From Nikon to Canon - optimal BIF setup

Alex Wimmer · 10-15-2009, 05:54 PM

Hi,

I have a dilemma and I would like your opinion.

I am photographing birds very often - especially raptors - and going light & frequently is my moto (all gear in a lumbar pack).

Now I am using Nikon system, D300 with Nikon 300mm f/4.0 with tc-14e practically glued on it for majority of flight shots.
While 300/4 is a very nice lens, through time I found many shortcomings at BIF photography - long focus throw, short AF limit, not so really quick AF and of course constant use of tc-14e, which degrades optical quality a bit (it is good to stop to f/8).
With D300 I have no issues, it is a fantastic camera. I am also very happy with other Nikon lenses I own.

Now for the questions.
1) Do you think I will gain much by getting a Canon setup for birding?
I read that Canon 400/5.6 is a great light lens for BIF - 400mm native, light, short focus throw, great 8.5m focus limit, fast AF - great!
What I am not sure is body selection. For me D300 is great and intuitive, but I cannot decide what would be proper Canon equivalent. Sincerely, I find Canon bodies strange to use with that big wheel, small joystick and menus (no offence intended).

2) Of course gear costs and when evaluating Canon gear I calculated I would pay roughly 1/2 of the price (or even more) of a Nikon 300/2.8, which by itself is great lens - but is heavy thus backpack is a must and holding it while waiting for action would be tough. Also I would probably always stop it down to 5.6 or more to gain some more DOF and at 500-600mm (with TCs) I doubt it would be that much handholdable anyway.

So, now you know my dilemma :-). To stick all the way with a comfortable tool (D300) and get a bigger lens, or try something new with the optimal lens.

What is your opinion/advice?

Thanks.

**arash_hazeghi** · 10-15-2009, 08:40 PM

Alex,

Welcome to BPN, what AF settings are you using with your D300?

Alex Wimmer · 10-16-2009, 06:21 AM

I use Continuous High, AF-C, 9/21 Dynamic or single (if against busy background), AF-ON, AF tracking normal/short.

**arash_hazeghi** · 10-16-2009, 07:23 AM

I have not used D300 extensively in the field but with D700/D3 the following setting has worked best

AF-C
Dynamic point AF
a1: release + focus
a2: focus
a3: 9 points (don't pick more than 9 since the AF area will be too wide and may pick other objects)
a4: short or off (with TC choose off and w/o TC choose short or off, this is also a function of the lens) this is the most important setting.
a8: 51 points

I used a D700 with AF-S 200-400 f/4 VR and 1.4X TC for the first time in a 2-day raptor shoot in Half Moon Bay, CA two weeks ago and the combo produced great results when tracking raptors against foliage (northern harriers, red-tailed hawks, white-tailed kites and American kestrels) despite being a zoom and a TC on top of that. I had less luck with a Canon 7D and 400 f/5.6L as well 400 f/4 DO which didn't produce the results I was hoping for.

IMHO, you need a better lens, switching to Canon will not solve your issues if not making them worse unless you buy a 1D(S)MKIII and a 500 f/4 lens or better, anything less than that is not going to be better than D300 AF wise. If you can, get a 200-400 f/4 VR and work on your tracking techniques. I used 300 f/4 AF-S with 1.4X TC on one occasion with shore birds and the results were again better than my expectations but I never tried raptors with it.

Here is one shot of northern harrier taken with D700 + 200-400 + 1.4X TC. http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...ad.php?t=47674

Good luck!

Bill McCrystyn · 10-16-2009, 08:29 AM

Attached Images

Alex Wimmer · 10-16-2009, 01:02 PM

Well, 200-400/4 is too much, too big, too expensive. 300/2.8 is almost that but manageable.

My question was more whether 400mm/5.6 Canon setup is a much better AF/IQ/speed-wise to Nikon 300/4+tc14-e setup or I better save for 300/2.8?

Has anyone used both setups and can directly compare the two lenses/body combinations? Something like "XXD with a 400/5.6 is much better/same as Nikon D300 with 300/4+tc14." Direct comparison.

I need a specialized light BIF tool, that is why I am asking. No doubt 200-400/500 etc can do the job.

**arash_hazeghi** · 10-16-2009, 01:31 PM

Originally Posted by Alex Wimmer

Well, 200-400/4 is too much, too big, too expensive. 300/2.8 is almost that but manageable.

My question was more whether 400mm/5.6 Canon setup is a much better AF/IQ/speed-wise to Nikon 300/4+tc14-e setup or I better save for 300/2.8?

Has anyone used both setups and can directly compare the two lenses/body combinations? Something like "XXD with a 400/5.6 is much better/same as Nikon D300 with 300/4+tc14." Direct comparison.

I need a specialized light BIF tool, that is why I am asking. No doubt 200-400/500 etc can do the job.

If you want top quality flight shots with either Canon or Nikon there is no choice but buying the expensive and heavy lenses, unfortunately.

As for EF 400 f/5.6L, it will focus slightly faster with an XXD body compared to D300 and 300 f/4+1.4XTC but the AF accuracy is not any better and you will get some OOF shots, if you want a real improvement in AF compared to what you have you have to use it with a 1D series camera.
You can also rent the body/lens and try for yourself.

**Desmond Chan** · 10-16-2009, 01:43 PM

Originally Posted by Alex Wimmer

Well, 200-400/4 is too much, too big, too expensive. 300/2.8 is almost that but manageable.

If you're after quality and you're going to stick with bird photo long term, you may end up with something like that one day.

I need a specialized light BIF tool, that is why I am asking. No doubt 200-400/500 etc can do the job.

So can a Tamron 17-55 f2.8, 105f2.8 micro Nikkor, Nikon 70-300. Been there done that, depends on what bird and where they or you are.

Fab shot flying purple martin with that 300f4 +TC combo like yours. If it's good for purple martin, it's good for bigger birds. No? :)

I don't know if there's such a thing as a specialized BIF tool, but for body, perhaps you can get a 7D now. Canon folks say it's THE BIF camera to get, a D300 killer. So there, one part of your problem solved. Then you can just get a 400f5.6 and you're good to go.

Bill McCrystyn · 10-16-2009, 05:53 PM

They said that about the 50D too. Oh well, so sad - too bad :D Like I said before, the only thing wrong with a Canon lens, is it won't mount on a Nikon Camera.

Flavio Rose · 10-16-2009, 07:28 PM

Probably it's obvious, but just in case, Desmond is being sarcastic when he writes that "Canon folks say [the 7D is] THE BIF camera to get, a D300 killer." The 7D has not been very well received for BIF, though as usual the opinions vary greatly.:( See the 7D threads on this board and elsewhere.

**Desmond Chan** · 10-16-2009, 09:07 PM

Originally Posted by Flavio Rose

Probably it's obvious, but just in case, Desmond is being sarcastic when he writes that "Canon folks say [the 7D is] THE BIF camera to get, a D300 killer."

Hey, quite a few posters on dpreview described it that way about the 7D :)

From what I read, it seems like 7D is the best Canon has offered so far. So if Alex wants to switch to Canon and doesn't want a full-frame, it stands to reason that he should seriously consider 7D. And, the high ISO performance of 7D looks impressive though for a crop factor camera. Better than the D300.

Oh, Alex, I use Nikon :)

**Arthur Morris** · 10-21-2009, 06:43 PM

#1: the image above, the Osprey, does not look particularly sharp to my eye.
#2: though pricey and heavier than the old 400mm f/5.6L, the Canon 400mm f/4 IS DO lens is now my everyday flight lens. At just under 4 pounds with the tripod color removed it is much lighter than any of the 300 f/2.8s and the Nikon 2-4. It kills from boats and is great for all around handeld telephoto bird photography and is particularly deadly while crawling and handholding....
#3: according to the online experts none of my cameras can focus and none of my lenses are sharp; amazing then that I am doing so well

**Arthur Morris** · 10-21-2009, 06:44 PM

Originally Posted by Desmond Chan

Hey, quite a few posters on dpreview described it that way about the 7D :)

From what I read, it seems like 7D is the best Canon has offered so far. So if Alex wants to switch to Canon and doesn't want a full-frame, it stands to reason that he should seriously consider 7D. And, the high ISO performance of 7D looks impressive though for a crop factor camera. Better than the D300.

Oh, Alex, I use Nikon :)

New player on the block: the Canon EOS-1D MIII. See the several threads in Photo Gear.

Alex Wimmer · 10-21-2009, 07:02 PM

Originally Posted by Arthur Morris

#2: though pricey and heavier than the old 400mm f/5.6L, the Canon 400mm f/4 IS DO lens is now my everyday flight lens. At just under 4 pounds with the tripod color removed it is much lighter than any of the 300 f/2.8s and the Nikon 2-4. It kills from boats and is great for all around handeld telephoto bird photography and is particularly deadly while crawling and handholding....

AF speed and IQ wise, how do you compare these two lenses? Was AF too slow or something else that you changed to 400/f4 lens. Perhaps IS?
Do you usually stop down to f5.6? Aperture f4 at 400mm seems too thin to me, especially for fast moving/frame filling birds.

**Arthur Morris** · 10-21-2009, 07:43 PM

Hi Alex,

I am not much at comparing; either something works or it doesn't but I will give it a try..

AF speed and IQ wise, how do you compare these two lenses?

Theoretically the edge should go to the f/4 lens for better AF but I do not see a difference. Image Quality is great with both.

Was AF too slow or something else that you changed to 400/f4 lens. Perhaps IS?

That latter. Too old, too shaky. If I pick up a non-IS lens and point it at a bird there seems to be a whole lotta shaking going on....

Do you usually stop down to f5.6? Aperture f4 at 400mm seems too thin to me, especially for fast moving/frame filling birds.

In part that depends on the size of the bird... With large birds that would normally be farther away than smaller species you do not need to stop down as much... When it is sunny I usually do flight at f/8, sometimes f/5.6. I think that d-o-f with flight is over-rated as the birds are not close and their is usually lots of d-o-f due to the distance....

Bill McCrystyn · 10-21-2009, 07:46 PM

Attached Images

**Arthur Morris** · 10-22-2009, 06:49 AM

Bill, I do not at all understand your comments above. All that anyone can ever do is judge an image as presented. Where you live or how close the birds may or may not come have nothing to do with what a presented image looks like. Good photographers make good images wherever they live.

Huge crops yield inferior image quality; I know that from experience....

Bill McCrystyn · 10-22-2009, 09:44 AM

Your assessment of the image was correct - but it is by showing an image under less than ideal circumstances that one can judge the outer extent of what a piece of equipment can do. Almost any camera starting from the Canon 40D up (even the 50D) with a quality lens can get a high feather definition image at 30'. As the old Marine saying goes "When the going gets tough - the tough get going". Pushing equipment to the limits show what their really made of. So far all I see is D7 sensors are still smaller than D300 sensors - there are just more of them, the old Canon game. If indeed they have overcome the noise and AF problems I haven't seen it yet. A D300 "killer", well, we will see. If anyone is in position to show us, it would be you. I would love nothing better than to be proven wrong. Then I would only have the quandry of what lens to use. ;)

**Alan Lillich** · 10-23-2009, 11:12 AM

Attached Images

**arash_hazeghi** · 10-23-2009, 02:37 PM

Originally Posted by Alan Lillich

Arash,

Thanks for the Nikon tips. My wife and I have gotten serious about birds this year and have been struggling with finding the best BIF settings for D300 and D700. We live in Los Gatos - could you please post some tips on finding raptors around Half Moon Bay?

One of our favorite easy spots for sea birds is on the first rise on Hwy 1 south of Ano Nuevo, opposite the Big Creek lumber yard. The birds often head north or south parallel to the shore, just above or just below the cliff top. Here's an example photo, D300, 80-400 @ 210, ISO 400, 1/4000 @ f/8. Please forgive the minimal post-processing, and yes it would be better with some fill flash.

Hi Alan,
The best place in HMB area to look for raptors is Poplar beach and Wavecrest park, although in general it depends on the rodent population, this year there is a concentration of voles and gophers in this area which has attracted lots of raptors which would otherwise be spread all along the coast. The most important factor is time of day, If you want ocean BG you have to be there early in the morning, if you want golden tones and busy BG best time is right before sunset.

As for D300 I don't own one and haven't used one in the field but for D700 the above setting works best in most situations. The autofocus performance depends on the lens as much as it depends on the body, for example the 80-400 is the older "screw-driver" type AF which can't really keep up with fast moving birds. As I recommended to the OP, if you do flight shots as hobby and only occasionally you can get away with a 300 f/4 AF-S +1.4X TC, but if you want to be serious you need to get a 200-400, the performance of this lens is really amazing even with a TC! Worth every penny IMO.

Gull shot is nice too, I like the BG.

Best,
Arash

**Arthur Morris** · 10-23-2009, 07:36 PM

Originally Posted by Bill McCrystyn

Your assessment of the image was correct - but it is by showing an image under less than ideal circumstances that one can judge the outer extent of what a piece of equipment can do. Almost any camera starting from the Canon 40D up (even the 50D) with a quality lens can get a high feather definition image at 30'. As the old Marine saying goes "When the going gets tough - the tough get going". Pushing equipment to the limits show what their really made of. So far all I see is D7 sensors are still smaller than D300 sensors - there are just more of them, the old Canon game. If indeed they have overcome the noise and AF problems I haven't seen it yet. A D300 "killer", well, we will see. If anyone is in position to show us, it would be you. I would love nothing better than to be proven wrong. Then I would only have the quandry of what lens to use. ;)

Let's see if I have this right: you have intentionally posted a bad image to show how good Nikon is while at the same time taking a potshot at Canon. BTW, have you ever used Canon equipment?

Oh, pardon me, I seem to have forgotten that all of the internet experts have clearly stated that none of my Canon cameras can focus accurately and most of my lenses are not sharp. Quite amazing.

Roman Kurywczak · 10-23-2009, 08:07 PM

OK....decided to chime in....the not so good Mark lll had a lot of images in BBC Wildlife Photographer of the year.....as well as countless posts here.....maybe if people were less concerned about which equipment to use......and concentrated more on becoming better photographers......then they would realize how useless this conversation is!.......put any brand in a qualified photographer and the results will speak for themselves......putting up bad images and trying to justify an equipment choice or speak as an authority....is kind of amusing......maybe trying to figure out how to get a FF Osprey image with all that equipment would be a better use of ones talents!

**Arthur Morris** · 10-23-2009, 08:15 PM

Roman, Apparently you did not see my rant stating the exact same thing in one of the two big MIV threads..... There was one guy who said that he was gonna learn to use Manual exposure mode once he got his MIV....

Roman Kurywczak · 10-23-2009, 08:19 PM

Hey Artie,
Fortunately I didn't.....may go over there to amuse myself some more! Good thing the Mark lV wil solve the manual exposure thing!
PS With any luck.....maybe it will also get out of bed B4 Sunrise.....carry itself out into the field.....and take the picture.....all when I sleep and I can get up at noon and PP the image:D.

**Arthur Morris** · 10-23-2009, 08:51 PM

RK, It is worth looking for. I said exactly what you said but my post was a lot longer!

Bill McCrystyn · 10-23-2009, 09:11 PM

Gentlemen, it has been my first hand experience that I have suffered from the same croma noise and missed/dropped AF lock ups that I hear from many other ex and current Canon users with DX formats. Since switching to Nikon I have had none of these problems. I will continue to share this with anyone who asks. Either you guys have magic Canons or we, have all gotten much better at our craft since switching to Nikon. In my case, I can say it is the equipment, as I continue to work on improving my skills.

Roman Kurywczak · 10-23-2009, 09:43 PM

Originally Posted by Arthur Morris

RK, It is worth looking for. I said exactly what you said but my post was a lot longer!

Found it.....much amusement and I agree......but many people are missing the point.....doesn't matter the system......a competent photographer will create great images with either/any system......all the equipment in the world won't make up for practice, practice, practice!

Bill McCrystyn · 10-23-2009, 11:12 PM

Roman what is amuseing to me is that for the last, what, 2 decades, Canon has controled the market and I have followed because they had the best product between the two. Now that Nikon has made a welcome comeback the last couple of years and they have the best product - it's really sounding like sour grapes.

Of course equipment matters, quality matters. If it didn't we would all just use P&S and be done with it. What an absurd notion, and discussion.

Roman Kurywczak · 10-24-2009, 07:53 AM

Originally Posted by Bill McCrystyn

Roman what is amuseing to me is that for the last, what, 2 decades, Canon has controled the market and I have followed because they had the best product between the two. Now that Nikon has made a welcome comeback the last couple of years and they have the best product - it's really sounding like sour grapes.

Of course equipment matters, quality matters. If it didn't we would all just use P&S and be done with it. What an absurd notion, and discussion.

Oh really! I personally think Nikon is excellent equipment and would have no issue using it.....but you are stating that it is better than Canon.......my point to you is......the only thing that seperates an average photographer from a great one......is not the equipment or brand......but the guy behind the camera. If we all only had P&S to use......bet the house that the more skilled photog.....who understands the equipment and knows photography.....will still make a better image than the guy with the more expensive or equal equipment.
Proof......the inferior/flawed in your opinion Mark lll.....has an awful lot of awards in the BBC......so it's not just a few bodies......we always seem to rule out operator error.

Bill McCrystyn · 10-24-2009, 09:50 AM

Well I'm glad I have at least come back up to an average photographer. No where in this thread was it I who said anything in regard a MKIII or any other Canon FX in specific - nor anyone. My only referance has been to DX format and I still stand on my opinion, and that of many others, that croma noise and AF tracking has been a problem reasonably solved by Nikon and - unless - this new D7 has changed something, still is inferior in that regard. I have read a few reviews here at BPN where I respect most peoples opinion (yours and Arties included) and have seen the AF problems from the past as still being evident. Pixel density, important to telephoto use and BIF still remains to be seen. I would like to see some math on the new D7 pixel density. Where is Roger when you need him? ;)

I believe that a better photographer will of course take better pictures, that's common horse sense, nor did anywhere in this thread infer otherwise. The thread started with Alex asking for opinions on what would work "best" for BIF and showed interest in Canon as a possilble fix to his "equipment problem" which I felt would not be the way to go. This thread had nothing to do with anyones personal ability - only equipment potential. I am sorry if anyone read anything other than that into it.

The facts are (check your experts) that Nikon has always been more agressive about croma noise and it's pretty obvious by my image that 51 AF points that cover (in DX format) almost all the sensor works better - than 21 points for open sky BIF.

If you have a problem with these facts - I'm sorry but being a better photographer won't change that.

With all due respect - Bill

Roman Kurywczak · 10-24-2009, 11:20 AM

OK....Bill this is why I don't gnerally get into the Nikon/Canon stuff.......I'm glad you hold me in such high esteem and I am flattered.....but I never said I was better and if I inferred it I do apologize.......my only point ever was.....equipment doesn't matter nearly as much as people think and I feel too much emphasis is put on it.......that's my only point and the last i will say on it!

Bill McCrystyn · 10-24-2009, 12:02 PM

Roman, your point is well taken and I'm sure no one would argue with it.

All I'm saying is - offering a child a calculator does not make him a physicist, but he has a better chance of becoming one rather than being given a pencil.

Now I am sure, I will hear from all the old coots like myself, that they all learned math with a pencil. :D

William Malacarne · 10-24-2009, 12:20 PM

But how many of us old coots are still only using a pencil....:D:D

Bill

Bill McCrystyn · 10-24-2009, 12:27 PM

AND still have a sense of humor! :D

**Jeff Donald** · 10-24-2009, 12:50 PM

Originally Posted by Bill McCrystyn

Roman, your point is well taken and I'm sure no one would argue with it.

All I'm saying is - offering a child a calculator does not make him a physicist, but he has a better chance of becoming one rather than being given a pencil.

Now I am sure, I will hear from all the old coots like myself, that they all learned math with a pencil. :D

I don't remember Aristotle, Plato, Ptolemy or Pythagoras having a calculator. Better equipment doesn't make better photographers. One of my favorite quotes is from Ansel Adams; "There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept." Long before there were light meters in cameras and auto focus, great photographs happened to be created with some much less sophisticated cameras.

William Malacarne · 10-24-2009, 01:07 PM

and your point is that Adams would still be using an old fashioned camera and you are driving a horse and buggy.....:)

Bill

**Jeff Donald** · 10-24-2009, 01:13 PM

There is nothing old fashioned about any camera. I would say they are different, just like watercolor painting is different from oil color painting. They are different art forms, not better or worse. In the right hands either instrument can produce great art/photographs. Adams would probably be using digital cameras as near the end of his career he had moved away from large format in favor of medium format and Polaroid. I don't see any reason he would not be using digital. After all he transition quite successfully from glass plates to film, why not film to digital?

William Malacarne · 10-24-2009, 01:20 PM

I agree 100%, but I also do not see anything wrong with an amateur buying new equipment if it makes his life easier. Why should anyone spend so much time worrying about what someone else is buying or why he is buying it. If one is wasting his own money look at it as helping the economy....now if the Gov't is wasting your money then people should get upset.

Bill

**Jeff Donald** · 10-24-2009, 01:41 PM

Nothing wrong with buying new equipment, in fact it helps the camera manufactures R&D budget, which benefits all photographers. However, the issue is when many photographers (camera users) want to present their opinions on technology, cameras, lenses etc. and spread it over the internet as fact. A healthy discussion is fine, but many camera users present their observations as fact. I think of it similar to S/N ratio in cameras. Forum readers need to be able to separate the signal (fact) from the noise (fiction) in internet posts and in many cases they don't have the education to do so. The end result is readers make false judgements and pass on the misinformation. It then becomes the responsibility of the owners of the forums, readers of forums etc. to challenge the misconceptions in a polite but critical manner and educate the masses.

Bill McCrystyn · 10-24-2009, 07:16 PM

Jeff you forgot Einstien. Now they are old coots - wow. By the way, a couple of those guys made some big mistakes.

Perhaps you can tell me which of my three facts were wrong so that I (and everyone else) may be enlightened here on this forum.

(1) for clear sky BIF 51 point AF which completly covers the sensor is better than 21 point

(2) the D300 has less croma noise than most DX on the market including Canon

(3) pixel density has real value for telephoto users and is higher than Canon. (The D7 remains to be seen)

Or where you just speaking generally about the BPN crowd and not these facts I brought forward ??

Hey William, according to Jeff, Ansul had he changed to digital apparently would not have researched all the new stuff first - just run out and buy the newest thing because he was so good it didn't matter what he bought.

Roman Kurywczak · 10-24-2009, 07:54 PM

OK Bill,
I lied.....it isn't the last comment. As a Canon shooter I will say this.....you are correct on all your facts!......so what......does and editor/publisher/magazine/contest care about chroma noise, pixel density or AF sensors?.........NO!!!.....the only thing that matters is the image......I have never once seen any of the aove mentioned say"Boy, that is some chroma noise on that camera so it doesn't matter that it is a cr** image......that camera made the difference!".........somehow......I think not.....so was it your point to make that the D3 has better chroma noise?......if it was, I admot it as a Canon shooter. Happy?
I personally think that is what you wanted.......but I will ask, do you know your controls and how to deal with all that chroma noise? Let me see where it made a difference to anyone....than what the actual picture looked like. Are you also saying there weren't any good images until the D3 and similar cameras? I think you just like to argue techs......so let me save you the trouble and let you concentrate on taking good images......the NIkon camera bodies have better chroma noise, AF, and pixel density.......us poor saps who are stuck with the Mark lll are ignorant to that fact and have only lousy pictures to show for it......all the ditors and magazine publishers as well as contest organizers are oblivious to the fact of the superior chroma noise of the D3 and should immediately disqualify any image by a Canon product because the obvious chroma noise, pixel density, and AF system difference of the D3 is the only true test of photography.....heck, let's eliminate the image altogether and just post camera specs.
Sarcastically yours,
Roman

Bill McCrystyn · 10-24-2009, 08:26 PM

OK Roman, and next your gonna tell me that you didn't research any of that train load of big dollar equipment you own before you bought it? LOL

It is hard for me to believe that anyone would be held an idiot for asking equipment questions before they drop a lot of money on the table. Apparently we must have a whole community of idiots including myself who daily ask these questions and really would like the answers - or should they just go by who takes the best pictures? Are you serious ?? That's half the beauty of BPN, we have probably half the brain trust of photographers here to answer all these questions that saps like me don't know. Thank God for BPN or I would have wasted a lot of money. The other half of this expieriance is all the lessons learned that help us become better at what we do with the cameras we bought. The dessert is getting to look at all the other images that come through here daily. I don't give a rats patotie (can I say that?) if it's a Canon or Nikon or Lieca or what? I just want (A) the truth and (B) the most for my hard owned money. If any of you got a problem with that - SORRY

Roman Kurywczak · 10-24-2009, 08:57 PM

I agree with most of what you say.....except for one thing......as in most of the arguments above you did not give all the sides to the story and just stated that the Nikon was superior. If indeed you wer being honest with Alex, why didn't you mention that your opinion also came at a premium......about 20% more than Canon. I own Sigma& tamron lenses as well as Canon ones and feel they work for me because of price and performance.......not until the last pane did you mention any other manufacturer. Did you mention to Alex that it is nearly impossible to get a 600mm Nikon VR lens?.......so if we are talking ideal BIF lens......most here would love that lens. For the record.....I tested the 600mm Canon against the Sgimonster 300-800mm.....and decided on the Sigmonster......cost (at the time), warranty, and performance all factored in my decision.......but you know what......these are all just tools......until I learned to use them, they were useless.

I will stand by my philosophy.....the photographer and his knowledge of the equipment he/she own is #1, #2, & #3.....in that order......after that....the equipment.

Bill McCrystyn · 10-24-2009, 09:15 PM

Cheers! Roman, I luv ya.

You did say one thing about me that is true. I need to learn how to get much closer to the birds. I too old to put on a full jimmy suit and crawl like snake. The Egret I had to approach today was across a 200 yard hatchery pond, flat as a pancake and barren as manicured lawn. You will see the shot I got on Avian today after I got about 50 yards from him. They are very shy there because the Fish & Game who run the joint keep shooting them. Makes um a little jumpy. That could be part of it. Of course I'm ugly too so it's hard to say.

Bill

William Malacarne · 10-24-2009, 11:02 PM

I do believe that Egrets are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The Fish and Wildlife site is down now but I did find this......not sure if it is up to date.

http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/Re...a/mbtandx.html

Bill

Bill McCrystyn · 10-24-2009, 11:28 PM

Bill - A guber is a guy who sits on his front porch with a confederate flag draped proudly behind him and eats peanuts and drinks beer all day.

This is Arkansas - they don't care about no stinking federal law - Wait, I hear a banjo in the distance. Whats that pig sound I hear?

William Malacarne · 10-24-2009, 11:38 PM

You didn't say it was a guber shooting them you said it was Fish & Game and they are accountable for their actions.

Bill

Geraldo Hofmann · 10-25-2009, 03:16 AM

I went through a couple of different camera-bodies some made my life as a photographer a little easier than others but honestly; none of them made me a significantly better photographer. (you may have a look at different camera-body examples) When I dropped my Canon 50D with the infamous 100-400mm in the water I worked with the Nikon D300 and the 300mm 2.8 + 1.4 from a friend for a while, my pictures looked the same my keeper rate was lower but only because I wasn’t used to the camera-body. I am used to the handling of my Canons and if somebody is used to the handling of Nikon the first weeks after switching will be a hard time.
Oh and btw I think the 50D is a fantastic camera for BIF and it has a higher pixel density than most other APS-C cameras, something I appreciate while working in Mississippi where the birds are as shy as in Arkansas.

To make a long story short if you really like how your Nikon handles go for the lens … if you think you like the handling of the Canon more go for the Canon … the 400mm 5.6 is a great BIF lens.
Geraldo

**Jeff Donald** · 10-25-2009, 06:45 AM

Originally Posted by Bill McCrystyn

Hey William, according to Jeff, Ansul had he changed to digital apparently would not have researched all the new stuff first - just run out and buy the newest thing because he was so good it didn't matter what he bought.

In Adams' autobiography he told Edward Weston that any modern lens was well enough corrected and stopping down only gave more Depth of Field. That was in the '30's and lens designs have only improved. Of course, just like 80 years ago, a lens is usually at its best optically two stops down from maximum aperture. Adams went on to say "The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it."

I've told these stories for decades in the photography classes I've taught/teach. The women in the classes seem to get it, the men mostly don't and continue to ask numerous gear related questions in search of the exact camera/lens combination that will make them a "great" photographer. To their logic, if I had the same pots and pans as Paula Deen or Julia Child I would be able to cook as well as they do.

The logic is of course flawed. The gear is only a small part of the total equation of taking/making great photos. I'm also a firm believer of the right tool for the right job and certain types of equipment is almost mandatory for certain types of photography. Just as in painting, certain brushes or papers/canvas are required for certain techniques or looks.

The road to becoming a better photographer is not paved with hardware. The vast majority of photographers would greatly improve their images by spending the money devoted to constant upgrades and applying it to photography workshops, seminars, classes etc. Workshops provide great opportunities to learn from fellow photographers and in my opinion is the quickest way to improve as a photographer. I've had students attend some of Artie's IPTs and the improvement in their photography is immediately evident. It really brings a students skill level up a notch or two. This is in sharp contrast to the many student's photography level I see that actually declines when they acquire a new camera or even lens.

My best advice is, know your gear, know your subject and follow the light.

**John Chardine** · 10-25-2009, 07:35 AM

As with almost all dichotomies (in this case photo gear-photographer, or nature-nurture etc) the real answer is somewhere in the middle. If you try to make a Julia Child omelette with the wrong pan, it just won't work.

Thread: From Nikon to Canon - optimal BIF setup

Thread Tools

Display

From Nikon to Canon - optimal BIF setup

LETS COMPARE

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions