Out of 'lurk mode' and into the sunlight

Harv

I've been lurking for a while and decided it was time to come out of the dark and into the light. The following is a thread I have posted earlier on another forum so some members here may have already seen it.

I hooked up with a few friends to shoot at the Second Marsh in Oshawa as I wanted to test drive my new 400 f/5.6L on something I could not shoot from my deck. I was very pleased with the results and am convinced I made the right choice with this lens.

All shots taken with my 1D MkIIn, 400 f/5.6L, shooting manual at ISO800, f/8, 1/2000 sec.











Thanks for looking in. C&C is always welcomed.

Harryb

Congrats on delurking Harv. That's a very impressive set of shots especially the green heron in flight.

Don't go back into those shadows.

JohnDC

Harv wrote:

I wanted to test drive my new 400 f/5.6L on something I could not shoot from my deck. I was very pleased with the results and am convinced I made the right choice with this lens.
All shots taken with my 1D MkIIn, 400 f/5.6L, shooting manual at ISO800, f/8, 1/2000 sec.

Nice shots. I have been polling other local wildlife photographers, and this seems to be their favorite combo for hand-held shots. The Canon sensor can do the higher ISOs to get the faster shutter speeds and smaller apertures without a noise problem, and the Canon 400s perform better than the 100-400 zoom. Your photos bear that out.

Rhuarc

Wow, two Harry's, and both of them with BIF's... WHat is this world coming too!!

Edit: Oh, nm, it is Harv, not Hary. Sorry about that! I knew I shouldn't have skipped out of grade school!

Dick on Aruba

Well Harvey, your series are awesome!, especially the first two.

Thanks for sharing,

Dick.

GonzoBernelli

Oh my! A "Greenie" in flight! Excellent!

Ric Grupe

The green heron is nice to be sure...but, I think the RWBB is the best shot...

Harv

Harryb wrote:

Congrats on delurking Harv. That's a very impressive set of shots especially the green heron in flight.

Don't go back into those shadows.

Thanks a lot, Harry. I appreciate the kind words. Now if I can only get close to your level of ability, I will have arrived.

Harv

JohnDC wrote:

Nice shots. I have been polling other local wildlife photographers, and this seems to be their favorite combo for hand-held shots. The Canon sensor can do the higher ISOs to get the faster shutter speeds and smaller apertures without a noise problem, and the Canon 400s perform better than the 100-400 zoom. Your photos bear that out.

Thanks a lot.

Yes, I've been pleased with this setup and it does handle the higher ISO settings well.

I looked closely at the 100-400 and tried a couple of copies and although it's possible to get a really good one, the risk is there that you could end up with one that is not to sharp at the long end, wide open. I had been using a 300 f/4 for handheld but wanted more reach. I have never seen or heard of a soft copy of the 400 f/5.6 so I went ahead and ordered one. I'm very happy with it.

The only lens I have that is sharper is my 300 f/2.8L IS but it's a bit of a brute to lug around all day and I pretty much use it on the tripod only.

Thanks for looking in.

Harv

Rhuarc wrote:

Wow, two Harry's, and both of them with BIF's... WHat is this world coming too!!

Edit: Oh, nm, it is Harv, not Hary. Sorry about that! I knew I shouldn't have skipped out of grade school!

Two Harrys you could probably deal with but one Harv may prove to be more than you want.

Harv

Dick on Aruba wrote:

Well Harvey, your series are awesome!, especially the first two.

Thanks for sharing,

Dick.

Thanks a lot for looking in and commenting, Dick.

Harv

GonzoBernelli wrote:

Oh my! A "Greenie" in flight! Excellent!

Thanks a lot, Gonzo. Appreciated.

Harv

Ric Grupe wrote:

The green heron is nice to be sure...but, I think the RWBB is the best shot...

Thanks a lot, Ric. Much appreciated.

Rhuarc

Harv wrote:

Two Harrys you could probably deal with but one Harv may prove to be more than you want.

I don't know, wait till you get to know Harry before you say that!

Harv

Rhuarc wrote:

I don't know, wait till you get to know Harry before you say that!

Uh..... I already know harry from elsewhere.

Rhuarc

Yikes, well then I guess you do know enough to say that, and it makes me sacred!

ShepsMom

Outstanding shots, i shall bow to you Harry likes rodents, so bring on some mice!!

Harv

ShepsMom wrote:

Outstanding shots, i shall bow to you Harry likes rodents, so bring on some mice!!

Thanks a lot, Marina.

Do you mean like this?

kdog

Stunning shots, Harvey. Great clarity and focus on those, and nice comps.

I think the bad-copy problem on the 100-400s has been solved over time. I haven't heard of anybody getting a bad one in a long time. A few of us on dpreview did some extensive comparisons of the 100-400 versus the 400. The results were that wide-open the 400 is indeed a bit sharper. However, once you stop down a bit, the two lenses are pretty much indistinguishable. And of course the 100-400 is much better at shorter focal lengths. It takes a pretty mean portrait and is great for panos. I bought the 400 just to compare to my 100-400 and ended up keeping both of them.

Looking forward to seeing more of your work.
-joel

Harv

kdog wrote:

Stunning shots, Harvey. Great clarity and focus on those, and nice comps.

I think the bad-copy problem on the 100-400s has been solved over time. I haven't heard of anybody getting a bad one in a long time. A few of us on dpreview did some extensive comparisons of the 100-400 versus the 400. The results were that wide-open the 400 is indeed a bit sharper. However, once you stop down a bit, the two lenses are pretty much indistinguishable. And of course the 100-400 is much better at shorter focal lengths. It takes a pretty mean portrait and is great for panos. I bought the 400 just to compare to my 100-400 and ended up keeping both of them.

Looking forward to seeing more of your work.
-joel

Thanks a lot, Joel. I appreciate you looking and commenting.

I looked long and hard at the 100-400 because of the versatility but as you know, opted for the 400. I wanted it primarily for birds in flight and it does focus a lot faster. I have a 70-200 2.8 and a 300 2.8 to cover the lower ranges so it made the most sense for me.

Maestro

What the heck took you so long? You have captured some great action and details in those shots.

gluwater

Uh-oh. There goes the neighborhood. Hey Harv .

Harv

Maestro wrote:

What the heck took you so long? You have captured some great action and details in those shots.

Thanks a lot. Your kind words are very much appreciated.

Harv

gluwater wrote:

Uh-oh. There goes the neighborhood. Hey Harv .

Hiya, Nick. Yep, I'm here. You had to know I'd catch up to you sooner or later.