. I'm worried that you may be getting in over you head.

[Jack van de Berg]

You're welcome.

The EF 600mm f/4L IS II is an exceptionally sharp lens at all distances, within it's specified range limits, and all f-stops, subject to diffraction at f/16 and beyond. Canon's MTF shows exceptionally flat response and as a practical matter, you will not find a sharper lens. In this focal length, you will not find a sharper lens. It's focus response on the very quick, but that will vary with the body that you use.

In good light, the 5D MkIII has excellent DR, IQ and color depth; however, it will be slow to autofocus when you combine it with 600mm and a 2.0x TC-III, particularly in low light. If low light is a big part of your shooting and you'll be using extenders, then the 1DX II is surely the way to go.

You're asking questions as if you're planning some professional shoot, but have no direct personal experience. Using a 600mm in low light on any body is a very deep dive. I'm worried that you may be getting in over you head.

Hello,

David Stephens thanks again for informing me and outing your worries.

To minimalize the chance getting in over my head I contacted Canon’s Professional Services (CPS) department and experienced personal at a pro dealer. I also plan to hire before buying equipment.

Can an experienced photographer get excellent/good image quality and pixel-level sharpness at approximately 50 or even 75 yards when using the Canon 1DX II, 600mm and a 2.0x TC-III for low-light, bird still-photography? I do not mean an excellent/good picture filling composition at 50/75 yards! My emphasis is on quality and sharpness.

I consider waiting for further equipment considerations till August/September this year, because maybe there will be a Canon announcement for the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV (http://www.canonrumors.com/tag/eos-5d-mark-iv/). If there is an announcement I consider asking mr. Chuck Westfall (Advisor, Technical Information, Canon USA) for an update of the 2014 (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/C...omparison.aspx) detailed technical comparison about “Canon EOS 5D Mark IV AF System Compared to the 1D X Mark II and 7D Mark II”.

Kind regards,
Jack

[David Stephens]

For a hummingbird, you want to be inside 20-feet, while for a great blue heron, 50-75-yards is realistic. Your intended bird is likely somewhere in the middle. Out beyond 50-yds, atmospheric conditions come into play, such that heat distortion can make it impossible to get a sharp image.

Here's an eagle at about 70-yards, on a crystal clear afternoon, taken with a 7D MkII, a 500/f4 II and a 1.4x TC-III and then cropped around 75%! So, I think you get the idea that 75-yards is a good way out, even with this relatively large bird:

Eagle With Shad - Explored by David Stephens, on Flickr

If your birds are smaller than this, then I think that 50-yards is too far away, even with cropping. Of course, with video, you won't be cropping, unless it's within the camera. For birds the size of robins, around 20-yards is the limit and you'll want to be well inside of that whenever possible.

Speaking with CPS was a good idea. I also like the idea of renting before you plunge in deep and spend a ton of money. Lots of us shoot stills of birds, but planning a video shoot at long shooting distances is fine, but executing is quite another thing. It requires practice.

[David Stephens]

...
I consider waiting for further equipment considerations till August/September this year, because maybe there will be a Canon announcement for the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV (http://www.canonrumors.com/tag/eos-5d-mark-iv/). If there is an announcement I consider asking mr. Chuck Westfall (Advisor, Technical Information, Canon USA) for an update of the 2014 (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/C...omparison.aspx) detailed technical comparison about “Canon EOS 5D Mark IV AF System Compared to the 1D X Mark II and 7D Mark II”.

Shooting at f/8, with the 2.0x extender on a 500 or 600mm SII Canon lens, the 7D2 and 5D3 aren't even in the same ballpark as the 1DX II as far as AF subject acquisition and tracking go. With a bare lens, the lesser bodies are manageable, but not as consistent. I doubt that the 5D MkIV will be superior in that regard; however, if you can wait, that might be worth waiting to see. Meantime, read Ari's review of the 1DX MkII. In low light and with a 2x, I don't think any other body will come close. I seriously doubt that the 5D4 will come close to the 1DX II's high-ISO performance.