I remember being genuinly mad at my R7 for focusing on the eye of a cow underneath the bird I was trying to focus on. Extremely logical focusing from the point of view of the camera ;)
I totally agree with everything you said. I have been doing exactly the same as you mentioned about the AF. Many people think they don't need to do much to get great images once they bought these camera and lenses. Camera AF doesn't know what we think. They are doing what they are programmed to do. One thing you didn't mention is that when you are way out of focus, it is hard to pump back the focus especially with mirrorless system. What I do is quickly focus something that has a lot of contrast and is close to me, then re-focus your object.
Everything you just said was vividly demonstrated by a recent trip to Ecuador to shoot hummingbirds and trying to capture these tiny, rapidly moving birds dancing in and out and between the flowers and foliage was a focusing nightmare for my R5 and kept me shuttling between the eye, zone, and single point back focus buttons! Thanks for the set up recommendations. Catherine Dalessio
Great discussion. I was at first disappointed with the tracking mode on the R7, but realized I was asking too much of the system. I primarily shoot in very dense rainforest, so my scenes are usually very busy and the camera was often not picking up the bird. I have switched to using spot first to get the focus on the bird, or at least close. Then switch to tracking, which then has a much better chance of locking on. If the bird is way out in the open, I can often go directly to animal tracking, but otherwise I always try to help the camera by getting the focus close first with spot.
Hello Ron, I hope that you are well. The last point you made, transitioning to RF lenses is very, very important. I have had the R5 for a year now. Shooting with the EF 600 f4 via the EF/RF adaptor was convenient but the weight of the Gen 1 EF 600 f4 IS was really a burden as lots of missed opportunities have happened. When I acquired the RF 600 f4, the match as you said, opens up many new opportunities. AF is lightning fast. IS/IBIS is rock solid. Also with the EF lens, the AF system made a certain level of noise as it was activated until it shut off. The RF lens is silent!!!! Even with the teleconverters, 1.4X and 2X, it is still fast. Great video!
It would be nice to use all rf lenses but some of us just can't. We are just lucky to have the camera body. That being said the tips you gave us are lots of help thanks.
Hey, Ron, I just purchased a new R5 as my first mirrorless body after years of experience with various Canon DSLR's; I'm excited about it. But I have a very significant investment in EF glass, including my favorite bird lenses: EF 500 II (+ TC's) and 100-400 II. Hearing what you said about EF vs RF lenses gave me pause, so I dialed up Canon until I was kicked upstairs to the top tech support guy in the US. He emphatically stated, as a very knowledgeable Canon veteran and a very experienced photographer himself, that there is ZERO difference between EF and RF lenses. He said there is ZERO AF performance hit when using the EF-R adapters. And "anything you hear on UA-cam to the contrary" is complete bunk. Now, certainly the motors and IS have improved a bit over the years, and it's likely that RF L lenses use the best of them, but newer EF lenses did too. I've had fantastic luck and results with my EF glass and after hearing his advice to "buy an adapter and forget about it," I'm satisfied with the lenses I already own. That said, any new lenses I might acquire will be RF as that is clearly the future. Bottom line, a great piece of glass is a great piece of glass, and the latter EF lenses were well built, well sealed, well stabilized, and powerfully driven.
That is very interesting, but I have to disagree. I shoot some very difficult subjects in small, fast-flying birds and I shot my EF 600 f/4 II and 100-400 II for quite a while on both the R5 and R3. They performed as well as they did on my DSLRs such as the 1Dx II. Then, I was able to shoot a 100-500 and RF 600 f/4 for several days shooting flying sea ducks. I had my EF 600 and the RF 600 sitting side by side and switched between them for 3 days of shooting where I shot thousands of images with each. There is no question that the RF lens did much better on AF speed and accuracy both naked and with both TCs. To me the difference was obvious, or I definitely would not have spent all that money to upgrade. I have several clients that have upgraded and they have told me their experience has been very similar. I agree that the optical formula of the newest EF glass and the RF glass, in say the 600 f/4s, is the same. No need to change something that is world-class. However, something is improved in the RF glass for communications between the camera body and the lens with the RF lenses with respect to AF performance. If you can rent a RF 600 f/4 and the RF TCs and shoot them on the same demanding subject side by side. I would bet money you will see very different performance levels. Thanks for the comment. Always good to hear others thoughts on topics.
Interesting, Ron, thanks for the clarification on how you arrived at your conclusion. This gentleman, aside from being a long-time Canon employee, is a wildlife & nature photographer, shoots an R5 & R3, and has held onto his own, personal EF500 II & EF 100-400 II for use with an adapter, because in his experience -- and Canon's testing, according to him -- there's no difference in AF speed. In the case of your EF 100-400 vs RF 100-500 comparison, did you check your EXIF data? I wonder if some of your "better AF quality" images were captured in the 400-500 focal length range and mis-attributed to "faster AF" instead of laying 100 more mm worth of pixels on target. With regards to the two 600's, did you shoot them both naked? I wouldn't be surprised to see the newer RF TC's out perform the older EF TC III's, as they've always been the weak link in the EF chain, in my experience. As for renting and testing side-by-side, I would have to do that and see for myself a VERY significant difference to even consider fire-sale-ing my wonderful and expensive (!) EF glass.
One other item to note is the focus range switch on the lens. I find that the AF system hunts more when the switch is in the “Full” position and the subject is farther away than the lens’ close focus range. Not sure how to explain that but hope this was clear. Thanks for the helpful video. Since I’ve started using the 3 button back button focus method my keeper rate has increased significantly! Took a while to get used to it but it has made a tremendous difference!
Hey, thanks so much for adding your findings to the discussion. Your finding is interesting in that it actually hunts more and not just takes longer to cycle with set to "FULL." I will have to see if that is the case with my setup. Cheers, Ron
Thank you for the very informative vid, just found you and subscribed. I had always wondered if I was doing right by constantly holding the back button down while taking the shots of the birds
Thanks Ron for another very helpful video. Shooting the R5, I realize I am not as clear as I need to be regarding which autofocus methods are able to track versus do not track, and likewise which methods are able to make use of eye tracking versus those that cannot.
Great video explanations of the human shortcomings of the AF system! In addition to your advice, when a bird coming towards me is out of focus, or is moving rapidly, if there’s time, I start with 300mm on the 100-500, focus on the bird or something in the same plane as the bird (sometimes manually) use spot focus, then zoom in and use eye detect. It sounds complex, but practice makes perfect! I also prefer to use electronic first curtain as it’s usually fast enough and I can hear the shutter taking pictures! Another key aspect of getting a sharp image is to consider the light before you take photos and go for a minimum of 1/1000 second if the iso is 3200 or less. It works for me!
I use my old "Sigzilla" 300-800mm without any undue issues. True, its focus is slower than the kit lens, but I am quite happy with it on my new Canon R7.
Always enjoy your videos. Big help in setting up my R5. Delving deeper into focusing by discussing the "Cases" would be helpful as well and is there a way to quickly change between cases?
Allen, thanks so much. That would be a good video topic. At this time I am using the "Auto" setting a lot and finding it does a great job sensing what I am doing and adjusting. I have never be a fan of "Auto" setting on cameras, but this may turn out to be an exception for me.
Excellent refresher as always. I’ve had all of the 1D bodies and found that on the R3, Case 1 with sensitivity at +1 for faster acquisition and pumping with the AF On button as needed (AIServo) is still very effective. And if the subject stops, I press the * button (One Shot) which is lightening fast with the advantage of the green confirmation button. KISS and take the camera’s guesswork out. I use the MFn/DOF buttons for tracking and eye focus on/off as you generously shared, and the awesome joystick click which gets to center point in a flash. I just added the R5 which I find is a little harder to work with given fewer custom buttons than the R3/1Dx/1DxII etc and the back buttons feel closer together or less tactile for some reason . Oh well, it makes up in size/weight. Anyway, thanks for all your time and effort. Much appreciated.
I’ve seen several people who complain about autofocus or image quality on shot they took were the bird is smaller than an autofocus point and they crop the image. They will complain that 20 or 24 megapixels aren’t enough but they will take a 45mp image from an R5 and crop it down to 2mp. Their problem isn’t megapixels it’s to short of a lens or just not close enough to the subject.
That is part of the issue. Overall, it is about getting to understand what a system is capable, its strengths and weaknesses, and working within those parameters. It just takes time and tinkering with whatever system you are shooting.
Fellow east-side of Florida Canon user here - I've a new R10, and when I depress the back button auto focus, with the camera staring at a stationary box of edibles on my kitchen table, the AF box moves around and changes shapes - like it's drunk. I've got it set to spot focusing, servo (though boxes don't move by themselves). Yes, I'm handholing the camera, but even so, my manually focused shots come out perfectly. Ron, what's the diagnosis and cure, please? Many thanks!
Hey Ron, I assume the R6 applies to your settings. I know you are not a big fan the R6, but that is the body I have and do like it a lot, even with some of the shortcomings compared to the R5. Jim and I plan to see you on November 17th for the Kingfishers and that is the camera body I will be using. Darrel and Janet said they had a blast with you on the Barred Owl trip. They are also members of our photo group here in Stuart Florida. Many of us are planning to book more tours with you in 2023.
I have nothing against the R6 at all. I just don't have one and never shot one, so I can't really say much about that body. Looking forward to shooting with you and Jim again. Ron
Excellent video on Canon mirrorless autofocus for bird photography! I just bought a new EOS R7 and a new RF 100-500mm zoom. While testing the autofocus, I noticed some really weird behavior. In one-shot AF, no subject tracking, subject detect off, and AF-On button set to Eye-AF, the camera consistently focuses on the closest object (no matter what it is, even just a flat white window frame), rather than my focus area (even spot) and no matter where I place it in the frame. Is this expected?
Excellent video. One thing I'm still not clear on: I set my R7 up the way you show in your set up video and the "eye detect" toggles on and off with the DOF button. Other videos I've watched lead me to believe that the eye detect is only on while a certain button is depressed and held down. I like it toggling on and off with the DOF button, but are there disadvantages to that? Thanks.
Great video. Your videos have helped my wife and I so much. We mainly shoot slower birds in low light, such as owls. When do you determine whether to use stabilization mode 2 or simply turn it off all together. I’m assuming at faster shutter speeds with good light that I would not need stabilization. In low light at 1/1000 though, or less, maybe I would? We use the 600f4 and 100-500. Thanks so much for the videos!
Thank you for watching and for the kind comments about my videos. With respect to turning stabilization on or off depending on shutter speed. Here is how I look at it. Stabilization does more than just stabilize your images it also stabilizes what you see when you are looking through the viewfinder and this is an advantage regardless of what shutter speed you are shooting. So, most recently, I have been shooting with mode 2 "ON" all the time regardless of shutter speed and getting great results. Now, this is using the Canon 100-500 and Canon RF 600 f/4, so RF lenses, so please take that into account. Cheers, Ron
IS and IBIS work together, so they are both configured using the IS mode switch on the lens. Any non-IS lens you can use the camera's menu to turn IBIS on or off, but that is the only independent control of IBIS, and again, only with non-IS lenses.
Loved the video--totally agree with everything you said. Just one question in the last part you spoke about the RF lens--I had good success with my R7 and the EF 100-400 mm. It gives me 600 mm at f 5.6 which I prefer than using an 1.4x on my R5 with my 100-500mm since I lose a stop of light. What do you think of that combination on the R7?
To me, it really depends on if you need the best AF and IS/IBIS performance available and that outweighs your need for a faster aperture. If you need the performance then the RF 100-500 is the way to go for me. Thanks so much for watching and adding your input to the discussion.
Hello Ron! I’m a long time follower of your channel. I’ve been looking at your harness system for a while now. I’m just not sure if it’s too big for a 5’4” woman? I shoot-with the Canon R5 and 100-500. Sometimes I carry a monopod, but I find that a bit of a pain. I’ve missed shots due to not being able to hold the camera up for extended periods. I do basically hiking and parks outings here in OH, and of course spring and fall migrations. So all that said, do you see this harness being used by women? Do you think the straps and system would be really bulky for a smaller frame? Thanks for the great content!
Hey, thanks so much for all the nice comments on my channel. Regarding the harness system, I offer an ultralight version that is in no way bulky and would suit your use case very well I think. I am 5'6" and the harness is very adjustable along with the monopod, so it should fit you just fine given it fits me and can still be adjusted even smaller. If you have any other questions just let me know. Sincerely, Ron
Hi Ron. Thanks for the reminders about getting the basics right! I enjoy your videos. I use R5 with 100-500, I'm finding when I add the 1.4x converter the autofocus feels less responsive somehow. Maybe my expectations are the issue?
Hey, thanks for watching and taking the time to comment. I have found the 1.4x TC on the 100-500 does slow AF response down just a bit, so I think what you are sensing is correct. Shooting with a bright enough exposure seems to mitigate this a bit, but I have not tested that idea fully.
I've recently purchased the R5 - I've been thinking about the RF100-500 - I'M Currently using the EF 100-400 MKII Lens - it works REALLY good. My hold up is that will I really see a noticeable difference in AF performance & image quality for the nearly $3000 I'll need to invest? - or would I be better to take that 3k and save some money until I could get the 600 F4? - I also use a 1.4 Tele with the 1-4 a majority of the time? thoughts?
I found the 100-500 to be a pretty big improvement over my 100-400 II for AF, but especially for IS/IBIS performance. It also is smaller and lighter if that is important to you. I would say rent a 100-500 if you can and see if you think it is worth the price. I always like to shoot a body or lens before purchasing to really see how I like it.
Haha I just need to keep the link to this video handy so I can hand it out to people in the field. I swear I get asked these questions every time i'm out, Someone with 200mm trying to grab focus on something I'm struggling to at 840mm and wondering why. Most common moan.
Hey, thanks Vince. These issues do seem to be pervasive, but once folks get the right way of thinking about how AF systems work these days, they seem to improve their results. Take care my friend.
Hey, thanks for the comment. So, should I assume you are speaking for everyone in the world, because everyone is just like you and finds what was presented here to be a no brainer. I suggest you don't loose sight of the fact that there are many people out there that can benefit from explanations such as those presented here. Just because you don't see the value does not mean everyone is just like you. So, right back at you. Get real!
Sorry you're having a bad day. Lots of us struggle when starting out, and helping us through the frustrations can make lifelong enthusiasts, which I generally see as a good thing.
I remember being genuinly mad at my R7 for focusing on the eye of a cow underneath the bird I was trying to focus on. Extremely logical focusing from the point of view of the camera ;)
Ha! That is great. Thanks for sharing and watching.
I totally agree with everything you said. I have been doing exactly the same as you mentioned about the AF. Many people think they don't need to do much to get great images once they bought these camera and lenses. Camera AF doesn't know what we think. They are doing what they are programmed to do. One thing you didn't mention is that when you are way out of focus, it is hard to pump back the focus especially with mirrorless system. What I do is quickly focus something that has a lot of contrast and is close to me, then re-focus your object.
Great point, and thanks for adding that to the discussion. Much appreciated.
Everything you just said was vividly demonstrated by a recent trip to Ecuador to shoot hummingbirds and trying to capture these tiny, rapidly moving birds dancing in and out and between the flowers and foliage was a focusing nightmare for my R5 and kept me shuttling between the eye, zone, and single point back focus buttons! Thanks for the set up recommendations.
Catherine Dalessio
My pleasure. I hope you had a wonderful time on your trip. Sounds amazing.
Great discussion. I was at first disappointed with the tracking mode on the R7, but realized I was asking too much of the system. I primarily shoot in very dense rainforest, so my scenes are usually very busy and the camera was often not picking up the bird. I have switched to using spot first to get the focus on the bird, or at least close. Then switch to tracking, which then has a much better chance of locking on. If the bird is way out in the open, I can often go directly to animal tracking, but otherwise I always try to help the camera by getting the focus close first with spot.
Barrett, thanks so much for adding your experiences with the R7. It is extremely valuable to have others like you chime in. Cheers, Ron
Hello Ron, I hope that you are well. The last point you made, transitioning to RF lenses is very, very important. I have had the R5 for a year now. Shooting with the EF 600 f4 via the EF/RF adaptor was convenient but the weight of the Gen 1 EF 600 f4 IS was really a burden as lots of missed opportunities have happened. When I acquired the RF 600 f4, the match as you said, opens up many new opportunities. AF is lightning fast. IS/IBIS is rock solid. Also with the EF lens, the AF system made a certain level of noise as it was activated until it shut off. The RF lens is silent!!!! Even with the teleconverters, 1.4X and 2X, it is still fast. Great video!
Hey, thanks so much Richard for adding your experiences to the mix. I am glad you found the video interesting.
It would be nice to use all rf lenses but some of us just can't. We are just lucky to have the camera body. That being said the tips you gave us are lots of help thanks.
Thanks so much for watching and commenting.
Hey, Ron, I just purchased a new R5 as my first mirrorless body after years of experience with various Canon DSLR's; I'm excited about it. But I have a very significant investment in EF glass, including my favorite bird lenses: EF 500 II (+ TC's) and 100-400 II. Hearing what you said about EF vs RF lenses gave me pause, so I dialed up Canon until I was kicked upstairs to the top tech support guy in the US. He emphatically stated, as a very knowledgeable Canon veteran and a very experienced photographer himself, that there is ZERO difference between EF and RF lenses. He said there is ZERO AF performance hit when using the EF-R adapters. And "anything you hear on UA-cam to the contrary" is complete bunk. Now, certainly the motors and IS have improved a bit over the years, and it's likely that RF L lenses use the best of them, but newer EF lenses did too. I've had fantastic luck and results with my EF glass and after hearing his advice to "buy an adapter and forget about it," I'm satisfied with the lenses I already own. That said, any new lenses I might acquire will be RF as that is clearly the future. Bottom line, a great piece of glass is a great piece of glass, and the latter EF lenses were well built, well sealed, well stabilized, and powerfully driven.
That is very interesting, but I have to disagree. I shoot some very difficult subjects in small, fast-flying birds and I shot my EF 600 f/4 II and 100-400 II for quite a while on both the R5 and R3. They performed as well as they did on my DSLRs such as the 1Dx II. Then, I was able to shoot a 100-500 and RF 600 f/4 for several days shooting flying sea ducks. I had my EF 600 and the RF 600 sitting side by side and switched between them for 3 days of shooting where I shot thousands of images with each. There is no question that the RF lens did much better on AF speed and accuracy both naked and with both TCs. To me the difference was obvious, or I definitely would not have spent all that money to upgrade. I have several clients that have upgraded and they have told me their experience has been very similar. I agree that the optical formula of the newest EF glass and the RF glass, in say the 600 f/4s, is the same. No need to change something that is world-class. However, something is improved in the RF glass for communications between the camera body and the lens with the RF lenses with respect to AF performance. If you can rent a RF 600 f/4 and the RF TCs and shoot them on the same demanding subject side by side. I would bet money you will see very different performance levels. Thanks for the comment. Always good to hear others thoughts on topics.
Interesting, Ron, thanks for the clarification on how you arrived at your conclusion. This gentleman, aside from being a long-time Canon employee, is a wildlife & nature photographer, shoots an R5 & R3, and has held onto his own, personal EF500 II & EF 100-400 II for use with an adapter, because in his experience -- and Canon's testing, according to him -- there's no difference in AF speed. In the case of your EF 100-400 vs RF 100-500 comparison, did you check your EXIF data? I wonder if some of your "better AF quality" images were captured in the 400-500 focal length range and mis-attributed to "faster AF" instead of laying 100 more mm worth of pixels on target. With regards to the two 600's, did you shoot them both naked? I wouldn't be surprised to see the newer RF TC's out perform the older EF TC III's, as they've always been the weak link in the EF chain, in my experience. As for renting and testing side-by-side, I would have to do that and see for myself a VERY significant difference to even consider fire-sale-ing my wonderful and expensive (!) EF glass.
One other item to note is the focus range switch on the lens. I find that the AF system hunts more when the switch is in the “Full” position and the subject is farther away than the lens’ close focus range. Not sure how to explain that but hope this was clear. Thanks for the helpful video. Since I’ve started using the 3 button back button focus method my keeper rate has increased significantly! Took a while to get used to it but it has made a tremendous difference!
Hey, thanks so much for adding your findings to the discussion. Your finding is interesting in that it actually hunts more and not just takes longer to cycle with set to "FULL." I will have to see if that is the case with my setup. Cheers, Ron
Thank you for the very informative vid, just found you and subscribed. I had always wondered if I was doing right by constantly holding the back button down while taking the shots of the birds
This was really helpful. I am learning a lot from your details on how to do bird photography and autofocus
Glad it was helpful! Thanks so much for watching and commenting. It is much appreciated.
Thanks Ron for another very helpful video. Shooting the R5, I realize I am not as clear as I need to be regarding which autofocus methods are able to track versus do not track, and likewise which methods are able to make use of eye tracking versus those that cannot.
Changed some AF settings after watching this video. It helped.. Thnx 👍
Great to hear! Thanks so much for watching and commenting.
Great video explanations of the human shortcomings of the AF system! In addition to your advice, when a bird coming towards me is out of focus, or is moving rapidly, if there’s time, I start with 300mm on the 100-500, focus on the bird or something in the same plane as the bird (sometimes manually) use spot focus, then zoom in and use eye detect. It sounds complex, but practice makes perfect! I also prefer to use electronic first curtain as it’s usually fast enough and I can hear the shutter taking pictures! Another key aspect of getting a sharp image is to consider the light before you take photos and go for a minimum of 1/1000 second if the iso is 3200 or less. It works for me!
Nick, thanks for adding to the discussion . Always good to hear other people's take. Thanks for watching. Ron
I use my old "Sigzilla" 300-800mm without any undue issues. True, its focus is slower than the kit lens, but I am quite happy with it on my new Canon R7.
Awesome, thanks for watching and taking the time to comment.
Hello Ron! another great video. what is the best focus point to use on birds in flight Canon EOS R7
Another brilliant video Ron... so much information so freely given.... a big thank you
Glad you enjoyed it. Thank you for watching and commenting.
Always enjoy your videos. Big help in setting up my R5. Delving deeper into focusing by discussing the "Cases" would be helpful as well and is there a way to quickly change between cases?
Allen, thanks so much. That would be a good video topic. At this time I am using the "Auto" setting a lot and finding it does a great job sensing what I am doing and adjusting. I have never be a fan of "Auto" setting on cameras, but this may turn out to be an exception for me.
Excellent refresher as always. I’ve had all of the 1D bodies and found that on the R3, Case 1 with sensitivity at +1 for faster acquisition and pumping with the AF On button as needed (AIServo) is still very effective. And if the subject stops, I press the * button (One Shot) which is lightening fast with the advantage of the green confirmation button. KISS and take the camera’s guesswork out. I use the MFn/DOF buttons for tracking and eye focus on/off as you generously shared, and the awesome joystick click which gets to center point in a flash. I just added the R5 which I find is a little harder to work with given fewer custom buttons than the R3/1Dx/1DxII etc and the back buttons feel closer together or less tactile for some reason . Oh well, it makes up in size/weight. Anyway, thanks for all your time and effort. Much appreciated.
Thanks so much for adding your experiences to the discussion. Always great to hear how others are doing things. Thanks for watching too!
I’ve seen several people who complain about autofocus or image quality on shot they took were the bird is smaller than an autofocus point and they crop the image. They will complain that 20 or 24 megapixels aren’t enough but they will take a 45mp image from an R5 and crop it down to 2mp. Their problem isn’t megapixels it’s to short of a lens or just not close enough to the subject.
That is part of the issue. Overall, it is about getting to understand what a system is capable, its strengths and weaknesses, and working within those parameters. It just takes time and tinkering with whatever system you are shooting.
Thanks for this. I just got a r7 and I found your video very helpful.
Great to hear! Thanks so much for watching and commenting.
Thanks for the great tips. Will try some of these techniques on my next outing.
Thank you for watching and commenting.
Fellow east-side of Florida Canon user here - I've a new R10, and when I depress the back button auto focus, with the camera staring at a stationary box of edibles on my kitchen table, the AF box moves around and changes shapes - like it's drunk. I've got it set to spot focusing, servo (though boxes don't move by themselves). Yes, I'm handholing the camera, but even so, my manually focused shots come out perfectly.
Ron, what's the diagnosis and cure, please?
Many thanks!
Excellent, thank you!
Hey Ron, I assume the R6 applies to your settings. I know you are not a big fan the R6, but that is the body I have and do like it a lot, even with some of the shortcomings compared to the R5. Jim and I plan to see you on November 17th for the Kingfishers and that is the camera body I will be using. Darrel and Janet said they had a blast with you on the Barred Owl trip. They are also members of our photo group here in Stuart Florida. Many of us are planning to book more tours with you in 2023.
I have nothing against the R6 at all. I just don't have one and never shot one, so I can't really say much about that body. Looking forward to shooting with you and Jim again. Ron
Excellent video on Canon mirrorless autofocus for bird photography! I just bought a new EOS R7 and a new RF 100-500mm zoom. While testing the autofocus, I noticed some really weird behavior. In one-shot AF, no subject tracking, subject detect off, and AF-On button set to Eye-AF, the camera consistently focuses on the closest object (no matter what it is, even just a flat white window frame), rather than my focus area (even spot) and no matter where I place it in the frame. Is this expected?
Eye AF always uses the full frame. Instead, use area AF with subject tracking and eye detection.
Merci pour ces tips.
Thanks, for your insights. As always you are very informative.
My pleasure! Thanks for watching and taking the time to comment.
Excellent video. One thing I'm still not clear on: I set my R7 up the way you show in your set up video and the "eye detect" toggles on and off with the DOF button. Other videos I've watched lead me to believe that the eye detect is only on while a certain button is depressed and held down. I like it toggling on and off with the DOF button, but are there disadvantages to that? Thanks.
I live in Fl. Stuart
Great video. Your videos have helped my wife and I so much. We mainly shoot slower birds in low light, such as owls. When do you determine whether to use stabilization mode 2 or simply turn it off all together. I’m assuming at faster shutter speeds with good light that I would not need stabilization. In low light at 1/1000 though, or less, maybe I would? We use the 600f4 and 100-500.
Thanks so much for the videos!
Thank you for watching and for the kind comments about my videos. With respect to turning stabilization on or off depending on shutter speed. Here is how I look at it. Stabilization does more than just stabilize your images it also stabilizes what you see when you are looking through the viewfinder and this is an advantage regardless of what shutter speed you are shooting. So, most recently, I have been shooting with mode 2 "ON" all the time regardless of shutter speed and getting great results. Now, this is using the Canon 100-500 and Canon RF 600 f/4, so RF lenses, so please take that into account. Cheers, Ron
@@whistlingwingsphotography thanks so much for the reply. We also use both the RF 100-500 and the RF 600 on an R5 and R6.
In your video you coming about Ibis and mode two. I need more clarity on mode 2 what does that mean, where's the configured?
IS and IBIS work together, so they are both configured using the IS mode switch on the lens. Any non-IS lens you can use the camera's menu to turn IBIS on or off, but that is the only independent control of IBIS, and again, only with non-IS lenses.
Loved the video--totally agree with everything you said. Just one question in the last part you spoke about the RF lens--I had good success with my R7 and the EF 100-400 mm. It gives me 600 mm at f 5.6 which I prefer than using an 1.4x on my R5 with my 100-500mm since I lose a stop of light. What do you think of that combination on the R7?
To me, it really depends on if you need the best AF and IS/IBIS performance available and that outweighs your need for a faster aperture. If you need the performance then the RF 100-500 is the way to go for me. Thanks so much for watching and adding your input to the discussion.
I need this reality check every now and then. You can’t fix everything with megapixel cropping or Denoise or Sharpen.
That is so true. Thanks for commenting.
Thanks! Handy tips as always.
You bet!
Ron, I need to purchase a second camera. What is your most used camera of the three? I have an R5 and have pondered buying an R3 as a second body.
I would not hesitate to get an R3. It is my favorite camera to shoot. The AF is a step above every other camera I have used. Cheers, ron
Hello Ron! I’m a long time follower of your channel. I’ve been looking at your harness system for a while now. I’m just not sure if it’s too big for a 5’4” woman? I shoot-with the Canon R5 and 100-500. Sometimes I carry a monopod, but I find that a bit of a pain. I’ve missed shots due to not being able to hold the camera up for extended periods. I do basically hiking and parks outings here in OH, and of course spring and fall migrations. So all that said, do you see this harness being used by women? Do you think the straps and system would be really bulky for a smaller frame? Thanks for the great content!
Hey, thanks so much for all the nice comments on my channel. Regarding the harness system, I offer an ultralight version that is in no way bulky and would suit your use case very well I think. I am 5'6" and the harness is very adjustable along with the monopod, so it should fit you just fine given it fits me and can still be adjusted even smaller. If you have any other questions just let me know. Sincerely, Ron
hi, can I conclude that using stabilizer mode 2 for birds in flight and all the rest mode 1 ?
Kind of. You don't want to be on Mode 1 for anything moving around. If anything, set Mode 2 and leave it. Use Mode 1 for totally static subjects.
Great content as usual. Thanks for the tips.
Hey, thanks for watching and taking the time to comment.
Hi Ron. Thanks for the reminders about getting the basics right! I enjoy your videos. I use R5 with 100-500, I'm finding when I add the 1.4x converter the autofocus feels less responsive somehow. Maybe my expectations are the issue?
Hey, thanks for watching and taking the time to comment. I have found the 1.4x TC on the 100-500 does slow AF response down just a bit, so I think what you are sensing is correct. Shooting with a bright enough exposure seems to mitigate this a bit, but I have not tested that idea fully.
@@whistlingwingsphotography On my next birding shoot I will try shooting as bright as possible and see how it goes. Thanks
I've recently purchased the R5 - I've been thinking about the RF100-500 - I'M Currently using the EF 100-400 MKII Lens - it works REALLY good. My hold up is that will I really see a noticeable difference in AF performance & image quality for the nearly $3000 I'll need to invest? - or would I be better to take that 3k and save some money until I could get the 600 F4? - I also use a 1.4 Tele with the 1-4 a majority of the time? thoughts?
I found the 100-500 to be a pretty big improvement over my 100-400 II for AF, but especially for IS/IBIS performance. It also is smaller and lighter if that is important to you. I would say rent a 100-500 if you can and see if you think it is worth the price. I always like to shoot a body or lens before purchasing to really see how I like it.
what wraps do you use on your lenses?
WalMart camo tape
Haha I just need to keep the link to this video handy so I can hand it out to people in the field. I swear I get asked these questions every time i'm out, Someone with 200mm trying to grab focus on something I'm struggling to at 840mm and wondering why. Most common moan.
Hey, thanks Vince. These issues do seem to be pervasive, but once folks get the right way of thinking about how AF systems work these days, they seem to improve their results. Take care my friend.
Thanks. ....
Welcome
Lot of words to cover what common sense should dictate. Get real ...
Hey, thanks for the comment. So, should I assume you are speaking for everyone in the world, because everyone is just like you and finds what was presented here to be a no brainer. I suggest you don't loose sight of the fact that there are many people out there that can benefit from explanations such as those presented here. Just because you don't see the value does not mean everyone is just like you. So, right back at you. Get real!
Sorry you're having a bad day. Lots of us struggle when starting out, and helping us through the frustrations can make lifelong enthusiasts, which I generally see as a good thing.