Hi All, I would be very grateful for your comments on the following.
I was choosing between Canon 80D and 7D Mark 2 last year – and eventually opted for 80D based on a combination of factors. I do plan to use my camera mostly for shooting birds – and I understood from the beginning that 7D has got a better autofocus, but did not think that the difference would be very significant (esp with still birds that i shoot most). Now I am starting to wonder whether I might have underestimated the difference
Attached are two pictures that I took last weekend in a remote nature reserve in northern Ukraine. I used the Canon 100-400 II lens.
On one picture is a male black grouse displaying on a lek at dawn – distance 200 meters, very early in the morning. F 7.1, ISO 400, 1/500, 400 mm, handheld. As you may see, the grouse is hopelessly out of focus – and this is the situation with 95% of pictures of that grouse that I took that morning. I am now thinking whether the superior autofocus function at 7D could have prevented this?
On the second picture is a Tengmalm’s owl, pictured at night at the distance of 10 meters under a flashlight. I did not use an external flash (do not think it is good to use it on owls anyway). F 5.6, ISO 6400, 1/40, 400 mm, handheld. The picture is not particularly sharp. The question I have is about the reason for this lack in sharpness – is it because the lighting conditions were poor, hence only 1/40 shutter speed and hence the blurring, or was it because the 80D autofocus failed to focus properly in poor lighting conditions? If the latter, could 7D have prevented that?
I would be extremely grateful for your views on the above.
Thank you
I was choosing between Canon 80D and 7D Mark 2 last year – and eventually opted for 80D based on a combination of factors. I do plan to use my camera mostly for shooting birds – and I understood from the beginning that 7D has got a better autofocus, but did not think that the difference would be very significant (esp with still birds that i shoot most). Now I am starting to wonder whether I might have underestimated the difference
Attached are two pictures that I took last weekend in a remote nature reserve in northern Ukraine. I used the Canon 100-400 II lens.
On one picture is a male black grouse displaying on a lek at dawn – distance 200 meters, very early in the morning. F 7.1, ISO 400, 1/500, 400 mm, handheld. As you may see, the grouse is hopelessly out of focus – and this is the situation with 95% of pictures of that grouse that I took that morning. I am now thinking whether the superior autofocus function at 7D could have prevented this?
On the second picture is a Tengmalm’s owl, pictured at night at the distance of 10 meters under a flashlight. I did not use an external flash (do not think it is good to use it on owls anyway). F 5.6, ISO 6400, 1/40, 400 mm, handheld. The picture is not particularly sharp. The question I have is about the reason for this lack in sharpness – is it because the lighting conditions were poor, hence only 1/40 shutter speed and hence the blurring, or was it because the 80D autofocus failed to focus properly in poor lighting conditions? If the latter, could 7D have prevented that?
I would be extremely grateful for your views on the above.
Thank you