How should I resolve my birding GAS?

User1303423862 wrote:

nnowak wrote:

To start with, I would ditch the 2X converter. It appears to be seriously degrading your image quality and the reduction in light won't be doing you AF any favors either. 2X converters, in general, tend to seriously degrade image quality and you are often better off just cropping further from a 1.4X converter.

Firstly, thanks for taking the time to make a detailed response. I appreciate your detailed technical knowledge and value your appraisal.

In terms of equivalence, your combo has a full frame equivalence of 176-800mm f/8-11. That is quite long and quite dark, especially when paired with an older camera like the original M6. Larry Rexley's recommended 1.5X teleconverter would put you at 132-600mm f/5.6-8, which is still quite a bit of reach.

Larry kindly offered me his spare 2X TC after I ran into problems with my Kenko 1.5X project. I agree the degree of light loss is an issue, although I think the gull and squirrel shots shows the optics themselves are pretty good.

That 2X must be worse than I thought as I don't see anything that resembles a squirrel in your OP.  Of the three photos you did show in you OP, the second and third look pretty rough, even when viewed on my phone without zooming in.

Certainly good enough for my needs. I do peep at my pixels, but also take a more relaxed perspective, viewing the image at around 50% on the screen, to get an idea of how it would look as an A3 print from a few feet away. The very few prints I order go on the walls in my home or to my friends/family who request them.

Creating photos that you like should definitely be a priority.

I could be mistaken, but your post reads a bit like you are looking for a quick fix because you currently have some free time and a bit of free cash. I would suggest taking a long term view of your gear and determine where you want to be a year from now instead of what might work this minute. Maybe that means the R7 + RF 100-500mm, or maybe the M6 II + Sigma 150-600mm, or maybe you continue with what you have.

Part of the fun I get out of photography is in 'bucking the system' to get results which punch above the weight of the kit used and money invested.

I can understand that.  I have photographed dragonflies with the original M + EF adapter + EF Life Size Converter + original EF 100-400mm L .... handheld.  For those unfamiliar, the Life Size Converter is a combination teleconverter and extension tube that was originally sold for use with the EF 50mm f/2.5 Macro to tske it from 1:2 to 1:1.  While not officially endorsed by Canon, it worked well on longer telephotos to reduce the Minimum Focus Distance.

I have other hobbies calling on my cash, and I get my most interesting shots while I'm pursuing them; in the hills, on motorbike rides, in crowds at events etc. It's been great having a bit of birding time on bright autumn days while I'm between contracts, I like the peace and quiet. Once I'm working again and have more money, I might develop my RF system a bit further. I wont pay £500 for a TC though, that's just extortionate. Big Sigmas I'm a bit doubtful of too. The standard version is a bit fragile and slow, and the sport version is damned heavy. Currently, an upgrade from M6 to M6ii and maybe the fast focusing EF 70-300 nano USM lens is in my sights. I can use it on both systems.

The 70-300mm II would definitely focus faster and have better image quality, but you are not gaining much reach.  Third party teleconverters without an extended front element should work OK, but I would still avoid a 2X TC.  How much is a used original 100-400mm L in your area?  AF is fast and optically it is still very good.  The only real drawback is the mediocre IS.

In the interim, I would recommend working on yourself. Learn everything you can about the birds you are trying to capture and then use that information to put yourself in a better position to get closer to the birds. Start with the easier birds that will let you get really close. Even the lowly sparrow can make for a compelling image when photographed from only a meter away. Drop the teleconverters and see what you can capture with just the 55-250mm as this would be equivalent to what the 100-400mm would get you on your R.

I'm not such a dedicated birder that I'm going to lie in wait for a grey heron dressed in camo, or wade into the millpond to get closer before he flaps away. 5000 ISO certainly degraded my image at that shady pool, but it still looks quite nice at A3 print size. Sooner or later. I'll get closer shots of the red kites, there is a big population near me and it's just a matter of time.

Pigeons can be brought really close with some pastry scraps. Here's a recent shot from my indestructible Ricoh PX.

No, you can't have any more of my cheese and onion pasty. Get lost!

Ignore the EXIF, something got twisted up in post there!

-- hide signature --

I am not a number. I am a free man.
How the heck did I end up with this username?