R7 and RF 600 f11

I've been on the fence with the RF 600 f11.  I'm an enthusiast wildlife shooter and my primary camera is the R7, while I also have a R10.  I have the RF 100-400 as well as my trusty EF 70-300 nano USM II.

I got the 600 a little while ago and have had mixed results.  It does poorly with BIF, and farther away subjects, but closer subjects it seems to be good.  It also seems to suffer more from heatwaves than my 100-400 on subjects at the same distance.

Anyway, here are a few test shots from earlier this week at my local wildlife refuge.  I'm not really that happy with it overall, but I think more testing is needed.  C&C welcome.

TeeJay626 wrote:

I've been on the fence with the RF 600 f11. I'm an enthusiast wildlife shooter and my primary camera is the R7, while I also have a R10. I have the RF 100-400 as well as my trusty EF 70-300 nano USM II.

I got the 600 a little while ago and have had mixed results.

960mm (equiv) puts this combo in an entirely different class (of difficulty). Generally speaking, your approach needs to account for that.

It does poorly with BIF

The sample you posted has a shutter speed well below what I would personally recommend for that focal length (4x the equiv focal length is a good rule of thumb).

You don’t mention anything about your AF settings. For BIFs I really like Eye AF with “Auto Initial” and Case 2 with "Tracking sensitivity" set all the way to ( - ), and "Accel./decel. tracking" set all the way to ( + ). "Switching tracked subjects" all the way to ( 0 ).

I would also turn IS off for BIFs (I get higher keeper rates with it off).

If you have a filter on the lens, remove it. Also watch for the temperature layer that can set up within your lens hood. My hood has a port in the bottom of it which I keep open at all times.

and farther away subjects,

Is it the AF accuracy or the IQ? Mech shutter or electronic? What are your image settings? What do you use for software? Do you shoot bursts?

but closer subjects it seems to be good.

That means your lens is likely not defective.

It also seems to suffer more from heatwaves than my 100-400 on subjects at the same distance.

Longer focal lengths magnify heat waves too. Atmospherics can ruin the whole day.

Anyway, here are a few test shots from earlier this week at my local wildlife refuge. I'm not really that happy with it overall, but I think more testing is needed. C&C welcome.

My (maximum) optimal focal length for birding is about 800mm equiv. I’m currently shooting at 700mm (on FF). It works great for BIFs (for me). Anything much longer than that and things get a lot more tricky (very quickly). Remember that Canon itself classifies anything 400mm and above as “Super Telephoto.” You have to treat things accordingly. Your technique and settings (and shooting situations) have to be close to perfect.

I would suspect that improvements could be made on all threee fronts. Pick away at each phase and your success rate should climb steadily.

Best of luck to you!

R2

Avenger20 wrote:

Nice pictures, but I think the RF 600mm f11 might be too much for a 30mpix APS-C (and the f11 too slow for the AF of this camera). So I was thinking about getting the RF 100-400mm f5.6-8. Is the performance and picture quality good on a R7?

The RF 100-400 is great on the R7 and R10.  That lens is on my R7 most of the time.  Also, the EF 70-300 nano USM II adapted to both cameras works very well.

R2D2 wrote:

TeeJay626 wrote:

I've been on the fence with the RF 600 f11. I'm an enthusiast wildlife shooter and my primary camera is the R7, while I also have a R10. I have the RF 100-400 as well as my trusty EF 70-300 nano USM II.

I got the 600 a little while ago and have had mixed results.

960mm (equiv) puts this combo in an entirely different class (of difficulty). Generally speaking, your approach needs to account for that.

I've been trying different things and techniques.  I did have, for a while, the Sigma 150-600 C and while it was much heavier, I had better success with it vs. the 600 f11.

It does poorly with BIF

The sample you posted has a shutter speed well below what I would personally recommend for that focal length (4x the equiv focal length is a good rule of thumb).

I've been varying my shutter speeds, all the way up to 1/4000 and not seeing much difference.

You don’t mention anything about your AF settings. For BIFs I really like Eye AF with “Auto Initial” and Case 2 with "Tracking sensitivity" set all the way to ( - ), and "Accel./decel. tracking" set all the way to ( + ). "Switching tracked subjects" all the way to ( 0 ).

I'll try Case 2 with the adjustments you mention. I do use Case 2, but at it's defaults.  Eye AF is being used.

I would also turn IS off for BIFs (I get higher keeper rates with it off).

If you have a filter on the lens, remove it. Also watch for the temperature layer that can set up within your lens hood. My hood has a port in the bottom of it which I keep open at all times.

No filter.  I do have a lens hood so I'll try shooting without it.

and farther away subjects,

Is it the AF accuracy or the IQ? Mech shutter or electronic? What are your image settings? What do you use for software? Do you shoot bursts?

Mostly IQ.  When shooting BIF I use EFC to avoid rolling shutter with electronic.  I always shoot RAW and process my RAW files with DxO Pure RAW 2, edit in Lightroom and use Topaz Photo AI for any touch up work.  And yes, It do shoot in bursts.

but closer subjects it seems to be good.

That means your lens is likely not defective.

It also seems to suffer more from heatwaves than my 100-400 on subjects at the same distance.

Longer focal lengths magnify heat waves too. Atmospherics can ruin the whole day.

Absolutely.  I've had that happen more than once.

Anyway, here are a few test shots from earlier this week at my local wildlife refuge. I'm not really that happy with it overall, but I think more testing is needed. C&C welcome.

My (maximum) optimal focal length for birding is about 800mm equiv. I’m currently shooting at 700mm (on FF). It works great for BIFs (for me). Anything much longer than that and things get a lot more tricky (very quickly). Remember that Canon itself classifies anything 400mm and above as “Super Telephoto.” You have to treat things accordingly. Your technique and settings (and shooting situations) have to be close to perfect.

I would suspect that improvements could be made on all threee fronts. Pick away at each phase and your success rate should climb steadily.

Best of luck to you!

R2

Avenger20 wrote:

Nice pictures, but I think the RF 600mm f11 might be too much for a 30mpix APS-C (and the f11 too slow for the AF of this camera). So I was thinking about getting the RF 100-400mm f5.6-8. Is the performance and picture quality good on a R7?

R2D2 wrote:

I would also turn IS off for BIFs (I get higher keeper rates with it off).

Is that IBIS, lens or both? I am experimenting still with the R7 and 100-400mm RF. At what shutter speed would you consider turning it on again. (Sometimes we are often forced to lower than ideal shutter speeds in the UK

Ah, thanks, I didn't know that.