Birds Which Telephoto Zoom?

[Only RF]

I shoot with an R6M2. The T3 is only a back up camera.

As for EFCS vs Electronic vs Mechanical, I lean toward mechanical, however I just did my last portrait session 100% in EFCS. I don’t notice any noise issues in my post with EFCS. I just did an unpaid birthday party at ISO 2000 EFCS CRAW and noticed no major noise issues any different than I would have with mechanical. I’ve noticed the EFCS is obviously faster than mechanical because the curtains stay open. I’ve missed a few candid event photos from the split second curtain time in mechanical shutter mode. That being said if I know my shutter speed is going to be north of 250 and my ISO north of 3200 I’ll try to stay in mechanical.

For my post I do almost everything in Luminar Neo. Their Noiseless AI does a good job removing noise without over baking it. I also use Topaz (entire suite, but mainly hangout in Photo AI 2) and find sometimes Topaz over cooks the image and it creates enormous 144MB files that still have to be processed in Luminar because Topz has zero creative abilities. Since switching to the R6M2 I view Topaz as a back-up/‘omg this photo looks really bad and I need it to look better’ solution.

I’m still leery on the RF 100-400. I really like shooting wide open and that’s just not possible at f/8. I’m leaning more towards one of the EF 200mm f/2.8 IS II USM lenses with an adapter. I really like primes and it gives me an excuse to buy another R6M2 if I really start shooting sports for money- 200 on one body, 50 f/1.8 or 85 f/2 on the other.

How would shutter mode effect noise?

 

[JoeTheSnowPlowGuy]

How would shutter mode effect noise?

There’s some thought the electronic modes produce more noise. Someone on here did an experiment shooting into a body cap or capped lens and the electronic modes showed more noise. I don’t remember the thread.

ETA: it was either here or on dpshooters

 

[Only RF]

There’s some thought the electronic modes produce more noise. Someone on here did an experiment shooting into a body cap or capped lens and the electronic modes showed more noise. I don’t remember the thread.

ETA: it was either here or on dpshooters

Interesting. I never heard of that.

 

[Only RF]

I'm wondering if bit depth has an effect. While Canon stopped posting details after the R5 (E shutter =12 and mechanical/EFCS =14) the fellow at photons to photons measured it and said the R7 was 12 in e shutter. It would not surprise me if the only camera out there that can do 14 bit in e shutter is the R3.

I did a bunch of searches and the only real thing I could find was bit depth effects posterization.

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/t....htm?phrase=bit+depth+effects+noise++&phrase=

Lower megapixel cameras are more forgiving when underexposed. This area is not my strength so I'm not sure I there is a relationship between bit death and noise. I have not found a specific comment about that yet. Then there is this.

14-bit vs 12-bit RAW - Can You Tell The Difference?

12-bit image files can store up to 68 billion different shades of color. 14-bit image files store up to 4 trillion shades. That’s an enormous difference, so shouldn’t we always choose 14-bit when shooting RAW? Here’s a landscape I snapped, then found out later I had shot it in 12-bit RAW. Better...

photographylife.com

 

[Jake Shoots Birds]

Can you describe the stickiness issue with the R7? Is that based on Duane’s recent video about using mechanical or EFCS and H vs H+.

I've conversed with Duane about this, and yes, it's the same issue. But for me it goes beyond Canon's remedy. I shoot in Elec-1st Curtain almost exclusively because of the slower sensor read speed, and would likely experience this less in H vs. H+, but honestly I would not have purchased the camera if I knew it wouldn't perform in H+ as it does not fit my needs. For what I paid I get my money's worth, but I would have paid more for the same specs if the specs actually performed.

 

[Jake Shoots Birds]

I shoot with an R6M2. The T3 is only a back up camera.

Ah, OK. Didn't see that mentioned anywhere in the post. My recommendation stands - get the 100-500mm. For shooting birds in the wild the 100-400mm lacks the reach and the R6 lacks the MP's to make up for it.

 

[Only RF]

The R6II can crop better than I expected.

• Canon EOS R6m2
• RF24-105mm F4 L IS USM
• 105.0 mm
• ƒ/7.1
• 1/1000 sec
• ISO 400

• Canon EOS R6m2
• RF24-105mm F4 L IS USM
• 105.0 mm
• ƒ/7.1
• 1/1000 sec
• ISO 400

 

[ctitanic]

When I was living in South Florida these were coming to my backyard feeder. They are native from somewhere in Latin American and escaped from breeders in South Florida.

 

[Only RF]

I agree with Jake. If you can swing it the 100-500. The extra reach will help on the FF. RF is the future and sometimes EF get a little upset with me because the think I say the EF 100-400 II is not a god lens for the R system. It is an excellent lens and I used it with my R and 1.4 and 2X TC's. The RF system has 4 extra pins for faster transmission speeds and I think it gives AF a bit of an edge.

R6II with the 1.4

• Canon EOS R6m2
• RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM + EXTENDER RF1.4x
• 700.0 mm
• ƒ/10
• 1/6400 sec
• ISO 2500

• Canon EOS R6m2
• RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM + EXTENDER RF1.4x
• 700.0 mm
• ƒ/10
• 1/6400 sec
• ISO 2500

 

[Only RF]

Here is a shot with my R, EF 100-400 II and 2X.

• Canon EOS R
• EF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM +2x III
• 800.0 mm
• ƒ/11
• 1/2500 sec
• ISO 1600