• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Opinions on the Canon 7D and Canon 400mm f5.6 for handheld winter photography on clou (1 Viewer)

Mad Scientist

Mad Scientist

Well-known member
Opinions: Canon 7D and Canon 400mm f5.6 for handheld winter photography Scotland/UK

Opinions on the Canon 7D and Canon 400mm f5.6 for handheld winter photography on cloudy days in Scotland

Scotland: Not the sunniest of places in winter. Natural light levels are low and even lower on cloudy days.

Here’s my understanding:

The Canon 7D – an excellent camera for birding in good light, but in poor light higher ISOs lead to very noisy pics.

The Canon 400mm – an excellent, sharp lens, but it doesn’t have image stabilization. Without image stabilization high shutter speeds are important for handheld photography, and high shutter speeds are vital for birds in flight anyway.

The requirement for high shutter speeds means high ISOs are needed in poor light conditions. The Canon 7D won’t provide high ISOs without unacceptable noise.

So, although the Canon 7D may be a great birding camera anywhere in the UK during the brighter months, it might not do the job in Scotland in winter.
Is this a fair assessment?
 
Last edited:
You are right in your assessment but it is not altogether a lost cause IMHO. For a start the shutter speed needed to get sharp hand held shots with the 400/5.6 can vary a lot depending on an individuals hand holding technique. For birds in flight where you defo need a fast shutter speed (1/1600 sec +)the only way the only way you can achieve it is to up the ISO but the only compensation is that you often have more light when shooting flyers as opposed to perched birds as the sky is brighter than say, bushes..... A big bonus with the 400/5.6 is that it is pin sharp wide open so you save a bit by not having to stop down.
Another factor in the equation is how well you deal with noise in the images, if you shoot to the right you can get away with up to ISO 1600 on the 7D in my experience although I used to prefer keeping at a max of 800 if I could. If you tend to underexpose your shots and then push in processing then noise can be a big problem even at ISO 800. On top of this good noise reduction software can also help a lot.

I guess at the end of the day you should be evaluating against the alternatives which will be dependent on your budget,
 
Thanks Roy. Unfortunately, I'm not confident in my ability to handhold at lower shutter speeds - too many blurred images.

The alternative I have in mind is the 5D mark 3. It's a pity is so much more expensive than the 7D.

From what I've read, the 5Diii will:

*give greatly improved autofocus
*give greatly improved low light performance
*give better image quality if I get close enough to take a photo that doesn't need a lot of cropping

So for bird photography in winter or dawn/dusk conditions, it sounds like the obvious choice.

BUT, I've also read that it won't give the reach of the 7D because it's full frame. Or maybe I should say apparent reach.

I say 'apparent reach' because, with higher initial image quality, photos on the 5Diii will stand up to heavier cropping than those taken on the 7D. That's what I thought, but I'm aware there's a large body of opinion out there that says that the 7D beats the 5Diii for non-close-up bird photos. I've not been able to find 'proof' of this though, if such a thing is possible.

So, I'm leaning toward the 5D mark 3, but I am worried about the 'real' or 'apparent' lack of reach.

Any thoughts (and any side-by-side real-world bird comparisons anyone knows about would be greatly appreciated).
 
Mad Scientist said:
Thanks Roy. Unfortunately, I'm not confident in my ability to handhold at lower shutter speeds - too many blurred images.

The alternative I have in mind is the 5D mark 3. It's a pity is so much more expensive than the 7D.

From what I've read, the 5Diii will:

*give greatly improved autofocus
*give greatly improved low light performance
*give better image quality if I get close enough to take a photo that doesn't need a lot of cropping

So for bird photography in winter or dawn/dusk conditions, it sounds like the obvious choice.

BUT, I've also read that it won't give the reach of the 7D because it's full frame. Or maybe I should say apparent reach.

I say 'apparent reach' because, with higher initial image quality, photos on the 5Diii will stand up to heavier cropping than those taken on the 7D. That's what I thought, but I'm aware there's a large body of opinion out there that says that the 7D beats the 5Diii for non-close-up bird photos. I've not been able to find 'proof' of this though, if such a thing is possible.

So, I'm leaning toward the 5D mark 3, but I am worried about the 'real' or 'apparent' lack of reach.

Any thoughts (and any side-by-side real-world bird comparisons anyone knows about would be greatly appreciated).
Click to expand...
I have the 5D3 (sold my 7D about six months ago) I also have the 400/5.6 (and the Tammy 150-600) so can offer a comparison for what it is worth.

The the 5D3 is great at high ISO's and I will use it up to ISO 6400 (even ISO 12800 is usable) no problem so shutter speed is rarely a problem when handing the 400/5.6. I can also confirm that the AF is greatly improved over the 7D, the 7D is fine when it nails the focus but can be a bit inconsistent whereas the 5D3 seems to nail it every time. The 5D3 is also faster focusing especially in low light. You also have more AF options especially in AI servo mode.The IQ on the 5D3 is superb when compared to any 1.6 cropper that I have used, not just noise levels but it seems nicer colours, contrast, saturation ..... Another bonus with the 5D3 is that you can AF at f8.

Now for the bad news, shooting full frame you take a heck of an hit on the 'reach'. For example a 400mm lens on a full frame gives the same 'reach' as a 250mm lens on the 7D. I use the 400/5.6 with a 1.4 x tc on the 5D3 which gives me 560mm, so still not up to the bare 400 on the 7D (640mm FOV) and shooting the 5D3 at f8 you are restricted to centre point AF only although it does allow centre point expansion which helps for flyers.
I love the 5D3 but IMO you cannot crop the images a lot more that the 7D. I have tried several test with the 5D3 v my ancient 40D and cropping a 5D3 shot to the same FOV as the 40D does not yield as much detail. I know that pixels per bird is not every thing but is it helps with fine detail on birds IMO.
To try and conteract the loss of reach on a FF I reckon you need at least 600mm for bird photography, to this end I have picked up a Tamron 150-600 but it needs to be stopped down at the long end and it is far from ideal for flyers.
I am sure other folk will give you their opinions but at the end of the day I would not recommend a 400mm lens with a FF Camera unless you can get very near to your target.
 
Retrodaz said:
Roy, what do you mean by shooting to the right?
Click to expand...
Its where you make sure that the exposure is pushed right over the the right side of the histogram as far as you dare without blowing the highlights of the bird. If you do a web search on ETTR you will find lots of info on it.
If you underexpose a shot and then push in processing you will amplify any noise present especially in the shadow areas, I shoot in RAW and aim to slightly clip the targets highlights (with a RAW file you can always bring it back a half a stop in processing). By shooting to the right you also maximise the dynamic range - it is reckoned that 80% of the tones are captured in the brightest 20% of the image so if you under expose you could be missing out big time.
By ETTR with birds you will often overexpose bright parts of the background but that is the price you pay for correctly exposing the bird. There are ways of bringing back these over exposed parts in processing.
 
I think Roy has just about covered everything there, I have the 7d and 400 5.6 a brilliant combo imho used it exclusively before I went to the 500 f4, always check the histogram with the 7d and as said ettr, I have been undecided for a long time in the 5d3 ie losing the reach so am waiting and hoping that the new 7d2 will have improved iso performance? auto focus, and a silent shutter that works. Might be worth waiting for the 7d2?
 
Last edited:
I agree with Tony that the upcoming 7D2 will be well worth waiting for. If the AF is improved (which it surely will be) and the high ISO noise levels are at least 1 stop better then it could be a killer Cameras for bird photography. Mind you I would not be surprised if the early adopters price is not more than you can current get the 5D3 for.
 
Thanks very much for your thoughts Roy and Tony. I especially appreciate hearing your views Roy as someone who's experienced using both cameras.

It sounds like I would lose too much reach with the 5D3, so I'll probably opt for the 7D - and as you and Tony both suggest, I'll try to compensate by exploring using +1 EV when I'm taking pics in low light conditions. Would you mind saying what software would you recommend using to normalise images like these?

Thinking about it, it sounds like what I really need is a cropped 5D3, but I know I'm not the first person to say that!

I'd certainly consider combining the 5D3 with the Tamron if it wasn't for the lens's bulk.

Maybe I should just buy a 7D, a 5D3 and swap the 400mm f5.6 between them depending how close the bird is. |:D|
 
Mad Scientist said:
Thanks very much for your thoughts Roy and Tony. I especially appreciate hearing your views Roy as someone who's experienced using both cameras.

It sounds like I would lose too much reach with the 5D3, so I'll probably opt for the 7D - and as you and Tony both suggest, I'll try to compensate by exploring using +1 EV when I'm taking pics in low light conditions. Would you mind saying what software would you recommend using to normalise images like these?

Thinking about it, it sounds like what I really need is a cropped 5D3, but I know I'm not the first person to say that!

I'd certainly consider combining the 5D3 with the Tamron if it wasn't for the lens's bulk.

Maybe I should just buy a 7D, a 5D3 and swap the 400mm f5.6 between them depending how close the bird is. |:D|
Click to expand...
If I were you I would wait a couple of weeks as the 7D2 could be just around the corner. Even if the 7D2 is out of your price range there may be a few bargain priced 7D MkI knocking around!
BTW shooting to the right is not quite as easy as just dialing-in Ev+1, each shot must be judged on its own merits - the Cameras histogram is your friend.
Also it is a big advantage to shoot in RAW IMO as it gives you a little more wriggle room in processing. For Software I convert my RAWS in Canons freebie DPP and then do the bulk of the processing in CS5 but there are cheaper options like Photoshop Elements. Best of luck for whatever you decide to go for :t:
 
Make sure you use the blinkies as well this will assist in assessing the exposure. Dialing in +1 you may be blowing whites and over exposing. Just get those blinkies so they are just barely blinking. More often than not with no sun on bright days you will be - ev not plus. So you need to play around and get to know you're camera. And as Roy says shooting raw is the way to go. Tone.
 
Last edited:
Very good advice. Thanks Roy and Tony.

At your prompting, I've searched for info about the 7Dii. With a bit of luck it might just about match my hopes for the autofocus and low light performance of the 5D3, while offering the reach of the 7D.

As you suggest, I'll wait for a few weeks and see what happens.

BTW, how easy do you find it to get the bird in your sights with the 400mm f5.6?

I'm wondering if I'll struggle to find the bird without the benefit of being able to start with a wider field of view, then zoom in it.
 
If you shoot RAW and are careful with how you process the files I find up to ISO 3200 useable with the 7D. The secret is to use Lightroom to manipulate the exposure, curves etc but do not sharpen or use any noise reduction.

Then, using an effective noise suppression plug in like Topaz Denoise, sort out the noise in Photoshop - again before sharpening - this is the key bit - no point sharpening the noise. Get it out of the way first then sharpen the image.

Combined with careful exposure to minimise the shadows to begin with and you can get some excellent results.
 
Thanks dannybgoode. I hadn't heard of Topaz Denoise. Looks interesting.

Just for fun, after I saw your pics Roy, I took a couple of shots of white houses on my little superzoom at ISO 12800. I won't post them, because they were of other people's houses. Safe to say though that the results were unusable! The results from the 5D3 are impressive.
 
The 7d is certainly capable of producing great results at ISO 1600 with the correct exposure and some post-processing. I still find myself in the position where the ISO needed is 6400 to get an adequate shutter speed to freeze the action.

I also shoot concerts and bought a 6d which is full frame and awesome at high ISO. It has much less sophisticated AF than either the 7d or the 5diii. The 6d still works beautifully for perched birds, although I would not use it for BIF.

If you aren't solely a bird photographer you can get a new 7d and 6d for less than the price of a new 5diii. You than have two bodies and cameras which will cover all your needs.

BW

Steve
 
I popped into the back garden this evening to give my 7D a quick test in poor light - heavily overcast - and shot with my Sigma 120-300/2.8 OS and 1.4X TC, hand held (OS off) at 420mm, 1/1250, f/5.6, 6400 ISO. I couldn't summon a BIF and birds of any kind were scant, but here is the best birdy example I could create this evening. It was shot raw and converted in Lightroom with no adjustments applied. All I did was to resize to 1/4 scale in the conversion to JPEG.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-...y3unKCQKDPE/s1296/20140830_185515_7026_LR.jpg

For reference here is a 100% crop with no adjustments at all....

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-...txKx7CmlG4/s800/20140830_185515_7026_LR-2.jpg

It goes without saying that the individual pixels are pretty awful, but if you can fill the frame with your subject and have modest ambitions for reproduction size I think the 7D can still deliver the goods. Of course, sympathetic post processing may help further.

Something like a 5D3 would have cleaner individual pixels, but less pixels on the bird, and the real noise advantage would come from the extra sensor area, which would be absolutely wasted in a focal length limited scenario where the image would be cropped in any case.

The greatest contributors to success, regardless of camera model are....

- Make the subject as large in the frame as possible, whether by using the right lens or getting closer;
- Expose well, to the right if possible, and shoot raw for greater latitude in tweaking sharpening and NR;
- Shoot sharp - perfect focus, no unwanted blur or shake. A sharp image conceals noise because the details show through and can somewhat dominate the noise. If you shoot soft you will try to sharpen the image, which in turn sharpens the noise and when you hit the image with heavy NR you obliterate the detail you were trying to salvage in the first place. You might get away with such things with a frame filling subject or environmental shot, but not if you need to crop severely.

p.s. The 7D can be bought for ~£600 new from Hdew (who supplied my 5D3) - http://www.hdewcameras.co.uk/canon-7d-digital-slr-camera-body-494-p.asp. The 5D3 is getting on for 3X that price from the same supplier.
 
Last edited:
Tim have any more examples with the sigma lens, I'm interested in buying the sport version but hear there are image quality issues when using TCs.
 
Paul, I haven't done any serious birding for some time and I have only one BIF shot with the 120-300 and 1.4X, but I can show an assortment of shots at 420mm with either my 7D or 5D3. Some have no edits, others just a crop and some have a bit more work. I've quickly assembled an album of random examples here....

https://picasaweb.google.com/106744949286510089237/420mm?authkey=Gv1sRgCKmIyrn8vM6PWQ

I would love the Sport version, but will have to survive with my original OS copy. The lens works best with Sigma's own TCs, although I find the 2X to need stopping down to f/8 while the 1.4X can be used wide open at f/4. If you look on POTN you will find a huge discussion thread with many superb examples from the non-sport version, especially of birds by Gabe Balazs. Drop into the thread here - http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=16274802#post16274802 - and work back or forth from there.
 
I suppose a question that has to be asked is "Do you have to photograph everything" and at 'all times of the year'? Is the photography of it all that important to you, or....can you find just as much enjoyment by skipping the camera and lens, and merely bird with your binoculars?

Frankly under some of those conditions, are you really going to get that 'perfect shot' ...7D or 5diii or whatever?

I know around my 'local patch' (I love that British term)....I am pretty familiar with my birds and find that at certain times of the year, it is way more enjoyable just to bird with bino's....take a walk and not have to worry about the light, the image etc. .... Just my thoughts, jim
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 10 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

B
Canon EF 400/f5.6 L USM + EOS 7D Mk II combo anyone???
Replies
2
Views
980
BoldenEagle
B
C
Umm... lol settings advice? Canon xs50 HS.
Replies
9
Views
1K
dom.birda
D
W
Considering a Partial Camera Upgrade - D500 w/ 200-500mm lens
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
BriLee
B
R
Canon 400mm F5.6 1.4 ext versus 5 or 600mm?
Replies
5
Views
2K
marcsantacurz
M
Denny Woodthorpe
  • Article
The Flasher.
Replies
2
Views
469
Denny Woodthorpe
Denny Woodthorpe

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top