Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Bird Talk
Thread started 02 May 2017 (Tuesday) 07:02
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Why spend tens of thousands on Canon equipment when a Tamron lens and a Sony 6500 will do as well?

 
Daxiesmum
Senior Member
Joined Jun 2010
Fareham, Hampshire UK
May 02, 2017 07:02 |  #1

I have been looking for lighter weight equipment for some time, and rather drifted down the Sony route mainly because of the Metabones converter that allows me to carry on using familiar good quality lenses.

I went out on a shoot from hides (blinds) with a Canon 1DX and 500 F4, and also a Sony 6500 with Tamron 150-600 G2 (Canon fit) using the Matabones IV.

Here are my results. Which I think are very interesting.

First the Canon combination,

IMAGE: https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2852/33875958530_c247aeb1bf_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/TBv9​fw] (external link)Male Siskin (external link) by Rebecca Hitchcock (external link), on Flickr

And another with Canon

IMAGE: https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2848/34277091686_1480cf50a0_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/UdX4​aq] (external link)Male Siskin on teezle (external link) by Rebecca Hitchcock (external link), on Flickr

Now Sony 6500 + Tamron and converter

IMAGE: https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4165/34245394065_d07684c97a_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/Ub9A​yH] (external link)Goldfinch aggression (external link) by Rebecca Hitchcock (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2881/34204815906_db8c7a17b8_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/U7yC​6h] (external link)Dunnock with a beak full (external link) by Rebecca Hitchcock (external link), on Flickr

IMAGE: https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2836/34204816856_aa7045e642_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/U7yC​nE] (external link)Nuthatch with gob stopper (external link) by Rebecca Hitchcock (external link), on Flickr

I have treated all the images the same in post. All are crops.

What do you guys think? Bearing in mind that I still can move on to the A9 which should be brilliant!

www.flickr.com/photos/​BeckyH1
1Dx,1D Mk3, 5D Mk2, 7D, 100-400, 17-40, 24-105, 300 2.8,500 f4, 180 sigma macro, x2 & x1.4 extenders, 100 2.8 macro, 24-70 2.8 Sigma

LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
TeamSpeed's Avatar
32,221 posts
Gallery: 63 photos
Joined May 2002
Northern Indiana
Post has been last edited 6 months ago by TeamSpeed. 3 edits done in total.
May 02, 2017 07:31 |  #2

Light/ISO/Exposure: I would think there is a big difference shooting at f4 vs f6.3.

AutoFocus: AF between the Canon and Tamron woul be different as well. Shooting BIS (birds in stasis) vs BIF would really start to show the differences in equipment as well.

Going to a system that is proven to be deficient in certain types of action shooting along with a slower lens through an adapter simply isn't going to provide the same flexibility and result as a DSLR and one of the best long reach fast lenses there are. Some results are going to be indistinguishable, others will be noticeably worst, and there will be situations you cannot even shoot with one over the other. I think as long as you are comfortable knowing you have more limitations with the Sony + Adapter + Tamron than you would with the 1DX + 500L, then the new combination should work well.

I don't own any Sony, nor do I own a 1DX/500L, however if I were to look at trying to put together a system where I would be in the wild shooting birds in their habitat, I would want the most flexible kit I could put together. I already would be making a commitment of time and money to shoot this genre, I wouldn't want to be hindered by equipment.

Great pics though, love em!


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Daxiesmum
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Joined Jun 2010
Fareham, Hampshire UK
May 02, 2017 08:06 as a reply to TeamSpeed's post |  #3

Thank you for your comments. You make valid points. In mitigation I have used F8 at the distance I was shooting with the Canon F4, but only F7.1 with the Tamron, which of course has the longer range. So I was getting a better depth of field withe the smaller aperture. Also the Sony has a crop factor of 1.5, whichi s why the subjects are bigger.
A point to consider is that focus is driven by the camera. So either lens performs better driven by the 1DX, than a slower camera. Nonetheless the 7D mkII with the Tamron, hand-held at 600 mm gave me this shot.( I can't hand-hold the 1DX with any long lens).

IMAGE: https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3827/33659578986_4c83dbac96_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/Tho9​9J] (external link)SEO at Farlington (external link) by Rebecca Hitchcock (external link), on Flickr.

The light wasn't very good. In better light I got this shot of a Kestrel flying past quite fast. The closed tail shows it wasn't hovering.

IMAGE: https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3850/33105499092_fa2a9b83e6_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/Srqk​v7] (external link)Kestrel fly-past (external link) by Rebecca Hitchcock (external link), on Flickr

Using the 7D ii and the Canon F4 I got this shot, where the kestrel was hovering.

IMAGE: https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3920/32921123640_5c53bafd3b_b.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/Sa8n​71] (external link)Kestrel hovering (external link) by Rebecca Hitchcock (external link), on Flickr

I agree with you in that I have yet to track a flying bird with any mirrorless camera, as as you imply, you can at least trust Canon to give you the best chance of a sharp image.

A conundrum! I would love to sell my Canon gear and buy lighter weight equipment. If only it was as good!

Becky

www.flickr.com/photos/​BeckyH1
1Dx,1D Mk3, 5D Mk2, 7D, 100-400, 17-40, 24-105, 300 2.8,500 f4, 180 sigma macro, x2 & x1.4 extenders, 100 2.8 macro, 24-70 2.8 Sigma

LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
TeamSpeed's Avatar
32,221 posts
Gallery: 63 photos
Joined May 2002
Northern Indiana
Post has been edited 6 months ago by TeamSpeed.
May 02, 2017 09:14 |  #4

I am not sure if it is common or not to use the 500L at f8 for birds, I would think the f4 is in demand for a reason? I would love to afford a 500L just to try it out and learn it! :)

Regarding AF, it is also driven by the lens itself. The gearing and the communications protocol is both a body and lens feature. In fact some of the latest Canon glass have a closed loop system that helps with locking AF, vs the 3rd party lenses.

The 7D2 is a great body, some call it a mini 1D. :)

How is CA on the Tamron vs the Canon? That could be a minor item to consider as well, especially with birds against a sky background.


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
MalVeauX's Avatar
Joined Feb 2013
Florida
May 02, 2017 09:30 |  #5

Heya,

Well, I have both Canon whites and a Tamron 150-600. The differences are pretty stark honestly. I like both for what they do. The 150-600's really are excellent for their cost and they are awesome for stationary birds and will do a very good job, even compared to a big white combination. But that's stationary birds. You can get away with in-flight shots with the big 150-600's, but they will not be as fast (both AF and focal-ratio) as a big white, especially being driven by a lesser AF system. I've used my 150-600 for in-flight a lot, and while it's doable, it's definitely not its ideal use. It's excellent for the stationary stuff at distance or simply small things. But, I use a 300 F4L IS for BIF for a reason these days, it's simply blazing fast, crazy fast, on my old 7D. Not even a big 500 F4 on a full frame, but a very similar FOV and different pixel density. Regardless, I love the 7D + 300 F4 setup because it's very light weight, yet has aggressive fast AF and a blazing fast AF lens and gobbles up light. I was about to pull the trigger on a 400 F2.8L, but the 13lbs really put me off, I knew I'd never use that for much without a tripod/monopod. So then I almost got the 300 F2.8L because it was lighter and I could use it with TC's still, but the weight was still a put off. So I settled on a 300 F4L IS because it's sharp and fast. I'm often shooting from a kayak, and in the swamps, and as much as I'd love that beast, or a 500 F4, I know that those are not realistic for my purposes when I'm really close to the subject, and need really fast, light weight performance. So, the 7D + 300 F4 is what I use. I still use my 150-600, but I rarely use it for in-flight. It's more of something where I just need the reach and have time to set it all up. For the spontaneous raw speed of something up close, that's what a white lens is for.

The camera matters too. Using a very good aggressive modern AF system, like Canon's, is a world of difference from something else when you're tracking a fast moving bird at close range. Canon still pretty much leads the pack when it comes to aggressive excellent AF and has some of the best big white lenses to match. There's a reason you don't need certain bodies out there and certain lens makers out there, lined up, shooting fast moving raptors in flight taking down prey. So this is why people spend thousands on one of those setups.

But, if you want to shoot stationary wildlife/birds and some large birds in flight at distance, most any modern camera and a big 150-600 will work out just fine actually.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY

2,325 views & 1 like for this thread
Why spend tens of thousands on Canon equipment when a Tamron lens and a Sony 6500 will do as well?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Bird Talk


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00096 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.04s
Latest registered member is Rtruelove
971 guests, 467 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016