(07-30-2021, 07:04 AM)Arthur Macmillan Wrote: Dave, you've hit the nail on the head! Some birders are getting excited by the R5 (I've started to loose interest). The file size is huge! Most of the serious birders that I bump into use the Nikon D500, or the EOS 7D Mk II. The have have the best all around balance of build quality, AF speed, range, and reach.
I saw Wim's comment about the best bird photo quality he's ever seen. And it doesn't really surprise me. The "animal eye" auto focus and tracking are valuable features. Hard to compete with, for sure. For instance, if I could justify spending $2,500 so I could shoot birds closer than 20' away, I might do it.
I got my first look through the R5 with the 100-500mm lens. To me it was both interesting and anti-climactic. It was a professional surfing photographer's camera, and he was really, really happy with it. He had a 1DX Mark III for back-up. When I see him again I will have some follow questions because later when I thought about it, doubts began to creep in.
I won't try to describe this as though I were a camera reviewer with extensive knowledge, but an obvious question to me was why didn't he get rid of the 1 DX Mk III as his back-up camera and buy the R6, which seems to me to have just as much ability as a camera sitting on the bench would need. Ah, there I got a chance to see the look on his face that many of you would have had. The 1 DX Mk III is in a class by itself, I was told! I was told he could toss it into the ocean, go out and retrieve it, and it would still be as good as new. Possibly, an exaggeration, but looking down at the scrawny looking R5, I know I wasn't reassured. Then he said there was a problem that all (most? many? some?) mirrorless cameras in even fairly moderately backlit situations.
On the other hand he mentioned he had sold the two EF zooms that one would normally have. He seemed to hedge a little on the 100-500 versus the 100-400 Mk. II.
I talked about birds and how the R6 was not enough for me, and he understood right away, even finishing my sentence for me. What I needed was an APS-C sized sensor in the RF mount.
Yes! It is so obvious when you shoot wildlife, and telephoto! I think Canon has been a bit bold, and tried to set itself apart with the RF series. But there is a big difference between a professional shooter who can live with 45, 50, 63MP sensors, and talk about maybe new 85 and 100 MP sensors coming out, and the actual photography enthusiasts who pay the bills. The longest lens in the Canon EOS EM mount is the 55-200mm zoom.
I'd love to see the the figures for how many EF 100-400mm lenses have been sold by Canon over they years. There is no way to know how many of those lenses went on APS-C sensor cameras, but let's not kid ourselves. If canon expects to sell many 100-500 lenses I don't think it is going to be to people buying the R5. There just is never going to be enough of them!
If they don't put an APS-C sensor in the RF mount I will either continue using he EF lens on crop sensor bodies, or just switch to another camera maker when it comes time to replace my 90D.
P.S. - Dave, I just think there is a slow down in birding in the summer. Spring and fall migrations were variously killed by Covid fears and Covid fearless crowds. I am still trying to adjust to new human migration patterns. Sometimes on the weekends places are too crowded with out of towners. I may have to revert to macro photography until things start feeling more normal.
You need a very fast expensive ML camera to match the D500/7DII in terms of auto-focus and general usage ..... the R5 delivers that complete with eye AF which works ......... as does the Sony A1 ........ and they better it, but at a price ...... and then the new lenses ....... and so on .........
....... of course the frame rate is double/triple the D500 which has it's pluses and minuses ....... (I guess) the files are around 50-60 Mbs per image and 20 of those per second requires fast computers and huge storage .... that's not how I want to operate ..... coming home with 1,000 images of maybe just a hand full of birds and having to throw 95% away ....... in the end how many images of the same bird do you need when you already have hundreds?
Cropping is a reality in birding unless you live somewhere where the birds are tame and large like Florida ....... much as I'd love to, I don't live there ...... FF probably reigns in that region ....... for the rest of us the APSc sensor is an instant affordable blessing ...........
......... I still see ML as a waiting game, the later you jump on the train the better the seat you will get ....... Nikon certainly won't let the success of the D500 go unnoticed and will produce a DX ML version .......
So stay with your 90D Mac and bathe in the glory of that OVF ....... with it's reach advantage ....... affordability ....... and multiple lens options .........
.......... when the right ML camera eventually arrives complete with lenses we will know about it ........
...... the best is still yet to come!!
I come across from time to time while shooting, folk from birding associations who do "le comptage" ..... "bird counting" ....... all are finding a low bird count this year across the board ..... most put it down to world climatic conditions .....
All the best