Tracking with the Canon R5

Dael_Pix

Dael_Pix

Messages
1,615
Name
David
Edit My Images
No
Had a trip to RSPB Leighton Moss today and I've come to realise that an extender would be helpful (then I don't have to zoom in when processing).

I also had trouble tracking birds, especially in flight.

Any tips for settings for the Canon R5?
I'll post photos of settings tomorrow (my eyes are double vision because I'm not used to driving such long distances).

I will say that the tracking is very good and I have quite a few photos out of exactly 2357 that are sharp.
But those that are sharp, I have to zoom in.
 
Dael_Pix said:
Had a trip to RSPB Leighton Moss today and I've come to realise that an extender would be helpful (then I don't have to zoom in when processing).

I also had trouble tracking birds, especially in flight.

Any tips for settings for the Canon R5?
I'll post photos of settings tomorrow (my eyes are double vision because I'm not used to driving such long distances).

I will say that the tracking is very good and I have quite a few photos out of exactly 2357 that are sharp.
But those that are sharp, I have to zoom in.
Click to expand...

Hi David can you describe the trouble you experienced? That may help diagnose the problem.

Personally, I set it up with back button focus and animal tracking mode. After positioning the tracking point on the bird, press back button to focus and track then shutter button to take pictures as you want.
 
Bird photography is a tough gig. Small subjects, often at a distance even when in a hide and moving quickly. Consequently croppping/zooming is commonly needed, well in my experience anyway. It's not uncommon to see the Sigma 150-600 or some of the 'big white' lenses (wrapped in camouflage neoprene) in bird hides, and with good reason.

I typically use a 7DII with a 100-400mm, which with the 1.6x crop factor gives a full-frame equivalent of 640mm, even then cropping is often needed.
 
I used the Canon 100-400mm version II lens.

When trying to lock on to a Marsh Harrier, it seemed that it took ages to find the subject, and most of the time the camera couldn't find it.

I tried back button but I didn't like it.

This looks to be in focus, but it's so small in the frame that it's not worth zooming in because it's grainy.

Untitled.jpgUntitled2.jpg
 
Last edited:
Well, I think that's quite typical.

I'd suggest using no more than 1/1000th (I often use 1/640th), which helps bring the ISO down and reduces noise. Using Mode 2 IS on the lens for panning is useful as is setting the focus distance range to 3m-inf helps with focus hunting if you lose focus. I usually select the central group of focus points and try to keep the subject in that zone having also selected AI Servo Focus mode, but I'm using a 7DII, your R5 might well be smarter at putting a viable focus point on the target in an auto or zone mode.

Experimenting with case settings may help.
www.eos-magazine.com

Case Settings | fine-tuned autofocus for action shots

Need a quick way to tailor your focusing to suit a different moving subject? Case settings are the answer – neat today packages of focusing customisations made by Canon for you and your EOS camera
www.eos-magazine.com www.eos-magazine.com

Essentially, it takes time and practice.

Even the best results I've managed to get, mainly serve to remind me just how good the birding shots posted by guys like @the black fox @cruso @Dale. and others on this forum are. I think everyone can learn stuff from this forum everyday.

Good luck
 
Last edited:
you are cropping into like 5% if that, maybe 2% of the frame on the last shot there- can't expect it to be anything but low resolution in my opinion. Like has been already said, you'd be better here getting that canon 800mm RF lens, reducing the shutter speed to compensate for the increase in Aperture and in my experience you probably also push that ISO up a bit to do the rest of the compensation for the high F number....

But... I am not a bird shooter. Just my experience using the R5 that it A.) takes high ISO really well and B.) that your cropping way way too much.
 
mav said:
Whistling wings on youtube has a good video on setting the r5 up for bif
Click to expand...
I've changed my settings to his. I'll have a go with the camera tomorrow

A_S said:
you are cropping into like 5% if that, maybe 2% of the frame on the last shot there- can't expect it to be anything but low resolution in my opinion. Like has been already said, you'd be better here getting that canon 800mm RF lens, reducing the shutter speed to compensate for the increase in Aperture and in my experience you probably also push that ISO up a bit to do the rest of the compensation for the high F number....

But... I am not a bird shooter. Just my experience using the R5 that it A.) takes high ISO really well and B.) that your cropping way way too much.
Click to expand...
I know that. I was just showing what the camera was doing
 
Last edited:
Not on a Canon, but I found much better success by using a smaller focus area as already mentioned, then to make it easy to keep the bird in the small focus area, I use a red-dot hot-shoe mounted "view finder"

That made a huge difference on small fast moving things, no more losing it with a long lens.
 
Dael_Pix said:
I used the Canon 100-400mm version II lens.

When trying to lock on to a Marsh Harrier, it seemed that it took ages to find the subject, and most of the time the camera couldn't find it.

I tried back button but I didn't like it.

This looks to be in focus, but it's so small in the frame that it's not worth zooming in because it's grainy.

View attachment 417770View attachment 417771
Click to expand...
was the camera tracking the bird when this photo was taken? i.e. was your AF mode "face and tracking" and did you see the little blue squares illuminated and dancing around over the bird in the viewfinder?
 
TimHughes said:
was the camera tracking the bird when this photo was taken? i.e. was your AF mode "face and tracking" and did you see the little blue squares illuminated and dancing around over the bird in the viewfinder?
Click to expand...
Yes
 
TimHughes said:
Great. Then I would say the key things are to get closer to the subjects and practice.
Click to expand...
I was in a hide overlooking a lake within a marsh. So I couldn't get any closer, not unless I use an extender or longer lens.
 
RSPB reserves tend to be set up for binos/scopes rather than cameras. Some are better than others and I gather they are gradually improving facilities for photographers.

I tried to photograph marsh harriers at Leighton Moss two years ago, probably from the same hide as you, but they were too far away, so the results were not great. I was shooting at 600mm.
 
Just because you know it is a bird (animal/whatever) does not mean the camera does... when at a long distance it just looks more like a spot to the camera; especially if a little out of focus; if it is a lot out of focus the camera (on sensor PDAF) can't even see it.

Also note that at distance the focus tolerance/DoFocus is much greater... what the camera believes to be in focus may not actually be in focus at the pixel level.
 
Last edited:
Dael_Pix said:
I was in a hide overlooking a lake within a marsh. So I couldn't get any closer, not unless I use an extender or longer lens.
Click to expand...
you do get them coming cloe at Lm. the grizedale hide is good for them , your best going late in the Day when most people have left and its quiet
i shot this from the grizdale , it was back and forward quite a few Times

8DD54E85-139E-4F21-B185-D7AFB5222EDA.jpeg
 
mav said:
you do get them coming cloe at Lm. the grizedale hide is good for them , your best going late in the Day when most people have left and its quiet
i shot this from the grizdale , it was back and forward quite a few Times

View attachment 417823
Click to expand...
Has that been cropped?
 
Sangoma said:
Not on a Canon, but I found much better success by using a smaller focus area as already mentioned, then to make it easy to keep the bird in the small focus area, I use a red-dot hot-shoe mounted "view finder"

That made a huge difference on small fast moving things, no more losing it with a long lens.
Click to expand...
I would try using smaller focusing area like suggested Also as said Whistling wings on youtube you’re subject needs to be as close to you as pos. For the better results I have a cameo hide sit and Waite tactics ?
 
Brentor said:
RSPB reserves tend to be set up for binos/scopes rather than cameras. Some are better than others and I gather they are gradually improving facilities for photographers.

I tried to photograph marsh harriers at Leighton Moss two years ago, probably from the same hide as you, but they were too far away, so the results were not great. I was shooting at 600mm.
Click to expand...
I took over 2000 photos and deleted 1800 of them because most were too far away even at 400mm. I'm now editing and marking others to delete.

No idea which hide I was at in the photos above. I went to them all. (Wish I put Strava on for the miles!)

I think instead of buying an extender I'll wait til I have funds to buy a prime.


I found out that a bean bag would help to rest the lens on. I took the tripod and ended up not using it (dead weight whilst walking round).
Benches could be more comfy:D
 
Dael_Pix said:
I took over 2000 photos and deleted 1800 of them because most were too far away even at 400mm. I'm now editing and marking others to delete.

No idea which hide I was at in the photos above. I went to them all. (Wish I put Strava on for the miles!)

I think instead of buying an extender I'll wait til I have funds to buy a prime.


I found out that a bean bag would help to rest the lens on. I took the tripod and ended up not using it (dead weight whilst walking round).
Benches could be more comfy:D
Click to expand...
The long end of the 100-400 II is as good as a prime. Even a 600 prime won’t make up for being a couple of hundred yards away from the birds. Given that you have a body that will allow more than just the central focus point at f/8, an EF 1.4x III will give decent results and will show how even 640mm is sometimes not enough. Even on the 7DII with 400 x 1.4 x 1.6 is not enough… In reality the art is in getting closer to the subject and then having the patience to sit and wait. Similar mindset to fishing IMHO.

PS, I’m no expert on bird photography, but have had a go from time to time. Still learning.
 
Last edited:
TimHughes said:
Great. Then I would say the key things are to get closer to the subjects and practice.
Click to expand...
I agree - much closer. When the subject is so small in the frame, performance and results will be disappointing.
 
Dael_Pix said:
I think instead of buying an extender I'll wait til I have funds to buy a prime
Click to expand...

I've been there, done that, got the lenses and they are amazing. That said, getting closer is still the key. For me, the primes' bigger advantage is in low light.
 
Agree 400mm on FF isn't that long for wild birds really. Getting closer helps even with long lenses as atmospheric moisture/pollution/heathaze have worse effects the more air is between you and the bird.
 
TimHughes said:
That said, getting closer is still the key. For me, the primes' bigger advantage is in low light.
Click to expand...
Focal length really should be thought of as a choice for composition; what is included in the frame. Almost everything gets much more difficult/demanding with greater distance...
 
Getting closer may not be an option for the OP at this location - unless he's JC in mufti!
 
I agree getting closer isn't going to help at this site, but I think the info is something that should be considered for others areas, wildlife is tough, results are often few and far between, lots of time is needed, and luck, working with wildlife and a long lens is one thing, but mix in British weather, your praying to Mother Nature and she listens ;)
 
Last edited:
Nod said:
Getting closer may not be an option for the OP at this location - unless he's JC in mufti!
Click to expand...
True, I've been to LM a few times and the long shot of the Harrier is typical in my experience. Though they do sometime come closer to the hides.

I had similar at LM, Dee Estuary, Ham Wall, Loch of Kinnordy and Loch of Lowes last year. Even at Marbury Country Park this year, where the birds are really quite accommodating, they are still at a distance that results in something rather less than full-frame which challenges the sensor.

Others may have different experience to me, but I pretty much always find I need to crop bird images to get a pleasing frame. There are some truly great birding images on this site, I often wonder how many of them are uncropped.

I think the main point is about managing expectations. Without being able to get significantly closer, the shot posted by David is often as good as it gets. Buying a bigger lens, may bring improvement and improve the chances of capturing better shots, but won't by itself be bringing a lot of beautiful frame fillers. This may in turn be something of a disappointment.

I enjoy watching/seeing the birds. Getting a decent photograph is for me a bonus.
 
This is a Harrier shot, taken on a dull November day at Medeshead RSPB reserve last year. I used a 7DII, 100-400mm II at 400mm, 1/800th at f/5.6. We (just the two of us) were stood on the road and the bird came in from the right, not bothered by us at all and was probably 100-yards away. It's worth noting that the 7DII has an APS-C sensor that effectively crops the image by a factor of 1.6 from the outset. So the framing is equivalent to 640mm on a full frame body.

The first frame is uncropped, the second cropped to give a reasonable composition. Cropping harder is a waste of time, because it just turns to mush.

PS - Yes the horizon in the uncropped image is p!ssed. I wasn't because I was driving.

Medeshead Harrier Full.jpg


Medeshead Harrier Crop.jpg
 
Last edited:
Nod said:
Getting closer may not be an option for the OP at this location - unless he's JC in mufti!
Click to expand...
Then it just comes down to time and luck; and knowing "when" you are most likely to get lucky (fieldcraft). It's a lot like good landscape photography in that sense... waiting on the light and clouds/weather to cooperate.

I usually spend many hours/days in the field for every decent image I take.
 
Last edited:
I wish I had the attention span and patience!
 
Back to Leighton Moss tomorrow, but setting off very early to get there when it's getting light. Unless, I decide to go fishing.
 
robinsslee said:
The subject looks small in the frame. Have you tried shooting still subject to check the sharpness and AF? Sometimes atmospheric conditions such as heat haze can affect the sharpness.
Click to expand...
Who are you asking?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top