# Birdsasart migrates to Nikon



## AlanF (Jan 24, 2018)

Jack Douglas has alerted us to Art Morris switching to Nikon

_“As many have surmised, I am — after 34 1/2 years of using Canon gear, after about 18 years as a Canon Explorer of Light (not many know that I was fired from that role about four years ago), and after 17 years of using Canon digital gear, switching to Nikon. If you do lots of flight photography, you should switch too. If not, I far prefer my Canon gear. Some of the AF stuff with Nikon — such as switching the AF patterns — is horrifically designed. But if you want sharp images of birds in flight then you should/will switch to Nikon. The funny thing is that I recently figured out — with help from Arash Hazeghi — how to make the most of the AF systems of my 5D Mark IV bodies and especially with my newly replaced EOS-1DX II. But for birds in flight Nikon is light years ahead. After 30 seconds of working with the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR lens and the blazingly fast professional digital camera body, the Nikon D5 DSLR camera body with dual XQD slots), I was pretty sure that I was gonna switch even before I saw the images. To make sure that I not was crazy, I had Patrick Sparkman try out the Nikon rig. After one bird flew by he said, “I am switching.””_

http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/2018/01/23/this-just-in-internet-experts-state-that-the-nikon-200-500-1-4x-tc-14e-iii-d5-combo-is-not-sharp/

The new Nikon D850 and D500 are awesome. The problem is having a hand-held telephoto to go with them. Art, however, goes overboard in praise of the Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6. I took a keen interest in the 200-500mm and have read dozens of reviews. The consensus is that the lens is tack sharp close up but softer at long distances and it is slow focusing. It’s on a par with the old Tamron 150-600mm. You can read comments on Art’s blog about the distance fall off of sharpness and the focusing.speed. 

A really in-depth review that sums up the consensus is in https://photographylife.com/nikon-200-500mm-vs-tamron-150-600mm-vs-sigma-150-600mm-c

_“Niki is razor sharp at 500 mm and near minimum focusing distance. “…“At infinity, it’s another story altogether with Niki showing noticeable softness, especially in the corners at all focal lengths but more so at longer focal lengths.”
“When it comes to sharpness, Sigi had good center sharpness from near to far and through the range of focal lengths. Corners are noticeably soft in long distance shots at all focal lengths."

“Of the three lenses I feel Tami has the best balance of near to far and corner-to-corner sharpness at all focal lengths.”
“When it comes to AF speed, Tami and Sigi are both quick and in the field I can’t distinguish a difference when they are focusing on a static subject. Racking focus from 10 feet to infinity takes the same amount of time. Niki is noticeably slower than both Tami and Sigi. I give Tami the slight edge over Niki in AF performance on static subjects just because Tami is a bit faster.”_

Other reviewers also recommend the Tamron over the Nikkor. And the new G2 Tamron is an improvement over the old 150-600mm.

I am not migrating to Nikon if the best lens available is a Tamron 150-600mm or its near-equivalent! My 400mm f/4 DO II has blazingly fast and accurate focus on the 5DIV, as well as being tack sharp corner to corner, and has given me consistently good birds in flight photos. If Nikkor could bring out a similar lens, then maybe I would consider it. By that time, however, Canon should have leapfrogged Nikon. In any case, for shots in good light, the Canon lenses on the 5DSR are difficult to beat for IQ.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 24, 2018)

AlanF said:



> Jack Douglas has alerted us to Art Morris switching to Nikon
> 
> _“As many have surmised, I am — after 34 1/2 years of using Canon gear, after about 18 years as a Canon Explorer of Light (not many know that I was fired from that role about four years ago), and after 17 years of using Canon digital gear, switching to Nikon. If you do lots of flight photography, you should switch too. If not, I far prefer my Canon gear. Some of the AF stuff with Nikon — such as switching the AF patterns — is horrifically designed. But if you want sharp images of birds in flight then you should/will switch to Nikon. The funny thing is that I recently figured out — with help from Arash Hazeghi — how to make the most of the AF systems of my 5D Mark IV bodies and especially with my newly replaced EOS-1DX II. But for birds in flight Nikon is light years ahead. After 30 seconds of working with the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR lens and the blazingly fast professional digital camera body, the Nikon D5 DSLR camera body with dual XQD slots), I was pretty sure that I was gonna switch even before I saw the images. To make sure that I not was crazy, I had Patrick Sparkman try out the Nikon rig. After one bird flew by he said, “I am switching.””_
> 
> ...



Just sounds like bitter click-bate to me. He Gott fired and now he wants to stick it to 'the man'. Funny how when he was paid by them he had nothing but praise for each and every model that came out. I wouldn't be surprised to find he has an 'agreement' with Nikon soon...


----------



## MrFotoFool (Jan 24, 2018)

Does anyone know why Canon "fired" (his word) him as an endorsee?


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 24, 2018)

Canon had a clear out of Explorers a while ago, they kept most of them but dropped half a dozen or so and got a newer fresher half a dozen. I don't like most of the new group but they included Gregory Heisler, who is probably one of the greatest portrait photographers alive, so they do have some good taste and I can forgive them the 'social media' derived others.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 24, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> He Gott fired and now he wants to stick it to 'the man'.......



Is "He Gott" a typo for the German "Herr Gott", the supreme being? If so, Art has definitely gone to the dark side. That would be so much so much more interesting than a typo for "He got".


----------



## unfocused (Jan 24, 2018)

I think it is simplistic to write it off as sour grapes.

He was not happy with the 1DX series because of the oil and dust splatter problems and I believe wrote about sending several bodies back to address the problem, without much success. That is a legitimate complaint that Canon really should address (yes, I know, Nikon has had problems as well, but Nikon seems to have taken the concerns more seriously, in part because they had a much bigger problem.) He liked the 5D IV, though, which does not seem to share the problem. 

As much as I like Canon, I have read enough reviews to know that many people prefer the Nikon autofocus system. I certainly find the Canon autofocus system less than stellar. Some people say it is just a matter of knowing how to use it, but I would note that many sports professionals who are Canon users, admit they tend to use single point autofocus most of the time. No autofocus system is perfect and I certainly hope Canon continues to work on improving their autofocus. 

There are always professionals switching systems. Scott Kelby switched from Nikon to Canon a few years back. 

Usually, when a high profile professional switches people like to find some ulterior motive. But, really, these people are courted by all the camera manufacturers and if they decide to switch, it's usually because they have found something they like about the new brand. Instead of us trying to come up with excuses and rationales, it is more productive to listen to what they have to say and determine whether or not we think they have some valid points.

I tend to think he has some valid points. I'm a Canon fan, but I appreciate it when a professional compares the brands, finds something he or she likes and then shares it with us. It can only make Canon a better brand.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 24, 2018)

Nikon didn't take the problem more seriously, they denied there was an issue at all until they were banned from selling the D600 in China.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 24, 2018)

He has written some more today in http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/ of his break with Canon. To reiterate, what surprises me is his raving enthusiasm for a lens that is not first class according to many reviewers and has to be stopped down at 500mm to f/11, which might be OK for the low Mpx D5 but will be well over DLA for a D850 or a D500. He is a wonderful bird photographer who is justly famous for his bird portraits. He is not known for birds in flight. I wonder if his protege Arash Hazeghi who is brilliant at BIF will switch to Nikon?


----------



## dak723 (Jan 24, 2018)

Oh how funny! The typical total forum overreaction! He's angry ...he's a mercanary... Good grief.

Perhaps you all missed this sentence from the OP's post:

"If you do lots of flight photography, you should switch too. If not, I far prefer my Canon gear."

Gee, he likes Nikon better for one specific type of photography. That happens to be what he does, so he is switching. But for everything else, he prefers Canon. Sounds pretty logical, simple and straightforward, but I guess that is too confusing for internet forum dwellers.


----------



## LDS (Jan 24, 2018)

Is this important? I really don't follow salesmen, or "influencers", as they are called today.

Do you say something interesting about techniques, etc.? Welcome. Do you try to sell me products or services? No, thanks, goodbye.

Never felt the need to be reassured about my choices, or the need of feeling I own the "best".

Unluckily it looks "influencers" work, and companies are trying to use them more and more. Just look at how the Lightroom product manager likes to boast on LinkedIn how he used them effectively to boost sales.


----------



## R1-7D (Jan 24, 2018)

He got fed up with Canon dicking him around on the oil splatter problems with the 1DX Mark II. He and I have been in contact about it for weeks, and collected files from over 30 different units to send to Canon. Canon just kept stalling and ignoring the issue, or claimed there was no issue. 

This is his response. I, unfortunately, can’t afford to make such a large switch. I won’t ever buy another 1D from Canon, though.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 24, 2018)

AlanF said:


> He has written some more today in http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/ of his break with Canon.



His post seems very reasonable and honest to me. People should really read it before jumping to conclusions. 



AlanF said:


> To reiterate, what surprises me is his raving enthusiasm for a lens that is not first class according to many reviewers...



I think it goes to show that the ability to capture and hold focus trumps absolute sharpness. 



LDS said:


> Is this important? I really don't follow salesmen, or "influencers", as they are called today...



I would not characterize Morris as a salesman -- at least not in the sense that he sells equipment. As far as I can tell he makes his living selling his images and conducting workshops. To be fair, the workshop route is pretty much how a lot of photographers make a living today, given the collapse of print journalism.




dak723 said:


> Oh how funny! The typical total forum overreaction! He's angry ...he's a mercanary... Good grief.



To be fair, it is only a few individuals who are trashing him.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 24, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> Just sounds like bitter click-bate to me. He Gott fired and now he wants to stick it to 'the man'. Funny how when he was paid by them he had nothing but praise for each and every model that came out. I wouldn't be surprised to find he has an 'agreement' with Nikon soon...



If you read the trail of posts on the forum he lost his role as Explorer of Light 4 years ago so IMO it seems odd he waits this long to 'stick it to the man'.
He is also quite clear that his interest has moved to more birds in flight and finds the Nikon superior on maintaining AF as he tracks the subject against complex backgrounds - something I have heard from a few people. Art is also clear that if it were not for birds in flight he would have no reason to change.

make of that what you will but it all sounds reasonable to me.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 24, 2018)

unfocused, is correct. Artie is a decent fellow who happens to make money through photography so you'd expect some of what he delivers. I can only guess on why the relationship with Canon deteriorated. In a recent interaction with Artie I suggested some very nice features of the 1DX2 relative to AF modes such as the different programming of the two back buttons etc. It was obvious to me (IOW my opinion) that he felt it was just fine to keep doing what works for him (primarily shutter focus). Of course, to each his own, I was only trying to be helpful. I believe that all of us as we age tend to tire of learning all the new-fangled features when we already have something that we think works just fine. I had to sweat with the manual of the 1DX2 for about a month before I felt I'd mastered the AF reasonably well.

So my guess would be that Explorers of Light need to be younger and fully engaged in the latest technology and perhaps Artie didn't fit that profile (anymore). Of course he may fully disagree with my guess and he would know better than me. At any rate, it doesn't seem to me that Canon was very considerate in their dealings but again how can I accurately judge.

dak723, I don't know exactly what you're trying to achieve. I think the Nikon AF is fast and accurate from what I hear and for a novice seems to be very well tuned and in that regard probably better than Canon at this point in time. From your comments one would think Nikon has been ahead for many years - not true and furthermore companies tend to sea-saw back and forth in being the best. It would be stupid to be switching brands constantly, so most of us do the best we can with what we've got, which is very good cameras from Canon and other companies.

Jack


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 24, 2018)

AlanF said:


> He has written some more today in http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/ of his break with Canon. To reiterate, what surprises me is his raving enthusiasm for a lens that is not first class according to many reviewers and has to be stopped down at 500mm to f/11, which might be OK for the low Mpx D5 but will be well over DLA for a D850 or a D500. He is a wonderful bird photographer who is justly famous for his bird portraits. He is not known for birds in flight. I wonder if his protege Arash Hazeghi who is brilliant at BIF will switch to Nikon?



Arash thinks highly of Nikon AF but has not been impressed with with their long telephotos, especially with teleconverters attached (something a lot of Nikon users seem to agree with).
Art is quite realistic and says he accepts Nikon will present frustrations in the future so we shall see.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 24, 2018)

So what?

He has very specific requirements and picked the best body/lens combo for him......

I would hope that any of us would do the same.....


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 24, 2018)

dak723 said:


> Gee, he likes Nikon better for one specific type of photography. That happens to be what he does...



Quite the opposite. He said until very recently that his main is bird behaviour and was not particularly interested in BIF but will grab it while he can. Whether that was because of the size of the 1Dx/2 I don't know, but he also said the 1Dx was too heavy for him at his age yet here he is with the D5...


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 24, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> So what?
> 
> He has very specific requirements and picked the best body/lens combo for him......
> 
> I would hope that any of us would do the same.....



Of course that's true but perhaps you don't regularly read the glowing comments designed to promote Canon that were obviously tied to a kind of loyalty that he even alludes to. It's not unlike some of us saying that some reviewers are influenced by the perks they receive and not truly unbiased. Artie has my blessing, he works exceedingly hard, is very helpful and has a great life in photography.

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 24, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > Gee, he likes Nikon better for one specific type of photography. That happens to be what he does...
> ...



Probably he just had one of those teenage moments. His move is not going to harm him and he may be forever happy with the decision but he's acknowledging that there are negatives and positives as we all know. He had been sticking with Canon due to an allegiance, which soured, so maybe this switch was long overdue.

Jack


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 24, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > So what?
> ...



From what I gathered, he was happy with canon until his needs changed..... so he went with a change that overall fit his new requirements better, and even doing so, mentions the pluses and minuses of the switch.

I find that refreshing..... loyalty is good, but not blind loyalty.....

For many of us, it really does not matter if we shoot Canon, Nikon, Sony, or Olympus..... all are good and produce fine images in skilled hands. For some of us, with very specific demands and trying to push as far as they can go, specific gear allows them to push to the next level. He is obviously in that rare category.....


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 25, 2018)

Don, if you had been reading/following the blogs you'd have a bit more information, not that it matters. Artie stated that he's struggled with BIF etc. and didn't do too much of it. It is conceivable that he didn't really have the parameters tuned to advantage, but no matter. So as a not too experienced shooter of BIF he then states:

"But for birds in flight Nikon is light years ahead." 

I don't take that literally but wonder how a person who says they are not that good at it can make such a definitive statement. Never the less, I have reason to believe there is some truth to it, and maybe Arash first switched and influenced him.

Now, here's another thing. He's encouraging others to do exactly as he has and to use his links so he makes money. OK, it's not illegal or immoral but I still have to kind of smile when I read such things. 

Thankfully we live in free countries and can all do as we please so Artie has my blessing.

Jack


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 25, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> Don, if you had been reading/following the blogs you'd have a bit more information, not that it matters. Artie stated that he's struggled with BIF etc. and didn't do too much of it. It is conceivable that he didn't really have the parameters tuned to advantage, but no matter. So as a not too experienced shooter of BIF he then states:
> 
> "But for birds in flight Nikon is light years ahead."
> 
> ...


Yes  I certainly get what you are saying.....

BTW, when I got my 7D2, my keeper rate for BIF was pathetic..... the more I used it and played with the settings, the better it got.... you really need to customize the settings for your own use....


----------



## unfocused (Jan 25, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> ...my guess would be that Explorers of Light need to be younger and fully engaged in the latest technology and perhaps Artie didn't fit that profile (anymore).



Looking at the Explores of Light (hate that term, reminds me of that horrible "painter of light" guy) it seems like a mix of a few true superstar photographers: Bruce Dorn, David Hume Kennerly, Douglas Kirkland, Peter Read Miller and Joyce Tenneson who, no doubt Canon courted pretty heavily and who probably get more consideration than others.

The bulk of the photographers seem to be people who are very talented and have been very successful commercially, but aren't likely to earn a place in the history books. A lot of them are Creative Live instructors: Roberto Valenzuela, Lindsey Adler, Sue Bryce, Joel Grimes, Peter Hurley. My guess they earned their spots through a combination of talent, success and teaching abilities. Plus, they are very good at self promotion.

I think I read/heard a few years back that Canon significantly revamped their workshops and other programs and set some pretty aggressive guidelines for what the photographers had to deliver (quotas for workshops, etc.) If I recall correctly, at the time they cleaned house and dropped a lot of people who weren't delivering in their view. Again, if I recall correctly, it created a lot of hard feelings at the time.

It seems like these days, Canon has pretty much gotten out of the traveling workshop business and offers mostly high-end "destination" workshops. 

I'm just guessing, but as I say, I think they concentrate on a handful of really high quality legitimate superstars, supplemented by people that have a proven track record as commercial successes.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 25, 2018)

unfocused, that's interesting. I guess none of this matters in the least, just something to gossip about. 

I came into photography as a keen young fellow with an FTb and then an F1 but got so involved with other aspects of life that I never continued with it in spite of my love for it. When I finally bought a DSLR it was a Nikon and I liked it but gave it to my daughter and bought into Canon because of their lenses. As a result I'm very ignorant on many fronts, but it's all interesting. It's amazing how GAS affects us all.

Jack


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 25, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> Never the less, I have reason to believe there is some truth to it, and maybe Arash first switched and influenced him.



I just found a bit on Fredmiranda saying Arash seems to be selling his Canon gear as well! That is a surprise given his comments about Nikon tcs - and he uses tcs a lot!


----------



## Refurb7 (Jan 25, 2018)

He got dumped by Canon and this is his payback. That's what happens when you're a sponsored photographer and the money dries up. You feel compelled to give your old brand a public trashing. It's like a quasi-religious conversion. One day he wakes up and has an epiphany that the old "faith" was all wrong, and the new faith is the only true one. The message to followers is: take heed of the new faith. If I were Canon I would have dumped him for his web site alone, if for nothing else.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 25, 2018)

Refurb7 said:


> He got dumped by Canon and this is his payback. That's what happens when you're a sponsored photographer and the money dries up. You feel compelled to give your old brand a public trashing. It's like a quasi-religious conversion. One day he wakes up and has an epiphany that the old "faith" was all wrong, and the new faith is the only true one. The message to followers is: take heed of the new faith. If I were Canon I would have dumped him for his web site alone, if for nothing else.



What is it about internet forums that someone cannot simply change their minds? Why does it have to be 'payback' or 'public trashing'. The money dried up 4 years ago - he has taken a long time to get revenge.

Have you read any of the articles? Can you tell me where he 'trashed' Canon? Where has he said he was 'wrong'? Please be specific?


----------



## docsmith (Jan 25, 2018)

_From the first moment that I acquired focus on a bird in flight three days ago on January 20, _

And he started selling all his Canon gear 4 days later? That is either crazy impulsive or something has been brewing for awhile and I do not buy the story. It sounds like some of you know/have met Art, to be clear, I haven't, so I am not trying to cast a negative light. But I know I would have tried things over time, in different settings, etc, before selling my system that had worked so well for me for decades.

Of course, this was from today: 
_First Nikon System Issue
I encountered some serious problems acquiring focus when using the 200-500 with the TCE 14 and the D5. Strangely enough, those problems exist only with static subjects! I’ve tried group, d9, and single point with similar results. Stranger still is the fact that even when I manually pre-focus and get the AF right on the bird’s eye, the system sometimes searches hopelessly. Even in high contrast situations. Any and all advise or comments are welcome._


----------



## Valvebounce (Jan 25, 2018)

Hi Folks. 
Personally I have trouble taking advice from people who don’t know the difference between advice and advise! :
His switch seems quite reasonable to me though I don’t follow him. 
I won’t use an adjustable wrench if I have a ring or crescent that fits, however an adjustable wrench is the tool when nothing else fits tightly. 
It seems he is using the right tool for the job! I wish him the best of luck. 

Cheers, Graham. 



docsmith said:


> _From the first moment that I acquired focus on a bird in flight three days ago on January 20, _
> 
> And he started selling all his Canon gear 4 days later? That is either crazy impulsive or something has been brewing for awhile and I do not buy the story. It sounds like some of you know/have met Art, to be clear, I haven't, so I am not trying to cast a negative light. But I know I would have tried things over time, in different settings, etc, before selling my system that had worked so well for me for decades.
> 
> ...


----------



## docsmith (Jan 25, 2018)

Valvebounce said:


> It seems he is using the right tool for the job! I wish him the best of luck.



Yep...I do occasionally check out his blog and wish him the best of luck as well. It will be interesting to see his experiences, if nothing else.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 25, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Refurb7 said:
> 
> 
> > He got dumped by Canon and this is his payback. That's what happens when you're a sponsored photographer and the money dries up. You feel compelled to give your old brand a public trashing. It's like a quasi-religious conversion. One day he wakes up and has an epiphany that the old "faith" was all wrong, and the new faith is the only true one. The message to followers is: take heed of the new faith. If I were Canon I would have dumped him for his web site alone, if for nothing else.
> ...



He well understands the game he is playing, he might win and he might lose, and he is being very careful about what he actually writes, but he is interested in generating web hits and traffic.

But anybody that can use a product in their profession for decades and then make a statement like _"I tried and failed for decades to create images like this with my Canon gear"_ about such a comparatively simple image is playing a game.

Do you honestly believe a Canon camera could not take that image? Isn't saying it couldn't unless you had more skill than him, a vocal pro of decades experience, disingenuous? Doesn't that count as 'trashing'? It does in my book. I know I could easily take that image with my camera.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 25, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > Refurb7 said:
> ...



He admits that his BIF skills are not the highest, but says the D5 makes it easier for him - not that the Canon cannot do it but that in his hands the Canon does not do it as reliably. I have read enough people who use both systems say the same thing about Nikon AF tracking that I have confidence he is right.

The guy is no longer a EoL, he made it clear that he could afford to sell all his Canon gear at fire-sale prices and still afford the Nikon gear (if indeed he bought it - I am not sure at this time if he is sponsored by Nikon). So if he wants to try something different good luck to him. If I could afford 2 high-class systems to compare them I would as well, and I would probably mention it on this forum. 

People are ascribing motives like 'revenge' and 'payback' because he blogged it. The fact is he makes a lot of income through his bog (including advertising his trips) and on blogs people keep their followers updated on changes in their lives. Big deal.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 25, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Mikehit said:
> ...



You asked "Can you tell me where he 'trashed' Canon? Where has he said he was 'wrong'? Please be specific?"

I showed you.

Anybody that can say a Canon camera couldn't take that image with decades of experience is lying. In that one statement he trashed Canon, but he did it in a way it can be claimed he is being humble or non derogatory, put in the context of his experience it is nothing but a cheap shot.

It's funny because there is another wildlife photographer I respect way more the Morris who went the other way. Andy Rouse, who made his name as a wildlife photographer and now does aviation as well. Years ago he was a Canon shooter but had a massive and very public falling out with them over his 1D MkIII AF issues so he moved, very acrimoniously and publicly to Nikon. After testing a 1DX and the latest super teles for some of his workshop attendees he swapped back to Canon specifically because the AF for moving wildlife images was so much more accomplished than the Nikon equivalent.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 25, 2018)

P.S. Don't forget we are talking about a pelican on take off here, not a raptor in open flight with a camouflaged and confusing background, or an erratic song bird darting between branches!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 25, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> He well understands the game he is playing, he might win and he might lose, and he is being very careful about what he actually writes, but he is interested in generating web hits and traffic.
> 
> But anybody that can use a product in their profession for decades and then make a statement like _"I tried and failed for decades to create images like this with my Canon gear"_ about such a comparatively simple image is playing a game.
> 
> Do you honestly believe a Canon camera could not take that image? Isn't saying it couldn't unless you had more skill than him, a vocal pro of decades experience, disingenuous? Doesn't that count as 'trashing'? It does in my book. I know I could easily take that image with my camera.



I'd agree with the above (although I'm not sure it rises to the level of trashing, but it's certainly disingenuous). I've had plenty of success shooting BIF on a Canon gear, and I'm far from an expert. Especially given that it's a picture of a pelican – given their typical flight pattern, I wouldn't consider them a particularly difficult BIF subject. If he showed a series of in-focus shots of flying swallows, I'd be more inclined to believe him...

I noticed that he complains of Canon cameras frequently shifting to focus on the background instead of the bird. Here's an example from several years ago (full image and 100% crop), one of a series of shots where the camera tracked the dark grackle just fine as it passed over alternating light and dark patches of forest. Not a great image becuase of the high noise (it was a 7D at ISO 2000).







Incidentally, the lens used was that quintessential briding lens, the 85mm f/1.2L II. 




Mikehit said:


> People are ascribing motives like 'revenge' and 'payback' because he blogged it. The fact is he makes a lot of income through his bog (including advertising his trips) and on blogs people keep their followers updated on changes in their lives. Big deal.



Exactly – he makes money off his blog. Why is the newest camera, regardless of manufacturer, touted by the likes of Northrup and Rockwell? Because click-though purchases mean income. If that revenue stream has been drying up of late for Morris, pushing his fans/followers to switch from Canon to Nikon could be rather lucrative. Not 'revenge' or 'payback'...


----------



## Refurb7 (Jan 25, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Refurb7 said:
> 
> 
> > He got dumped by Canon and this is his payback. That's what happens when you're a sponsored photographer and the money dries up. You feel compelled to give your old brand a public trashing. It's like a quasi-religious conversion. One day he wakes up and has an epiphany that the old "faith" was all wrong, and the new faith is the only true one. The message to followers is: take heed of the new faith. If I were Canon I would have dumped him for his web site alone, if for nothing else.
> ...


He talks about his Canon getting 50% of shots out of focus. And he presents the pelican shot as being near impossible for Canon. Really? That pelican taking off from the ground, because a waive hit?!! The system he promoted for years is now somehow so crummy that it can't do even basic things. That sounds like a trashing to me. I'm not naive enough to believe that nonsense.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 25, 2018)

Both he and Hazeghi are saying that Canon is still great for static shots but Nikon wins for BIF. The Nikon AF on the D5 and D500 does have an incredible reputation. But, to sell all of ones Canon gear in a self-proclaimed fire sale stretches incredulity. If one believed that Canon was better in a large set of aspects and one hadn't a long experience with Nikon, the seemingly rational solution is to buy a Nikon and lens, try it out for an extended period and then phase in to Nikon and sell off not at fire sale prices. As it is, they appear to have ditched their Canon gear for a Nikon and one lens each.


----------



## Talys (Jan 25, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> But anybody that can use a product in their profession for decades and then make a statement like _"I tried and failed for decades to create images like this with my Canon gear"_ about such a comparatively simple image is playing a game.
> 
> Do you honestly believe a Canon camera could not take that image? Isn't saying it couldn't unless you had more skill than him, a vocal pro of decades experience, disingenuous? Doesn't that count as 'trashing'? It does in my book. I know I could easily take that image with my camera.



It's a ridiculous statement. You could take that photo with a t2i... or a 30 year old film camera.

I mean, seriously, what do you need to take it? The right focal length/aperture. A fast-ish shutter. A camera.

Photographing waterfowl taking of a rock requires a camera with enough reach... and the rest of it is just an exercise of getting to the right spot so that you get good lighting while the bird is on the rock, and patiently waiting for the bird to move and then _click click click click click_. It isn't magic, and if anything, big, slow-moving waterfowl is way, way easier to capture launches of, then, say, little songbirds.



AlanF said:


> Both he and Hazeghi are saying that Canon is still great for static shots but Nikon wins for BIF.



It's perfectly fair for him to assert that on a Nikon he gets him more in-focus shots (not that this is necessarily the case for others, of course). But it's pretty hard to believe his claim that despite trying for decades, for he's never been able to get an in-focus profile shot of a pelican launching from a rock.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 25, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> You asked "Can you tell me where he 'trashed' Canon? Where has he said he was 'wrong'? Please be specific?"
> 
> I showed you.
> 
> Anybody that can say a Canon camera couldn't take that image with decades of experience is lying. In that one statement he trashed Canon, but he did it in a way it can be claimed he is being humble or non derogatory, put in the context of his experience it is nothing but a cheap shot.



So the part where he said "Do understand that many others, more skilled than I, have made images with their Canon gear." (that quote is above the picture you cut into this thread) didn't register? 
It is quite clear he is blaming himself but finds that Nikon makes it easier. I think ascribing 'cheap shots' to a quite clearly stated reason is really pushing it. 
By your reckoning 'I prefer Range Rover for its ability to travel over rough ground and carry the dogs' is a cheap shot aimed at Jeeps.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 25, 2018)

Refurb7 said:


> And he presents the pelican shot as being near impossible for Canon.



No he doesn't. 
You can get perfectly sharp portraits at a party with a Canon but some people bought Sony because the eye AF makes it easier. Doesn't mean Canon is a bad camera.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 25, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> It is quite clear he is blaming himself but finds that Nikon makes it easier. I think ascribing 'cheap shots' to a quite clearly stated reason is really pushing it.
> By your reckoning 'I prefer Range Rover for its ability to travel over rough ground and carry the dogs' is a cheap shot aimed at Jeeps.



It's a pelican taking off from a rock. To properly apply your analogy, what he said was 'Many other drivers, more skilled than I, have managed to drive their Jeeps from their house to the grocery store, but I've never been able to do that after driving Jeeps for 20 years. However, 10 minutes after getting behind the wheel of a Range Rover, I was happily at the store buying bread and milk.'


----------



## NancyP (Jan 25, 2018)

One huge reason to switch would be a promise of first-in-line technical support from Nikon for repairs, loaners, pre-release access to lenses and bodies, and so on. He may be named to the Nikon equivalent of EoL in the future. If Canon dropped him as EoL for whatever reason, he would lose the extra-special service he had become used to, and that support could be highly useful when giving workshops. 

I agree that the claim that the pelican was a hard shot unobtainable with recent Canon gear is ludicrous. That's a shot I could get with my 60D and EF 400 f/5.6 L no-IS. Planning! And BIF takes continual practice.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 25, 2018)

[quote author=Art Morris on Jan 24, 2018]
I tried and failed for decades to create images like this with my Canon gear.






This image was created on January 22 at La Jolla, CA with the hand held Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR lens (at 440mm) and the blazingly fast professional digital camera body, the Nikon D5 DSLR camera body with dual XQD slots).
[/quote]

[quote author=Art Morris on Jan 19, 2018]
More on my 1DX II:
There is, however, no denying the killer accurate AF. 





This image was created on Day one of the first San Diego IPT — the morning of Monday, January 15 at La Jolla, CA. I used the hand held Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM lens (at 200mm) and the blazingly fast Canon EOS-1D X Mark II. ISO 800. 
[/quote]

So, in 5 days he went from taking sharp pictures of pelicans in flight with the killer accurate AF of a Canon camera, to taking sharp pictures of pelicans in flight with a Nikon camera...after failing for decades to take that sort of picture with Canon cameras.

Sure thing, Artie. That makes perfect sense. :

No, : is not nearly adequate.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 25, 2018)

I suppose it's human nature, but I don't know why people need to be so extreme in their opinions (regarding the guy who switched). I don't trust anyone who raves about products without finding any faults, not just because I feel they are more likely to be (more) biased, but also because they tend to be more likely in my experience to flip their opinion. It reminds me of those people who are very visibly *in love* (in British parlance, 'lovey-dovey'), posting lots of nauseating stuff about how in love they are, how their partner is perfect, etc, and especially how their exes were terrible. You just know that when they break up, they will suddenly have nothing good to say about the person who they previously idolised - both can't be true, and indeed it's most likely neither position is really fair. In this case, the Nikon setup is perfect, whereas before he (apparently?) sung Canon's praises. I'd much rather trust someone who was more equivocal.*

I can quite believe Nikon is better for some things. What I don't quite get is why someone as high profile as this guy can't run two systems - if he believes Nikon is best for BIF but Canon better for other things, why does he need to 'jump ship' wholesale? If I had a few thousand spare pounds or dollars, I'd probably run two or more systems.

*If I'm misrepresenting him, my apologies; I don't know him or his work, rather I'm going by what people here have quoted him as saying.



Valvebounce said:


> Hi Folks.
> Personally I have trouble taking advice from people who don’t know the difference between advice and advise! :



Not quite as bad as confusing a vise for a vice! 

(Although I have just discovered that the British English is vice for both, which I am surprised by and undermines my joke  ).


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 25, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > You asked "Can you tell me where he 'trashed' Canon? Where has he said he was 'wrong'? Please be specific?"
> ...



The guy is a pro photographer who makes money teaching in his own workshops! To say he couldn't achieve that shot with a Canon camera in decades of trying, despite evidence to the contrary, is (at best) a cheap shot, no its worse than that, it is dishonest. He is lying.

I don't care if he prefers Nikon or Sony to Canon for whatever reason he might, but to lie about the differences in capabilities given his influence and position in the bird photography genre is an outright betrayal of everything honest and fair.


----------



## Refurb7 (Jan 25, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Refurb7 said:
> 
> 
> > And he presents the pelican shot as being near impossible for Canon.
> ...



YES he does. Of course he does. You just have to read his blog post.

Let me quote Birdsasart for you:

"The Dramatic Take-off Image
I tried and failed for decades to create images like this with my Canon gear. Do understand that many others, more skilled than I, have made images like this with their Canon gear. With my new Nikon gear I now feel that I at least have a good chance. That gives me more confidence to at least try in difficult or even near-impossible situations."

So he tried and failed FOR DECADES to make images like this pelican shot with Canon. In other words, it was near impossible ... FOR DECADES!!! But now he has "a good chance" with Nikon. 

Agan, that pelican taking off from a rock was so darned elusive that Canon couldn't photograph it despite decades of attempts. You buy that nonsense?


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 25, 2018)

Refurb7 said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > Refurb7 said:
> ...


I believe him. There is nothing so rare as a large bird taking off. Canon is ******* because it can not be used to take a picture of a barely moving target.....


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 25, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > Never the less, I have reason to believe there is some truth to it, and maybe Arash first switched and influenced him.
> ...



Here it is: http://arihazeghiphotography.com/blog/switch-to-the-dark-side/

I suspect there is a wee bit more in all of this than just the technical aspects of the two systems - just a guess.

Jack


----------



## Refurb7 (Jan 25, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > Jack Douglas said:
> ...



With all of the settings to configure the autofocus on a Canon 1DX2, he can only find one that is "unstable" and "nervous"? That's really strange.


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Jan 25, 2018)

Refurb7 said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > Refurb7 said:
> ...



+1 
It sounds like taking a marketing position to me, however caveated he may try to make it. It is one thing to say "I've found the Nikon system gives me a higher keeper rate", and if that is his experience then great, share your opinion and experience. 

It feels to me that the way he puts it is to subliminally suggest that 'while really experienced pro's may be able to get this shot with Canon, I couldn't, but if you switch to Nikon then you too will be able to get these shots without needing to be a pro.', which feels more like an inducement.


----------



## geonix (Jan 25, 2018)

Ari Hazeghi and Arthur Morris changing brand should be a big issue at Canon.
Two well-known wildlife photographers who acknowledge the AF superiority Nikon has gained in the last years.
Some already suppose other reasons than technical issues, but I have no reason to think that way.

So let's hope Canon finally realizes that their product lines do not only compete among themselves, but also with other brands. Sadly, even if they did and would like to do something about it, it will take a long time I guess.


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 25, 2018)

Whenever I've shot birds, and birds in flight, which isn't all that often. I've never had an issue with my keeper rate with the EOS-1D X or EOS-1D X Mark II. I've always thought composition was my biggest issue.


----------



## Refurb7 (Jan 25, 2018)

geonix said:


> Ari Hazeghi and Arthur Morris changing brand should be a big issue at Canon.
> Two well-known wildlife photographers who acknowledge the AF superiority Nikon has gained in the last years.
> Some already suppose other reasons than technical issues, but I have no reason to think that way.
> 
> So let's hope Canon finally realizes that their product lines do not only compete among themselves, but also with other brands. Sadly, even if they did and would like to do something about it, it will take a long time I guess.



Canon dumped Mr. Morris some time ago, so his changing brands is clearly no "big issue" at all. I don't know about the other guy. The D5 has been out for two years already. If it were significantly better, there would have been a lot more switchers by now.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 25, 2018)

geonix said:


> Ari Hazeghi and Arthur Morris changing brand should be a big issue at Canon.
> Two well-known wildlife photographers who acknowledge the AF superiority Nikon has gained in the last years.
> Some already suppose other reasons than technical issues, but I have no reason to think that way.
> 
> So let's hope Canon finally realizes that their product lines do not only compete among themselves, but also with other brands. Sadly, even if they did and would like to do something about it, it will take a long time I guess.



The only reason you have no reason is that you haven't been following blogs and picking up the fine points. I started to notice something back when Artie was so annoyed he didn't get a new 1DX2 because of the oil spots and then stated he would just sell it anyway. You or I would never get a new 1DX2 due to spots, maybe a free cleaning.

I have no problem with the Nikon being better, with him switching or any of it and maybe it will in fact catch Canon's attention. I hope so too. 

Still, it's just idle gossip that adds a little life to CR and my comments are added in that context because it's Artie's business not mine.

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 25, 2018)

Canon Rumors said:


> Whenever I've shot birds, and birds in flight, which isn't all that often. I've never had an issue with my keeper rate with the EOS-1D X or EOS-1D X Mark II. I've always thought composition was my biggest issue.



One need only peruse the "Anything shot with a 1DX" thread to view the amazing photos by skilled shooters. No one I know of has concluded the 1DX2 AF is worse than the 1DX, so there you go.

All modern cameras are amazing, with some being better than others in some aspects. So far Artie just claims the AF is the key for him.

Jack


----------



## bholliman (Jan 26, 2018)

I don't regularly read Arts blog, but I have watched most of his videos at B&H and found them entertaining and somewhat educational at the time.

I'm willing to give him the benefit of a doubt and take his comments as to why he switched at face value. None of us will really know the full story behind his switch unless they know him personally.

I think it's great that we live in an age when we have many excellent photo equipment options and brands to choose from. My choice is Canon, but I don't have a problem with others making different choices.



neuroanatomist said:


> So, in 5 days he went from taking sharp pictures of pelicans in flight with the killer accurate AF of a Canon camera, to taking sharp pictures of pelicans in flight with a Nikon camera...after failing for decades to take that sort of picture with Canon cameras.



Art is certainly guilty of some hyperbole here. The shot of the pelican taking off would be easy to shoot with almost any camera and sufficiently long lens.



neuroanatomist said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > People are ascribing motives like 'revenge' and 'payback' because he blogged it. The fact is he makes a lot of income through his bog (including advertising his trips) and on blogs people keep their followers updated on changes in their lives. Big deal.
> ...



I hadn't thought of that angle, but there certainly could be financial motivation. Hopefully, his switch is driven by an honest need for a system that performs better at what he needs it for and not revenue from click-through purchases...


----------



## Jeffrey (Jan 26, 2018)

Having shot birds in flight for several years with Canon and Nikon gear, to be honest it is a toss up on which I like better for BIF shots. I never had any problems with my Canon gear and thought the autofocus was amazingly great.

Presently I'm shooting a Nikon D850. Last weekend I shot raptors using the Nikon 200-500mm lens and enjoyed many successes. About the same as with the Canon. 

Bottom line: shoot what you like, what seems easiest to you, and enjoy the experience. Shooting BIF's is tons of fun!!!!


----------



## Talys (Jan 26, 2018)

Jeffrey said:


> Having shot birds in flight for several years with Canon and Nikon gear, to be honest it is a toss up on which I like better for BIF shots. I never had any problems with my Canon gear and thought the autofocus was amazingly great.
> 
> Presently I'm shooting a Nikon D850. Last weekend I shot raptors using the Nikon 200-500mm lens and enjoyed many successes. About the same as with the Canon.
> 
> Bottom line: shoot what you like, what seems easiest to you, and enjoy the experience. Shooting BIF's is tons of fun!!!!



Right, exactly. When I first became interested in photographing waterfowl, I owned Minolta Maxxum (film) camera, and developed my own film on Ilford black and white paper in a converted walk-in closet. Then I took pictures of birds with a Nikon, and after that with a Canon. 

In my opinion, having sufficient focal length, field skills, light, patience, and learning how the birds behave is 99% of getting a good shot. Of course, there are some absolutely spectacular bird shots, all of which are far beyond my skill level. But none of the awesomeness is attributable to super-duper-awesome sensors.


----------



## Sabaki (Jan 26, 2018)

The man is correct; Canon's autofocus is not perfect and does not deliver as flawlessly as the common perception will allow us to believe

I'm a loyal Canon photographer but I cannot blindly defend every attack on Canon wares, especially when we know what the truth is


----------



## AlanF (Jan 26, 2018)

99% skill? You missed out luck. Many of my best BIFs have been by sheer luck combined with having in my hand a set up with excellent AF. Here is a good example. I was standing in car park near Halifax NS when a raptor zoomed towards me I swung up my trusty 7DII + 100-400mm II took a series of shots, all perfectly in focus thanks to the Canon camera and lens, and got an osprey with a flounder. As Louis Pasteur would have said if he had been here: "Luck favours the well-prepared photographer". The 100-400mm II on a Canon is an awesome combination for opportunist BIF shots.


----------



## Talys (Jan 26, 2018)

AlanF said:


> 99% skill? You missed out luck.



You are absolutely right 

Luck should definitely be in that 99%. It's more important than the camera body by a thousand-fold, lol. 

Though, at the end of the day, luck averages out into perseverance. In other words, luck helps you get some great shots in a little time, or punishes you with no good shots in a whole afternoon. But if you spend enough time at it, it does averages out (and we do all get a little better at it, I think!). Presuming that you shoot in spots where you get many opportunities to photograph the bird that you want to get photos of... with enough time, even the unlucky get some great shots. 

Anyways, nobody is unlucky enough that after DECADES, they can't get a picture of a pelican taking flight  And if they are that unlucky their wife should buy lots of life insurance, hehehe


----------



## geonix (Jan 26, 2018)

Refurb7 said:


> Canon dumped Mr. Morris some time ago, so his changing brands is clearly no "big issue" at all. I don't know about the other guy. The D5 has been out for two years already. If it were significantly better, there would have been a lot more switchers by now.



They "dumped" him as a canon ambassdor of light (whatever that means). Still Art Morris continued to use and promote Canon equipment for years (as I understand the blog). He made a number of bird photography youtube videos with canon for instance. 
Between the flagships 1DX II and D5 may be less a difference than between 5DIV - D850 or 7DII - D500. And these are the cameras that do matter more in the market for wildlife photography.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 26, 2018)

bholliman said:


> I hadn't thought of that angle, but there certainly could be financial motivation. Hopefully, his switch is driven by an honest need for a system that performs better at what he needs it for and not revenue from click-through purchases...



I don't think his switch was motivated by the chance to increase traffic on his blog, but Artie has long been a 'shiny new toys' man and every model he buys is amazing. He rapidly went from the 5D3 to 7D2 to 5DSR to 5DIV and each was the best birding camera. It is the classic behaviour of an obsessive person and for years he has been saying he did not shoot birds in flight regularly and that the 1Dx2 was too big for him at his age - and here he is selling all Canon gear specifically to buy a BIF rig and with a D5 to boot. I have for ages always taken his gear-related comments with a pinch of salt but in the case of the Nikon his comments certainly mirror a lot of others I have read from other people. 
Artie's preference has always been for behavioural shots, and once the BIF thing calms down I wonder if he will return to type and, when he does the comments he is already making about AF challenges will start to gripe. 

I note that Arash has kept a couple of big lenses to evaluate future Canon bodies so he seems to be keeping his options open, and willing to accept the pendulum may swing again.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 26, 2018)

Talys said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > 99% skill? You missed out luck.
> ...



There was a very great scientist called Emil Fischer (1902 Nobel Prize for Chemistry). He would ask each applicant to work with him the question: Are you a lucky person? There are some people who, on the other hand, should take your advice about life insurance.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 26, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> I note that Arash has kept a couple of big lenses to evaluate future Canon bodies so he seems to be keeping his options open, and willing to accept the pendulum may swing again.



He is keeping one, and that is so he can keep selling his guides rather than return: 
"I am keeping one of my Canon super-telephoto lenses to try out future Canon bodies so I can keep the BIF guide up to date. ...... Both Arthur Morris and I remain fully committed to updating and improving these guides with a new edition every year."
And he is now promising to write Nikon guides. http://arihazeghiphotography.com/blog/switch-to-the-dark-side/


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 26, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > I note that Arash has kept a couple of big lenses to evaluate future Canon bodies so he seems to be keeping his options open, and willing to accept the pendulum may swing again.
> ...



At 40$ a pop he would have to sell an awful lot of copies to offset not selling a big white 
I understand the cynicism about Artie's switch but when Ari (and others like Doug Brown) switches you have to really take note.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 26, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Mikehit said:
> ...



Do you know what deals are going on behind the scenes? I don't know. How many of these guides get sold? Just a thousand nets $40,000 gross.


----------



## arthurbikemad (Jan 26, 2018)

There is no question in my mind its all about money/sponsor. I'd guess that Art must have been cheesed IF he lost sponsor from Canon, I wonder what Nikon give him? His site seems to be one big advert imo from the quick look I took, he says himself how he profits from sales.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 26, 2018)

MikeH
I bought the 400mm DO II after much deliberation, finally swayed by Ari Hazeghi's blog on his experiences after a year of use in the field and its rave write for BIF hand held. It's difficult to imagine his giving it up and selling as it as Nikon has a gap in its line up. I wonder if we are suddenly going to see a Nikon 400mm f/4E PF ED VR. I hope they sort out the VR unlike on Nikon 300mm f/4E PF ED VR.

I couldn't give up a light 400mm f/4. 

http://arihazeghiphotography.com/blog/one-year-with-ef-400-do-is-ii/#comment-2328
(had to google to find it)


----------



## docsmith (Jan 26, 2018)

AlanF said:


> He is keeping one, and that is so he can keep selling his guides rather than return:
> "I am keeping one of my Canon super-telephoto lenses to try out future Canon bodies so I can keep the BIF guide up to date. ...... Both Arthur Morris and I remain fully committed to updating and improving these guides with a new edition every year."
> And he is now promising to write Nikon guides. http://arihazeghiphotography.com/blog/switch-to-the-dark-side/



Thanks for the link. Whereas Art's premise was that he shot with Nikon Jan 20 and by Jan 24 was selling off his Canon gear, Ari makes it sound more deliberate, something he heard over a period of time, started testing last summer, etc. So, perhaps Art is more of following Ari?

Also, that link is a bit more clear, Ari seems to feel that Nikon's AF is better at the "Top 5%" most difficult situations. Both are making statements of other top BIF photographers that are making the switch. I love that stuff, the infamous "others" argument. I haven't heard of others making this switch, wondering if our BIF people on this forum had?

But, I think a little skepticism here is more than fair. If you take a step back and look at this and ask some basic questions, this move makes sense for them. A few examples: was Art hurt about the Explorers of Light, this makes sense, and his first two paragraphs explaining the switch were about EOL; Will this help drive business both as click through sales and more guide books, this decision makes sense and should drive more sales; Could this be ego driven and wanting attention from Nikon/Canon, another resounding this makes sense; Emotionally driven in maybe wanting attention, to be relevant or even bored, etc, another resounding this action makes sense. I could go on.

So, there could be something too this and in certain ways Nikon has surpassed Canon's top end AF system. Thinking back, a few reviewers have gushed about the D5 AF system, even in comparison to the 1DXII. But this switch could also makes sense in a lot of other ways. So, bring on these "Top 5%" shots that they can now get. I wish them well and that they have great luck with their new gear. I'll be keeping mine, but always am curious about how the market is evolving.


----------



## LDS (Jan 26, 2018)

arthurbikemad said:


> There is no question in my mind its all about money/sponsor.



In some countries, if you are paid (or obtain any other pay-like advantages) to use and promote stuff you have to disclose it explicitly, every time. That's the right thing to do.


----------



## arthurbikemad (Jan 26, 2018)

LDS said:


> arthurbikemad said:
> 
> 
> > There is no question in my mind its all about money/sponsor.
> ...



I do wonder what the truth is with these kind of things.

I know some well known video bloggers, certain things online have been the best thing since sliced bread (free items that were submitted for review), but then, in private chat, not... I am sure all that's said is true, but the real truth is, only a few will know for sure and the rest will only be left guessing.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 26, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > AlanF said:
> ...



Behind the scenes deals - in Art's case you can always ask, but when it comes to Arash who values image quality above everything I find it hard to believe he would switch for the sake of cheap gear if Nikon was sub-(Canon)standard. People tend to lose sight of that in these discussions.


----------



## RobbieHat (Jan 26, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> geonix said:
> 
> 
> > Ari Hazeghi and Arthur Morris changing brand should be a big issue at Canon.
> ...



Jack, I agree with your perspective and it sounds like you, more than most, have actual experience in the field with this equipment. I only expanded my photography focus to wildlife (mainly birds) and BIF over the past few years as my gear has matched my aspirations. I don't use a 1DXMarkII so can't comment on what I am sure is an excellent focusing system, but I can comment that Canon's focusing system on other cameras is lacking for fast moving action. I am often in position to capture compelling BIF and takeoff pictures and 99.9% of the time miss a keeper shot. The results are soft and the systems is constantly confused or loses focus on the original subject I was locked on. I keep trying, but get frustrated with how many failed attempts I get. I have a friend with a D5 and the 200-400 w extender Nikon and I will have to take him out with me so we can do some side by side comparisons on comparable equipment. 

I have been in the market for a wildlife/bird rig for some time. I have considered the 1DXMarkII and was awaiting the 7DMarkIII. The 1DXII had so many problems that I decided to pass. The 7DIII is very appealing with crop sensor and new focusing system but now appears a year off. I can easily swap out my lenses with little loss of value and invest in a Nikon for a dedicated rig. I also shoot a lot of landscape and if Canon doesn't dramatically improve DR in their next upgrade cycle it will be another nail in the coffin. 

Canon glass has always kept me loyal, but at some point the processor and focusing systems driving that glass need to keep up.


----------



## RobbieHat (Jan 26, 2018)

geonix said:


> Refurb7 said:
> 
> 
> > Canon dumped Mr. Morris some time ago, so his changing brands is clearly no "big issue" at all. I don't know about the other guy. The D5 has been out for two years already. If it were significantly better, there would have been a lot more switchers by now.
> ...



I have followed Art's blog for years and you are correct, he has been a Canon lover for a long time. Many would accuse him of being a Canon fanboy. I doubt this move is borne of sponsorship switch, but a real observation in the field that one system has distanced itself from another system. Sad. I will watch his work and observations closely to see how his views evolve. He is extremely transparent and detailed in his descriptions and opinions.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 26, 2018)

Robbie, the 5DIV has very capable AF, significantly better than that of the 5DIII, which in turn is better than the 7DII. But, glass is important. I got good rates of keepers with the 100-400mm II with all three bodies, and with the 400mm DO II and the 5DIV a very high rate. So far, with the Tamron 100-400mm, I have had little success with 5DIV.

Technique is very important. I am not that fast so I like a wide field of view: 400mm on FF, sometimes 560mm; and no more than 400mm on crop - best to leave the TCs in the bag to maximise AF speed for me. I also prefer to use no more than the centre 9 points and for slower birds just the centre point. If you want to have better tracking then remember that a minus (-) setting in the menu gives that. Ari Hazeghi, on the other hand, is a real pro and can even handhold a 600mm f/4 (he doesn't use tripods) and get shots that I could never get on any system.


----------



## NancyP (Jan 26, 2018)

Another good reason for Art to switch is that he may be seeing more Nikon users in his workshops, and he finds that he needs to be current on fine points of Nikon cameras and lenses in his genre of photography. 

At any rate, I just dropped a few hundred dollars on natural history and ecology books for an upcoming trip to an unfamiliar-to-me rainforest ecosystem, and expect to be studying up for the next two months. I suspect that (plus getting back in BIF shape by practicing on anything that flies) will get me more keepers using the old cheapo Canon gear than would an update to new Canon or Nikon gear and no mental preparation. Well, maybe updating to IS from non-IS might be a big help too...... ;D

Now if the Nikon system can detect and focus on bird EYES - that would be a killer AF system!


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 26, 2018)

NancyP said:


> Another good reason for Art to switch is that he may be seeing more Nikon users in his workshops, and he finds that he needs to be current on fine points of Nikon cameras and lenses in his genre of photography.



If that were the truth it would be perfectly logical, Matt Granger (That Nikon Guy) bought, and has now sold, a complete Canon outfit with just that mindset, but that wasn't how this change was framed. He said he was switching because the Nikon was capable of a specific image the Canon equivalent wasn't, which by his own posting history is demonstrably false.

I take great exception to that kind of lie. When people in a position of influence blatantly lie, for whatever reason, I instantly mistrust everything they have ever said. That software he recommended? Wouldn't look at it now. The overpriced cart to wheel his gear around? No, I don't respect his judgement or know his true motives.

Zero credibility.


----------



## arthurbikemad (Jan 26, 2018)

RobbieHat said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > geonix said:
> ...



Out of interest what problems?

Oil and dust, I hate to be the bearer of bad news for Art but Nikon suffer the same issues, only difference is Nikon do nothing about it.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 26, 2018)

RobbieHat said:


> I have followed Art's blog for years and you are correct, he has been a Canon lover for a long time. Many would accuse him of being a Canon fanboy. I doubt this move is borne of sponsorship switch, but a real observation in the field that one system has distanced itself from another system. Sad. I will watch his work and observations closely to see how his views evolve. He is extremely transparent and detailed in his descriptions and opinions.



An observation few agree with? How do you know how transparent he is when he is clearly very happy to be, at best, disingenuous?


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 26, 2018)

I'm inclined to think PBD has a valid point. However, as humans we do have lapses and it's kind of sad that all the positives have to become suspect due to a brief lapse (but is it a lapse). A brief lapse can lead to a drunk driving death etc. As a result, right or wrong, we do pay close attention to the things that are out of character and they do result in us being much less trusting. More so than before, I will be taking Artie's comments with a grain of salt at least in certain realms.

I can say with absolute assurance and personal knowledge that he had close to zero interest in learning the new AF capabilities of the 1DX2. I don't want to take time to search it out but I posted to his blog and the proof of what I'm now saying is there (a few months back). At that time I was taken aback and described to my wife that I thought he was becoming very stagnant with old age - just like me!! 

Such juicy gossip for us bunch of mostly males. 

Jack


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 26, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> I'm inclined to think PBD has a valid point. However, as humans we do have lapses and it's kind of sad that all the positives have to become suspect due to a brief lapse (but is it a lapse). A brief lapse can lead to a drunk driving death etc. As a result, right or wrong, we do pay close attention to the things that are out of character and they do result in us being much less trusting. More so than before, I will be taking Artie's comments with a grain of salt at least in certain realms.
> 
> I can say with absolute assurance and personal knowledge that he had close to zero interest in learning the new AF capabilities of the 1DX2. I don't want to take time to search it out but I posted to his blog and the proof of what I'm now saying is there (a few months back). At that time I was taken aback and described to my wife that I thought he was becoming very stagnant with old age - just like me!!
> 
> ...



Jack, as you know the latest AF systems are nearly infinitely customizable, everybody that wants the AF to match their personal shooting requirements just *has* to take the time to learn it, fiddle with it even at the expense of missed photos, and get it dialed in to their personal needs and response times. Anybody that bucks that or wants an 'out of the box' solution leaves 90% of the capability of the AF systems, Canon or Nikon, on the table.

I must be honest and say the 1DX MkII was the first camera I have had with this level of AF adjustment and even after using Canon AF since 2004 I was overwhelmed with the options. I looked around for explanations, 'Case' settings and tutorials. Via CR and YouTube I found Grant Atkins' AF setup videos where he puts the three variables onto a custom menu and adjusts values per event in real time. Made a ton of sense and now I am happy with my AF.

People who don't take that time to learn a new system are foolish, people that sell their knowledge in books and via workshops that refuse to learn new stuff are charlatans and snake oil salesmen.


----------



## Refurb7 (Jan 26, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> NancyP said:
> 
> 
> > Another good reason for Art to switch is that he may be seeing more Nikon users in his workshops, and he finds that he needs to be current on fine points of Nikon cameras and lenses in his genre of photography.
> ...



I agree with you. I don't know how he thought he could pass off that lie. "Here's a photo only a Nikon could make ... blah ... blah ... blah." He thinks people are dumb enough to believe that.


----------



## ethanz (Jan 26, 2018)

arthurbikemad said:


> Out of interest what problems?
> 
> Oil and dust, I hate to be the bearer of bad news for Art but Nikon suffer the same issues, only difference is Nikon do nothing about it.



Yes, what problems? I don't know of many problems the 1dx2 has had.


----------



## ethanz (Jan 26, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> Such juicy gossip for us bunch of mostly males.
> 
> Jack



Yes, lots of gossip we all love to read. I do agree it was hasty of him to sell tens of thousands of dollars worth of Canon gear after using a Nikon for five minutes. I'm grateful to his website, I was able to find a great 200-400 on there used for a decent price. I wish him well with getting lots more artful bird pictures.


Proverbs 20:19
A gossip betrays a confidence; so avoid anyone who talks too much.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 26, 2018)

arthurbikemad said:


> Oil and dust, I hate to be the bearer of bad news for Art but Nikon suffer the same issues, only difference is Nikon do nothing about it.



Quite the contrary...when the problem gains sufficient notoriety, Nikon graciously allows you to buy the new model they release in which the problem is corrected.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 26, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> I can say with absolute assurance and personal knowledge that he had close to zero interest in learning the new AF capabilities of the 1DX2. I don't want to take time to search it out but I posted to his blog and the proof of what I'm now saying is there (a few months back). At that time I was taken aback and described to my wife that I thought he was becoming very stagnant with old age - just like me!!
> 
> Such juicy gossip for us bunch of mostly males.
> 
> Jack



I remember that discussion you mention and I made the same sort of comment about button assignments and got the same response. 
Art readily admits he has been cantankerous sod for his whole adult life and has never liked being proved wrong, and also admits that is why he started following one of the life-skills gurus to try and change this attitude. 
I guess getting new kit gives a new mindset and you willingly learn things on new kit that you did not think were necessary on the old kit because you convinced yourself you had mastered it.


----------



## takesome1 (Jan 26, 2018)

Sorry, didn't have time to read all the posts.

But I remember a few years ago reading one of his reviews, it might have been the 7D II or the 5Ds R.
He made comments about he he wasn't a BIF guy and he wasn't physically up to it.
So it seems he went a different way.

I have read several of Morris's reviews and honestly they were more sales pitch than review. I think this is the same thing with a new boss.


----------



## reef58 (Jan 26, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > I'm inclined to think PBD has a valid point. However, as humans we do have lapses and it's kind of sad that all the positives have to become suspect due to a brief lapse (but is it a lapse). A brief lapse can lead to a drunk driving death etc. As a result, right or wrong, we do pay close attention to the things that are out of character and they do result in us being much less trusting. More so than before, I will be taking Artie's comments with a grain of salt at least in certain realms.
> ...



You seem to have sort of grudge against him as some of your contentions are a bit over the top. That being said I don't follow him, but have watched a couple of his videos through B&H. I thought the lady in one of them had better photos than Art. I find navigating his blog annoying so I haven't spent more than 10 minutes there. He changed so be it. I am not sure why people take it personally. Yes the line about the pelican photo was over the top, but considering the times we are living in it was pretty insignificant.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 26, 2018)

Lots of life lessons to be learned if all aspects of these discussions are mulled over. We can all be better in more than just photography. I give Artie full credit for recognizing a need (interpersonal) and trying to deal with it. Just as I give full credit to some of our members who try hard to tone it down, without mentioning names of course.  

To think I was almost ready to sell all my Canon gear only three days ago. 

Jack


----------



## Talys (Jan 26, 2018)

takesome1 said:


> Sorry, didn't have time to read all the posts.
> 
> But I remember a few years ago reading one of his reviews, it might have been the 7D II or the 5Ds R.
> He made comments about he he wasn't a BIF guy and he wasn't physically up to it.
> ...



The site is highly promotional - - and in desperate need of a makeover. It looks like a 90's website.


----------



## arthurbikemad (Jan 26, 2018)

With such huge investment at stake and the learning curve you'd think that a pro tog would take the plunge and buy the Nikon while still owning the Canon gear, then at least you have a choice what one to sell in case it all goes wrong, here in the UK Wex for example would even refund it im sure if you felt it was a no go. Also I do wonder with all these complex comparison sites of IQ and DR that no one has devised a simple working test for high speed AF, surely a simple device that fires a ball or rubber chicken  can be constructed so AF can be assessed in a more controlled environment maybe then we can shout off how good one v the other is in this regard.

And yeah, that website, oh dear, reminds me of this:- http://www.arngren.net or https://www.lingscars.com hahaha


----------



## ethanz (Jan 26, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> To think I was almost ready to sell all my Canon gear only three days ago.
> 
> Jack



If you go on a fire sale, I'll buy your TC's and 11-24 on the cheap.  Maybe the 400 too, if its cheap enough.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 26, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Art readily admits he has been cantankerous sod for his whole adult life and has never liked being proved wrong....



That's quite a virtue. I can think of some cantankerous sods who will never even admit they have been proved wrong.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 26, 2018)

reef58, I am a relative newcomer to DSLRs and far from an expert. However, I do try hard to be as good as I can and I find it disappointing when someone who is influencing many folk in their photography purchases is not interested in keeping up. I have no right, nor do I care to force anyone to follow my advice relative to 1DX2 AF. However, if I hear of somewhat ignorant criticisms and I know there is a better way, I'm generous in offering what little I can. The 1DX2 ergonomics are not perfect but they still are mind-bogging amazing.

I have absolutely no axe to grind with Artie and in fact I commend him for many positives. Who am I to suggest that a professional photographer with decades of experience should follow my advice! I just thought he'd be interested in knowing.

I heard about BB focus a couple years back and tried it. Ugh, this is tricky, why bother. Then I heard more praise of it and said to myself if I'm going to improve I need to persevere. Now it's trivial and it opens all sorts of options because with the 1DX2 you can have up to 3 buttons functioning as BBs and instantly change AF modes and also the almost complete setup of the camera including shutter speed, without barely thinking, in an instant. Think BIF against blue sky following a stationary shot in the trees.

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 26, 2018)

ethanz, I'd love to have helped you out but somehow I always get cold feet and tell myself I have to be satisfied with the crummy Canon gear I have (stupid Canon). Worse yet, I go and buy more of it. 

One thing, Artie should be praised for selling his gear at more than reasonable prices. Hopefully, some folk got gear they really couldn't afford.

Jack


----------



## tron (Jan 27, 2018)

The very fact that Arash is changing to Nikon (he is selling his 600 II) while he takes superb flight photos with his Canon equipment says all I need to be certain that there is more to this change that what it is said.


----------



## ethanz (Jan 27, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> ethanz, I'd love to have helped you out but somehow I always get cold feet and tell myself I have to be satisfied with the crummy Canon gear I have (stupid Canon). Worse yet, I go and buy more of it.
> 
> One thing, Artie should be praised for selling his gear at more than reasonable prices. Hopefully, some folk got gear they really couldn't afford.
> 
> Jack



I was looking at his gear for sale and was tempted, but I really don't need anything more right now. lol


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 27, 2018)

ethanz, people had to act quickly as it was a total surprise. Quite intriguing.

tron, I think we all see quite a few puzzling/contradictory statements and like you I'll be really curious to see what unfolds over the next year or two. Artie has gone out of his way to present an image of being balanced in spite of making a few assertions that are not. For me it's just entertainment, a diversion, including how all of us react to such news.

Jack


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 27, 2018)

tron said:


> The very fact that Arash is changing to Nikon (he is selling his 600 II) while he takes superb flight photos with his Canon equipment says all I need to be certain that there is more to this change that what it is said.



In what way? 
Just because you can take excellent shots with one bit of gear does not mean you can't improve with another. 
Are you saying the Nikon AF is definitely not superior to the Canon AF?

If he is being sponsored by Nikon, there are three propositions: 
he would switch to Nikon anyway for its superior AF and while he is doing so takes advantage of Nikon's generosity (as would you I am sure - I certainly would);
there is no difference in AF and he is changing simply to get free gear
Nikon is inferior and he is moving anyway, sacrificing everything he has aimed for these last years simply for free gear

I favour the first. You?


----------



## reef58 (Jan 27, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> reef58, I am a relative newcomer to DSLRs and far from an expert. However, I do try hard to be as good as I can and I find it disappointing when someone who is influencing many folk in their photography purchases is not interested in keeping up. I have no right, nor do I care to force anyone to follow my advice relative to 1DX2 AF. However, if I hear of somewhat ignorant criticisms and I know there is a better way, I'm generous in offering what little I can. The 1DX2 ergonomics are not perfect but they still are mind-bogging amazing.
> 
> I have absolutely no axe to grind with Artie and in fact I commend him for many positives. Who am I to suggest that a professional photographer with decades of experience should follow my advice! I just thought he'd be interested in knowing.
> 
> ...



I came across Art when I got my 7D2 and was searching for setup of the functions. Art has several videos about setting the functions and one specific to the auto focus case settings including his custom settings. So, he is familiar with setting up the camera and working the autofocus system.

I think he is full of himself and a bit of a pitchman for his products, but that is okay. He switched to Nikon so what. I have never shot Nikon, but I have heard many comments indicating their autofocus is a bit better than Canon. If I had a huge need for autofocus improvement I may look myself.

On the bright side if people keep switching to Sony and Nikon maybe I can get a good deal on a 500F4


----------



## Hflm (Jan 27, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > The very fact that Arash is changing to Nikon (he is selling his 600 II) while he takes superb flight photos with his Canon equipment says all I need to be certain that there is more to this change that what it is said.
> ...



I don't know whether speculating helps in any way. 
I don't know whether it makes sense to switch in such a way and pay a huge surplus for buying the large teles and D5 bodies, accessories, etc., before an 1dx3 is out. Usually you have a leapfrogging contest between Canon and Nikon. The D4s wasn't praised for class-leading AF. The D5 is maybe a bit better for certain types of photography (e.g. BIF) compared to the 1dx2, in other aspects Canon is clearly superior (DPAF, 60fps4k). Canon is certainly evaluating the D5 and Sony A9 and an 1dxiii will (and has to) raise the bar again.


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 27, 2018)

Hflm said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > tron said:
> ...



I think the lesson here is YMMV, and beware of idol-worship. They're free to make whatever gear decisions they want to suit their needs. It would be unfortunate if they've been disingenuous about their reasons, though. Same goes for people switching from any brand, to any brand.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 27, 2018)

Not that I care one iota, but here is a possible scenario.

Arash tried a Nikon last year and found that for his very very specific uses he personally liked the Nikon AF better, he pontificated but decided he was going to switch. He told Art who has been unhappy that Canon haven't taken his moaning about oil splatter seriously. 

Art decided he could monetize this dissatisfaction (views and traffic are money makers) and preempted Arash's considered move with a flamboyant and over the top 'announcement' of his own.


----------



## tron (Jan 27, 2018)

Orangutan said:


> Hflm said:
> 
> 
> > Mikehit said:
> ...


I believe this answers best to Mikehit. 
@Mikehit If the reason is money they should say so. If someone takes excellent pictures they cannot claim they switch to get even better. But they can change to make money sure. So I chose not to believe what they say.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 27, 2018)

tron said:


> If someone takes excellent pictures they cannot claim they switch to get even better.



Why not?
I upgraded lenses to get better photos. So if I believed changing brands got me even further, and if I could afford it, why shouldn't I do it?

Anyone who has taken wildlife photography anywhere near seriously knows that feeling of 'I got a great photo but I know I can do better so I will come back tomorrow'. Using gear to get that shot is inseperable from trying to get the shot. The happy people are the ones who say 'yes I know I could get better by spending XXXX on a new lens but it isn't that important' - they are the ones who do not suffer from GAS like I do.

At the moment my personal skills make switching almost irrelevant and that is the key consideration for me.


----------



## Talys (Jan 27, 2018)

tron said:


> @Mikehit If the reason is money they should say so. If someone takes excellent pictures they cannot claim they switch to get even better. But they can change to make money sure. So I chose not to believe what they say.



There are absolutely stunning bird photographs taken with both Canon and Nikon cameras - like the one on the cover of this month's National Geographic, "Why Birds Matter" issue. There were stunning photos taken many years ago, before 5DIV and D850, too.

So, if those photos are possible with older 1D's and older 5D's and older Nikons, the inability to get stunning shot _is not the fault of the equipment_. I don't however, have a problem with someone saying that with newer gear, they a higher ratio of amazing shots, as long as they can articulate the reason -- better autofocus, lighter lens (like a 400 DO), better quality optics, whatever.



Mikehit said:


> At the moment my personal skills make switching almost irrelevant and that is the key consideration for me.



For me... At the moment my personal skills make switching almost irrelevant. For the moment, and, for the foreseeable future


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 27, 2018)

Same here. If I had Artie's back yard, I'd get infinitely more opportunities for BIF practice than I get now. One thing though, if you always shoot in the same location with largely the same birds and already have a ton of amazing shots, it's going to get boring or you start pixel peeping fretting (PPF). The perfect solution is travel and photography. 

Jack


----------



## ethanz (Jan 28, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> if you always shoot in the same location with largely the same birds and already have a ton of amazing shots, it's going to get boring or you start pixel peeping fretting (PPF). The perfect solution is travel and photography.
> 
> Jack



Or the birds start to recognize you. I have two hawks that live next to my house. I have photographed them so many times, I think they know what I look like and they almost always fly away when I appear with my camera now.


----------



## tron (Jan 28, 2018)

Please go back to private's post #30 in this thread. I agree with him. I believe Arti's claims target the many honest well intended people that think others are like them. I personally choose not to believe him. YMMV of course.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 28, 2018)

ethanz said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > if you always shoot in the same location with largely the same birds and already have a ton of amazing shots, it's going to get boring or you start pixel peeping fretting (PPF). The perfect solution is travel and photography.
> ...


I have heard that in some city parks, that the birds have become habituated to people, particularly from feeding, and will allow you to approach closer than wild birds will normally allow.....


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 28, 2018)

PBD, Consider this:

Jan 18 
Me: While you and I are loving our 400 DO II’s Arash is selling his … or is it a spare? I’d be interested in a comment on the situation.
Jan19
Reply: pps: I will ask Arash about his 400 DO II.
D5 borrowed, help wanted on how to use it
Jan22 
Gear Fire Sale and "But for birds in flight Nikon is light years ahead." 

You may very well be right on the money.  BTW I would not normally give the whole topic more than a few minutes of my time but I coincidentally happened to fall the midst of what was transpiring and it was indeed puzzling!

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 28, 2018)

Really, Don, what proof do you have?  Remember good old Dilbert. 

Jack


----------



## Talys (Jan 28, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> I have heard that in some city parks, that the birds have become habituated to people, particularly from feeding, and will allow you to approach closer than wild birds will normally allow.....



I have stellar's jays that I feed peanuts to. They come up so close to me that I'd need to mount a wide macro to take a photo, lol. And they know that if I come out with a broom, it's to get rid of the squirrels for them


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 28, 2018)

Talys said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > I have heard that in some city parks, that the birds have become habituated to people, particularly from feeding, and will allow you to approach closer than wild birds will normally allow.....
> ...



However, if they fly you'll need a Nikon to capture them! 

Jack


----------



## ethanz (Jan 28, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



I obviously don't feed hawks, so either they resent me for not giving them food or they see I have a Canon and know I won't get any pictures of them so they save me the humiliation of missed shots.


----------



## tron (Jan 28, 2018)

ethanz said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > Talys said:
> ...


 ;D ;D ;D


----------



## tron (Jan 28, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> ethanz said:
> 
> 
> > Jack Douglas said:
> ...


They are staying down so as to be photographed even by people using Canon cameras ;D ;D ;D


----------



## JBSF (Jan 28, 2018)

Hazeghi is undoubtedly one of the masters of BIF, but don't think some of those birds aren't baited. Diurnal photos of Great Grey Owl are undoubtedly set up using rodents as bait. On the other hand, not many photographers are going to use 1DX2 and 600mm lens with extender handheld, shooting hundreds of frames of a subject to get the perfect shot. He does. What's puzzling is that he has a portfolio of spectacular photos that are perfectly exposed and processed, and he is abandoning the equipment that captured them. Maybe the Nikon will give him a 0.5 percent advantage.

Morris is also a great photographer, but everything he does is motivated by money, or at least that is how he comes across to me. He invites email questions for advice, which I have never tried. However one (former) CR forum contributor submitted a photo to him once, and his response amounted to, "That sucks. You need to enroll in my next $10,000 workshop." When the 7D2 came out, he published a review of it on his website comparing it to 5D3, which was unscientific to say the least. His excuse was that he wasn't very good at understanding equipment, but he would send anybody a raw file for $5. He can't post anything in his blog without reference to the latest piece of used equipment that he has sponsored for one of his acolytes (for a fee). I suppose his methods succeed, so he sticks with them, so all power to him. But they are a turnoff to me, and until I saw this thread, I had not gone to his site for at least two years.


----------



## tron (Jan 28, 2018)

JBSF said:


> Hazeghi is undoubtedly one of the masters of BIF, but don't think some of those birds aren't baited. Diurnal photos of Great Grey Owl are undoubtedly set up using rodents as bait. On the other hand, not many photographers are going to use 1DX2 and 600mm lens with extender handheld, shooting hundreds of frames of a subject to get the perfect shot. He does. What's puzzling is that he has a portfolio of spectacular photos that are perfectly exposed and processed, and he is abandoning the equipment that captured them. Maybe the Nikon will give him a 0.5 percent advantage.
> 
> Morris is also a great photographer, but everything he does is motivated by money, or at least that is how he comes across to me. He invites email questions for advice, which I have never tried. However one (former) CR forum contributor submitted a photo to him once, and his response amounted to, "That sucks. You need to enroll in my next $10,000 workshop." When the 7D2 came out, he published a review of it on his website comparing it to 5D3, which was unscientific to say the least. His excuse was that he wasn't very good at understanding equipment, but he would send anybody a raw file for $5. He can't post anything in his blog without reference to the latest piece of used equipment that he has sponsored for one of his acolytes (for a fee). I suppose his methods succeed, so he sticks with them, so all power to him. But they are a turnoff to me, and until I saw this thread, I had not gone to his site for at least two years.


I agree 100% with you ( Including the fact that I hadn't visited their site for many months)


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 28, 2018)

JBSF, I agree with you 100%. The site is useful to a relative beginner like me but hard to stomach and since it's not "that" useful, I plan to abandon the somewhat time wasting activity. 

It gets boring looking at the same old pelican shots being pixel peeped and hearing about beach shooting and shifting the tripod a few degrees, which of course does nothing for me traipsing around in the bush hand-held trying to sneak up on a wary subject. Ari is a better fit for me if I'm so inclined. 

Now there will be even more pixel peeping and advice to crop a photo 70%. I guess a pelican head with the eye cropped out counts as art; I'm surely no art expert, but it doesn't do much for me as a bird lover! 

There is honesty in some of it though, for example: "... and I are head over heels in love with the D-850 image files".  As a previous poster mentioned there is nothing like the lovey-dovey effect! Now I must un-check this thread.

Jack


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 28, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> JBSF, I agree with you 100%. The site is useful to a relative beginner like me but hard to stomach and since it's not "that" useful, I plan to abandon the somewhat time wasting activity.
> 
> It gets boring looking at the same old pelican shots being pixel peeped and hearing about beach shooting and shifting the tripod a few degrees, which of course does nothing for me traipsing around in the bush hand-held trying to sneak up on a wary subject. Ari is a better fit for me if I'm so inclined.
> 
> ...



Jack, 

Just come and stay in my house for the summer, you'll get all the experience you could ever want in the 'Morris' environment. It sure is easy honing your BIF skills on big slow flying birds that are perched 15'-30' from you!


----------



## AlanF (Jan 28, 2018)

Private, you could open up a very popular guest house!


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 28, 2018)

tron said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > ethanz said:
> ...


It's not just Canon shooters that are having problems.... Nikon cameras seem to have problems with MFD when shooting birds...... Looks like Canon and Nikon are both ******* and we better switch to Sony!


----------



## Talys (Jan 29, 2018)

Cool photo, Don


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 29, 2018)

Talys said:


> Cool photo, Don



Yes, 

I firmly believe that there is so much more than camera body that goes into a good picture..... like a bit of research into locations.....


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 30, 2018)

Here is an interesting comment by Art.



> Trying to Explain …
> I shared today’s featured image with skilled flight photographer Arash Hazeghi, one of our crack Avian Moderators on BirdPhotographers.Net. He responded, “Looks good but I can’t believe you couldn’t get that with Canon. With all due respect, a pelican is no challenge for yours truly; try an incoming peregrine or kestrel.”
> 
> Arash is 100% correct. I could have gotten today’s featured image with Canon gear. Could have. And Arash and Patrick Sparkman and other top bird photographers would have nailed sharp focus on this one with any halfway decent camera body because of their superior skills, strength, hand-eye coordination, and stamina. But for me, I might or might not have gotten this one sharp with my Canon gear. How do I know? Because that it the reality I experienced for the past two decades when my success rate in simple situations like this was from 20-40%. With my new Nikon gear my success rate in these situations has risen to well more than 90%.
> ...



Excellent behavioural photographer. Crap in-flight. 
There is hope for me yet....


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 30, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Here is an interesting comment by Art.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



My success rate with close-in swallows is less than 1%, maybe I should buy expensive Nikon gear to crank it way up to 2%. 

Just curious: not having used top-end gear, I've always assumed they were "about equal," and it all came down to skill. Has he not gone out with Arash for lessons? Has Arash not handed him a pre-configured body and said "ok, do this..."?


----------



## tron (Jan 30, 2018)

Orangutan said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > Here is an interesting comment by Art.
> ...


 ;D ;D ;D


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 30, 2018)

Orangutan said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > Here is an interesting comment by Art.
> ...



I believe Arash has tried to set his gear up for him. 
Reading comments by different people who have used both systems, the issue is not AF in terms of lenses and body, but in the way the algorithm works, and the Nikons reputedly are able to discriminate better than Canon between the intended subject and the background when tracking. If that is correct then the Nikon has clear advantages.
Interestingly, early reviews of the Sony A9 report the same sort of thing. I say 'interestingly', because I have sometimes wondered how close the cooperation between Sony and Nikon is.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 30, 2018)

Orangutan said:


> My success rate with close-in swallows is less than 1%, maybe I should buy expensive Nikon gear to crank it way up to 2%.
> 
> Just curious: not having used top-end gear, I've always assumed they were "about equal," and it all came down to skill. Has he not gone out with Arash for lessons? Has Arash not handed him a pre-configured body and said "ok, do this..."?



Two counter points. 

If my success rate went for 1% to 2% I'd be increasing my success rate by 100%, so I'd consider that a very reasonable reason to swap.

I found using others settings just doesn't work for me yet I can achieve similar hit rates with my camera set up differently just because f the way my brain/button coordination works. Setting up AF for that final few percent of success is a time consuming and laborious process, it is work to get it right and there is limited value in others settings. 

I find great variances in my ability to keep up with the action and so I find a case setting that works one day won't work another. For that reason I have abandoned case settings and have the three AF variables set up on a custom menu like Grant Atkinson recommends in his various AF guides on YouTube.


----------



## tron (Jan 30, 2018)

To be fair, it suddenly occured to me that maybe Art was trying to take BIF photos using 5D4 with a 2XIII converter. Maybe that is not a very successful combination. But this is a MAYBE. I have tried it myself once and failed. But I consider it user error on my part.
So don't consider this an opinion on 5D4 tracking capabilities just as a report of what I have tried that work
more for me.

I had success (for BIF) with the following combinations:

7DII + 400DO II
7DII + 400DO II + 1.4XIII 
(not much used, generally this combination may need a few shots to get the best even for static subjects)
7DII + 500IS II 
5DsR + 500IS II 

If I am without car and I have to walk a lot I take just the 400DOII otherwise the 500II.
An important reason why I didn't try again with the 5D4 is that normally it is used with another lens: 16-35 or 24-70 when there are landscape opportunities or with a 100-400 as a second "urgent" birding kit.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 30, 2018)

No he had 1DX MkII's and 5D MkIV's.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 30, 2018)

Nikon and Sony currently have better algorithms for tracking than does Canon in certain respects. So, we just have to wait for a firmware update from Canon. I am not going to switch from Canon in a leapfrogging exercise. In my continued search for light telephoto lenses, I tried out the Nikon D5OO/300mm f/4 PF combo in a local departmental store and compared it with my 5DSR/100-400mm II. At 300mm, the IQ was about the same for both but whereas at 1/60s the Canon had no visible shake the Nikon one was bad. This morning, I went out with the 5DSR and 400mm DO II + 1.4xTC and got a fleeting shot of a hawfinch nestled between branches and twigs in a tree, the guy next to me with a D500 and the 200-500mm failed. I really don't think at my level I am limited by Canon gear, just by my strength and skill.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 30, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > Cool photo, Don
> ...



Here is a good location for Talys I came across on Sunday.


----------



## Talys (Jan 30, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Here is a good location for Talys I came across on Sunday.



Haha neat 



AlanF said:


> Nikon and Sony currently have better algorithms for tracking than does Canon in certain respects. So, we just have to wait for a firmware update from Canon. I am not going to switch from Canon in a leapfrogging exercise.



+1. I have no problem acknowledging the superior sensor in Nikon and Sony, but I'm not one to switch systems every time that happens. 

1) It doesn't make sense, long term -- at some point, Canon will have something I really want. Then what?
2) I'm not versatile enough to shoot Nikon and Canon at the same time; the controls become muscle memory
3) There's a lot of stuff I like more about Canon than Nikon, like lenses and DPAF and controls
4) Aside from the camera, there's a TON of accessories that add up to thousands of dollars, like several flash triggers and compatible receivers (for strobes), a half dozen RT flashes, grips, batteries, L plates, wired triggers, and tons of filters that might be a different diameter on Nikon lenses. 

Oh, one other thing, though this could be purely my product ignorance. Does Nikon even have a wireless (radio) flash system yet, like Canon's RT? It did not, the last time I checked. The Nikon Commander, using infrared is HORRIBLE compared to RT. For starters, it won't work if you stick a flash in an umbrella-style softbox, like a Westcott Apollo, and those are the fastest to set up (and smallest when taken down) large softboxes. And secondly, it isn't compatible with third party strobes, at all (ie you can't mix a strobe with 2 Nikon flashes and control it remotely with Nikon Commander).

On Canon, the Yongnuo E3RX allows me to use the Canon RT system in conjunction with studio strobes, mixing strobes with RT flashes. I can either attach the E3RX directly to the strobe (PC cable), or I can a controller like the Skyport onto an E3RX.

Often, I will use a corded strobe for very large softboxes (48" - 80" ones) and just use flashes on the smaller ones (partly to keep from having a ton of power cables all over the place, and because I can't afford awesome battery powered strobes  )

From a studio photography perspective, if you light your subject correctly, every camera body going back 10+ years, whether it's APSC or full frame will take amazing photos, and every shot that isn't properly lit will look terrible.


----------



## ethanz (Jan 30, 2018)

Talys said:


> Oh, one other thing, though this could be purely my product ignorance. Does Nikon even have a wireless (radio) flash system yet, like Canon's RT? It did not, the last time I checked. The Nikon Commander, using infrared is HORRIBLE compared to RT. For starters, it won't work if you stick a flash in an umbrella-style softbox, like a Westcott Apollo, and those are the fastest to set up (and smallest when taken down) large softboxes. And secondly, it isn't compatible with third party strobes, at all (ie you can't mix a strobe with 2 Nikon flashes and control it remotely with Nikon Commander).



I believe with the D5 you can control multiple SB flashes remotely right in the menu system of the camera.


----------



## Talys (Jan 30, 2018)

ethanz said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, one other thing, though this could be purely my product ignorance. Does Nikon even have a wireless (radio) flash system yet, like Canon's RT? It did not, the last time I checked. The Nikon Commander, using infrared is HORRIBLE compared to RT. For starters, it won't work if you stick a flash in an umbrella-style softbox, like a Westcott Apollo, and those are the fastest to set up (and smallest when taken down) large softboxes. And secondly, it isn't compatible with third party strobes, at all (ie you can't mix a strobe with 2 Nikon flashes and control it remotely with Nikon Commander).
> ...



Yes, that's the Nikon Commander system -- but it uses infrared, right? 2.4Ghz is a zillion times superior, since you don't need line of sight. Not only is it more reliable, but it actually works, when the flash is inside a softbox or otherwise completely obscured (like behind a subject, or 12 feet up and behind a 70 inch softbox.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 30, 2018)

Arbitrage has just dug this up on the fredmiranda site. Arash Hazeghi posted on April 24
"_Hi,

I did not find the combination of the Nikon D5 with the 600FL to give more keepers than the Canon 1DXII and 600II. It is important to realize that with any camera, Nikon or Canon, if you let the camera decide and choose one of the entire AF array the AF will latch to the BG when photographing challenging BIF against any kind of varied BG, so the "3D tracking" in Nikon is just as useless as "iTR" in Canon and I don't expect any such system to work for the type of photos I like to take. The most productive method for photographing BIF is to use the center AF expansion for either camera so that it is forced to focus where you want it to focus._
_
Initially the D5 seemed to hold focus better when the bird was changing direction but upon close inspection on my computer, many of those shots were not what I'd call tack sharp compared to my Canon files, they were slightly soft which makes it unacceptable to me. I also found that the Nikon couldn't quite keep up with the bird coming at you at high speed where as the 1DXII would often nail at least a couple of those shots (e.g. below).

The Nilkon system falls apart quickly when you throw in a TC, whereas the Canon system does not care if a TC is attached, many if not most of my photographs are taken with a TC. So as a bird photographer, if I were to start today, I would again choose Canon without thinking twice but I will always keep my options open, if Nikon get's the job done better I have no problem buying an entire Nikon system, but they are still far from there IMO._
"


----------



## docsmith (Jan 30, 2018)

Ok...while most of this discussion has focused on Art, I've been wondering why Ari switched. That quote (and the picture if you follow the link below), this is just plain weird. Just a few months ago, he was talking based on experience that Canon was the same or better. If you read above, he also makes this quote "Usually switching systems (either side) is a waste of money and will not make you a better photographer."

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1505565/1#14155767

I actually came back to post on this to talk about lens/body combinations. If Ari was after the "Top 5%" then I have to think Canon having the 400 DO II, which he seemed to love, would be a distinct advantage.

Now, I am just hoping that Ari responds to the Fredmiranda thread. Something happened between August and January and I am real curious as to what it was.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 30, 2018)

docsmith said:


> Now, I am just hoping that Ari responds to the Fredmiranda thread. Something happened between August and January and I am real curious as to what it was.



I am doubtful that 'better pictures' are part of the true rationale.


----------



## ethanz (Jan 30, 2018)

Good detective work. The plot thickens and this gets more interesting.


----------



## Mikehit (Jan 30, 2018)

docsmith said:


> Ok...while most of this discussion has focused on Art, I've been wondering why Ari switched. That quote (and the picture if you follow the link below), this is just plain weird. Just a few months ago, he was talking based on experience that Canon was the same or better. If you read above, he also makes this quote "Usually switching systems (either side) is a waste of money and will not make you a better photographer."
> 
> http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1505565/1#14155767
> 
> ...



Yep it is looking weird. 
He has said in the past that his interest in raptors is driven as much by the technology and if it was not for the quality and technology invested in these cameras he would probably have found another hobby. So either he has learnt how to use the Nikon in specific circumstances and get the best from it, or he has gone back on his previous comments about enjoying using the best technology for the job.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 30, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> docsmith said:
> 
> 
> > Now, I am just hoping that Ari responds to the Fredmiranda thread. Something happened between August and January and I am real curious as to what it was.
> ...


If he was after better pictures, he would give up on birds and concentrate on kittens in boxes..... or if he really wanted a challenge, to take a sharp picture of bigfoot!


----------



## tron (Jan 30, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Arbitrage has just dug this up on the fredmiranda site. Arash Hazeghi posted on April 24
> "_Hi,
> 
> I did not find the combination of the Nikon D5 with the 600FL to give more keepers than the Canon 1DXII and 600II. It is important to realize that with any camera, Nikon or Canon, if you let the camera decide and choose one of the entire AF array the AF will latch to the BG when photographing challenging BIF against any kind of varied BG, so the "3D tracking" in Nikon is just as useless as "iTR" in Canon and I don't expect any such system to work for the type of photos I like to take. The most productive method for photographing BIF is to use the center AF expansion for either camera so that it is forced to focus where you want it to focus._
> ...


Good discovery Alan. Finally some hard proof that verifies the obvious many of us mentioned.


----------



## Talys (Jan 31, 2018)

@tron, AlanF - I agree. Good find, Alan.

Though not remotely close to his skill level, the high number of photos that look great in on the little screen but are inexplicably "slightly soft" on the PC is what I experienced with a Sony A7RII + G-Master 100-400, and why I ultimately never bought one. Keep in mind that at the time, I was comparing it to 80D with Sigma 150-600 on bird portraits.

I seriously considered it at one point -- not to replace my Canon, but just because there had been so much talk of them. I wisely borrowed one first, spent a whole day with it, and then decided that it wasn't for me, though I would certainly place plenty of blame on operator error. Ultimately, I bought a 100-400LII and a 6DII instead, and I certainly don't regret that choice. The only reason I didn't buy a 5D4 was the lack of the flippy screen, which I need for some non-bird stuff.




Don Haines said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > docsmith said:
> ...



Pfft. Bigfoot is overrated. Loch Ness. Or Ogopogo! Then he can crank those shadows in LR 8)

My cat, at 10 years of age, still jumps into any box or stiff bag on the ground. It's like some kind of Pavlovian response. Box: Can I fit into it?


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 31, 2018)

Talys said:


> ethanz said:
> 
> 
> > Talys said:
> ...



Nikon have a radio flash system, the SB5000, it costs $600 a flash. Some of the camera bodies can fit a dongle, the WR-R10, that enables wireless control from the menu (as all RT enabled Canon cameras can) it costs $110 and needs an adapter that cost $60. No Nikon cameras have the radio chip included.


----------



## Talys (Jan 31, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> Nikon have a radio flash system, the SB5000, it costs $600 a flash. Some of the camera bodies can fit a dongle, the WR-R10, that enables wireless control from the menu (as all RT enabled Canon cameras can) it costs $110 and needs an adapter that cost $60. No Nikon cameras have the radio chip included.



Hmm. So, if I read the stuff correctly, you need to buy 1 transmitter (WR-T10) for the camera, and 1 receiver (The WR-R10) for EACH flash, which is not just $100 per flash, but also something that sticks out of each speedlight (which must be a SB-5000).

That sounds crazy. Even if they don't put the chip in the camera, _why on earth wouldn't the put the receiver inside the $600 flash_? Or, at least, make a $700 version with the chip built in (talk about easy money). Or, if you're going to force someone to plug a piece into the flash, ffs, just make it attach to the hotshoe and make it usable for _any_ flash (perhaps with limited HSS support).


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 31, 2018)

Talys said:


> @tron, AlanF - I agree. Good find, Alan.
> 
> Though not remotely close to his skill level, the high number of photos that look great in on the little screen but are inexplicably "slightly soft" on the PC is what I experienced with a Sony A7RII + G-Master 100-400, and why I ultimately never bought one. Keep in mind that at the time, I was comparing it to 80D with Sigma 150-600 on bird portraits.
> 
> ...


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 31, 2018)

Talys said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Nikon have a radio flash system, the SB5000, it costs $600 a flash. Some of the camera bodies can fit a dongle, the WR-R10, that enables wireless control from the menu (as all RT enabled Canon cameras can) it costs $110 and needs an adapter that cost $60. No Nikon cameras have the radio chip included.
> ...



No the SB-5000 is a direct comparison to the 600-EX-RT II, it has radio triggering and control internally. 

The dongle goes on the camera body, it is, effectively, just a radio chip. You only need one WR-R10 per setup as it goes on the body, it replicates the ST-E3-RT but doesn't have any buttons or menus, Nikon went a different direction and use the camera menu only for the radio control.

The WR-T10 is a stand alone remote control from which you can trigger the camera, it is just a wireless trigger, you don't need one at all unless you want remote triggering of the camera.


----------



## Talys (Jan 31, 2018)

@Don - your cat looks very puzzled LOL.



privatebydesign said:


> No the SB-5000 is a direct comparison to the 600-EX-RT II, it has radio triggering and control internally.
> 
> The dongle goes on the camera body, it is, effectively, just a radio chip. You only need one WR-R10 per setup as it goes on the body, it replicates the ST-E3-RT but doesn't have any buttons or menus, Nikon went a different direction and use the camera menu only for the radio control.
> 
> The WR-T10 is a stand alone remote control from which you can trigger the camera, it is just a wireless trigger, you don't need one at all unless you want remote triggering of the camera.



Ahh, okay. Well, that makes a _lot_ more sense. The buttons and screen on the E3-RT are super useful, but I suppose I could live with it in the camera. Thank you for enlightening me!


----------



## MrFotoFool (Jan 31, 2018)

I assumed there would be a comparable thread on NikonRumors but surprisingly I could not find one. There is a 14 page (at this point) thread on FredMiranda (which I think someone linked above). I read the first six pages and it is less emotional than this thread and far more focused on actual camera settings than on Art Morris himself. However more than one person who has used both systems side by side for birds in flight say the Nikon does track better or is easier to use. So I think there may be something to it. Birds in flight is not something I regularly pursue and I far prefer the overall feel and intuitiveness of my Canon. However it seems likely that if you specialize in birds in flight that Nikon may indeed be the better option.


----------



## stevelee (Jan 31, 2018)

Just a general, and I hope not too impertinent a question comes to mind.

An online friend of many decades' duration is a photographer in Rhode Island. I recall that some years ago he said folks in his camera club would give him grief if his pictures of flying birds did not have even the tips of the wings razor sharp. I see some of you on this thread are referring to using flash.

Is this characteristic of the overall BIF community? I've not taken time to go through the many pages of BIF on this board. I have seen some lovely shots that look like birds soaring, riding wind currents, but no sense that their wings have ever moved. Are there photographers who like to take pictures that look like birds are actually flying, or is that considered gauche or a poor use of modern technology or something?


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 31, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > My success rate with close-in swallows is less than 1%, maybe I should buy expensive Nikon gear to crank it way up to 2%.
> ...


I'd consider it "in the statistical noise." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_change_and_difference



> I found using others settings just doesn't work for me yet I can achieve similar hit rates with my camera set up differently just because f the way my brain/button coordination works. Setting up AF for that final few percent of success is a time consuming and laborious process, it is work to get it right and there is limited value in others settings.


Fair enough; however, when I see other people getting shots with gear that's equal or less than mine, my first assumption is that I should up my skills. OK, he did make some noises about it being partly his own skill, but...? ? ?




> I find great variances in my ability to keep up with the action and so I find a case setting that works one day won't work another. For that reason I have abandoned case settings and have the three AF variables set up on a custom menu like Grant Atkinson recommends in his various AF guides on YouTube.


Thanks for the tip, I'll look at those videos some time.


----------



## ethanz (Jan 31, 2018)

stevelee said:


> Just a general, and I hope not too impertinent a question comes to mind.
> 
> An online friend of many decades' duration is a photographer in Rhode Island. I recall that some years ago he said folks in his camera club would give him grief if his pictures of flying birds did not have even the tips of the wings razor sharp. I see some of you on this thread are referring to using flash.
> 
> Is this characteristic of the overall BIF community? I've not taken time to go through the many pages of BIF on this board. I have seen some lovely shots that look like birds soaring, riding wind currents, but no sense that their wings have ever moved. Are there photographers who like to take pictures that look like birds are actually flying, or is that considered gauche or a poor use of modern technology or something?



Yes, many people do get anal about the wing tips being sharp and not blurred.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 31, 2018)

Orangutan said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Orangutan said:
> ...



First point, the 1%-2% comment, was a touch tongue in cheek, but it did point out relative improvement. As a real life example if I go to a rookery and shoot 1,000 images, if 1% are critically sharp, well composed, have the light just right, the background just right, the wing position just right etc etc then I get 10 keepers/portfolio possibles, if I double that I get 20. That is a meaningful improvement.

Don't get me wrong, nothing beats observation and an understanding of your subjects and your gear, and yes with more practice, subject observation and gear familiarity we would all be better, further, with the customization we now have for our gear it takes time and familiarity to dial that in for optimal results in any given shooting situation. There is a very good reason Nat Geo and BBC wildlife shooters are given the time to get the shots they do.

As for the videos, it's just another way of doing things, it will work for some and not for others. Here is the link for the relevant aspect that I found a game changer in dealing with case settings (or not!) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp8sHvGArgg . But it is just personal preference, just like BBF, I, personally, can't get on with it, missed far too many shots without engaging the AF with my thumb and I end up with cramps in it, I do like the far less popular back button AF off. But it took me several weeks of frustration and missed shots on non critical shoots to establish that single button feature!


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 31, 2018)

stevelee said:


> Are there photographers who like to take pictures that look like birds are actually flying, or is that considered gauche or a poor use of modern technology or something?


I'm a rank amateur, but enjoy both the art and the technical challenge of BIF. I much prefer the suggestion of movement, or intent, that gives life to photos of living things. I'm not fond of motionless photos of living taxidermy.


----------



## stevelee (Jan 31, 2018)

Orangutan said:


> I'm not fond of motionless photos of living taxidermy.



That's the way a lot of the pictures look to me. I've not been inspired to take up the challenges of photographing flying birds, since I don't have a conception of what I want the pictures to look like.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 31, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> docsmith said:
> 
> 
> > Now, I am just hoping that Ari responds to the Fredmiranda thread. Something happened between August and January and I am real curious as to what it was.
> ...



He came in to the Fred Miranda forum to attack those who had criticised Art Morris but hasn't returned to answer Arbitrage's question of why he has done such an about face from the August post or what lenses he would use to replace his favoured 400mm DO II.


----------



## Jester74 (Jan 31, 2018)

I may be wrong or misunderstand this guy, but it seems to me that he is looking for a magical ability in camera bodies to focus where he thinks and track the subject flawlessly while taking high resolution photos at 10 fps with a huge dynamic range. And find the right exposure of the picture element which he will crop in post. I am personally highly sceptical that this will ever happen, but who knows? NORAD tracks Santa every year...
And as an influencer he is doing his job with his switch. Influence...


----------



## tron (Jan 31, 2018)

Well I believe that using either Canon or Nikon we can have a sharp and a blurry picture of a bird in flight at the same time as long as we do not check the result ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 1, 2018)

tron said:


> Well I believe that using either Canon or Nikon we can have a sharp and a blurry picture of a bird in flight *cat* at the same time as long as we do not check the result ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D



Fixed that for ya.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 1, 2018)

tron said:


> Well I believe that using either Canon or Nikon we can have a sharp and a blurry picture of a bird in flight at the same time as long as we do not check the result ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


Actually, it's not birds in flight, it is cats in boxes....

Schrödinger's cat is a thought experiment, sometimes described as a paradox, devised by Austrian physicist Erwin Schrödinger in 1935. It illustrates what he saw as the problem of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics applied to everyday objects. The scenario presents a cat that may be simultaneously both in focus and out of focus, a state known as a quantum superposition, as a result of being linked to a random subatomic event that may or may not occur. The thought experiment is also often featured in theoretical discussions of the interpretations of quantum mechanics. 

Schrödinger was a brilliant theoretical physicist, but had problems performing practical experiments and often forgot to set the aperture properly to get the desired depth of field.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Feb 1, 2018)

I did uncheck this thread but in a moment of boredom returned to peruse the previous 2 or 3 pages. I'm also curious about Ari's description of the equality more or less of Canon and Nikon and then the switch to Nikon minus the 400 DO. 

I also have unsubscribed from Birdsasart. I just can't stomach some of the over the top pickiness about such things as AF point choices and histograms (Ari brushes histograms off for bird photos and recommends blinkies). Personally my opinion of Artie is not negative but he's slowing becoming out of touch, which is normal as we age. There is a time when the young and energetic need to take over.

PBD, if only. I do believe even I could get some BIF as you describe, where you live! But perhaps they would eventually become repetitious and boring just like ... 

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Feb 1, 2018)

Ari has come back to explain. He used the wrong settings when he first tested the D5. Yes, there is no equivalent of the 400mm DO II, the Nikon 2xTC is so bad he wouldn't buy it and even their 1.7xTC isn't sharp. Big birds are easy as are seagulls etc. But, for that extra 5% of BIF that real men need to capture, he will sacrifice everything. Good news for me as little birds wheeling in flight camouflaged against background are less than 5% of my goals and so breathing a huge sigh of relief I can continue with my 2xTC on my 400mm DO and my 100-400mm and not sell up for Nikon. Phew.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 1, 2018)

Speaking of birds in flight, that 'explanation' stinks like something that would have vultures flying around it in slow, lazy circles that even a Canon camera could track.


----------



## Mikehit (Feb 1, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Speaking of birds in flight, that 'explanation' stinks like something that would have vultures flying around it in slow, lazy circles that even a Canon camera could track.



Neuro... I never took you for being cynical..... :


----------



## docsmith (Feb 1, 2018)

I am not interested in changing systems. I am interested in seeing more pictures. As an understatement, Art seems prone to hyperbole. I do not have an opinion about Ari yet. But if I got particularly passionate about one specific thing, I can see flipping gear if I thought it was a bit better. And while I want to see pictures, getting better pictures than what Ari has may not be what happens, he may just get more keepers. I'll be most interested in his ongoing impressions.

But, question was answered, Aug to Jan switch was learning more about Nikon's equivalent to the zone AF system, which he finds better for BIF (as Alan already quoted, but bottom of the comment section):

http://arihazeghiphotography.com/blog/switch-to-the-dark-side/


----------



## Talys (Feb 1, 2018)

@docsmith - thanks for the link.

Ari's answers are a perfectly reasonable reason _for him_ to switch bodies, in my opinion. Per his explanation, it wouldn't make any sense for me, nor, do I think, most casual birders. 




> Q: Why are you switching to Nikon now?
> A. In the past 13 years, I have been exclusively shooting with Canon gear, I briefly tried Nikon gear, that is the D3s and the Nikon 500VR for a few months in 2010 and it didn’t meet my expectations. After Nikon’s latest release, the picture has changed. Nikon has gained the upper hand in the AF department for such subject as birds in flight.
> 
> Q: Is the AF the only reason? Is it that much better?
> ...


----------



## Grant Atkinson (Feb 1, 2018)

This has been an interesting thread to follow, as a wildlife (and bird) photographer and a Canon shooter. Whilst I don't own any Nikon gear I frequently shoot the newest Nikon cameras and lenses when I swop out gear with some of the folk who travel with us on photographic safaris. I like to shoot with the Nikon gear for many reasons. It is very important for me to have a good idea of the Nikon's setup and controls as I often have to assist photographers using Nikon equipment that are traveling with us. I also like to know the Nikon's capabilities, to the limit of my own abilities, and have an idea of the respective strengths and weaknesses for when somebody may ask my opinion on choosing gear for wildlife photography. I also would like to know which cameras are the best tools for the job, for my own shooting. In the course of leading photo safaris, I get to see the images from the Nikon and Canon systems displayed side by side all the time when we are processing, evaluating, critiquing our images with our groups of photographers. 
From what I can tell, I would agree with some posters above that the Nikon D5 does a better job of holding onto a fast-moving subject like a bird in the air, whether using one AF point or the group of 5, or D21, than any Canon body, if one tries to track that subject when it moves against a dark background or a strongly structured background. I have seen that result with the Nikon 200-400 f4 VR lens as well as the Nikon 400 f2.8 VR v2 lens and also with the Nikon 200-500f5.6 VR lens and the Nikon 300 f4 VR PF lens.

On the other hand, the Canon 1DX and 1DX Mk 2 as well as the 5Dmk4, when used with the Canon EF 100-400L IS ii, the EF 400 f4 DO IS ii and the EF 500L f4 IS ii will all lock onto strongly backlit subjects (that my older Canon lens and body combinations would fail on) that are moving quite quickly, when the Nikon D5 fails to do so, mounted onto the Nikon 200-400 f4 VR and the Nikon 200-500 f5.6 VR. I have not had a chance yet to see how the newest Nikon fixed lenses fare in this regard as it may be the lenses and not the camera AF that are the trouble, but the end result is the same for the user.
For sure there are some differences in the autofocus capabilities of the two camera systems and their highest performing bodies for AF (1DX mk2, 1DX, 5Dmk4, 5Dmk3, 7Dmk2) and the D5, D4s, D850, D500 but I feel that they are fairly close to one another and the differences are not great in my opinion.
Lenses play a big role too in photographing fast action and up until now, Canon's EF 100-400L IS ii and the EF 200-400L f4 1.4x extender focus faster and deliver sharper overall image quality than their Nikon counterparts - the Nikon 200-400 f4 VR and the Nikon 80-400 VR, as well as the Nikon 200-500 VR. The new high-end Nikon zooms may change this a bit - the 180-400 f4 1.4 converter lens that is upcoming, and the newest Nikon 70-200 f2.8 - which is too short for most of the wildlife that we photograph. 
Whilst it is fun to compare the high end of the two systems for action photography, I feel like they are closer to one another in autofocus performance than they have been in the past .
All our serious action shooting is usually done using either a Single manually selected AF point, or AF Expansion (One plus 4) or One plus 8 AF points, not AF Zone or the automatic AF settings. My wife Helena and I get to photograph a lot of wildlife in many different situations. We are mostly happy with the results we get from our gear but our own technique and application of skills is not always perfect, that we know for sure. We also don't expect that autofocus will manage to focus every super fast action shot that we attempt though we look forward to continuing improvements in AF.


----------



## applecider (Feb 1, 2018)

From Art's 1-26-18 famous pelican landing post -"I couldn't get this shot with a canon post."

"I tried and failed for decades to create images like this with my Canon gear. Do understand that many others, more skilled than I, have made images like this with their Canon gear. With my new Nikon gear I now feel that I at least have a good chance."

I am inserting my snark into this quote:


"I tried and failed for decades to create images like this with my Canon gear. Do understand that many others, more skilled than I [who am a professional bird photographer and have been in the field almost every day for the past 20 years and so have had more chances to capture birds in every aspect of their lives than maybe all but 100 people in the world] , have made images like this with their Canon gear. With my new Nikon gear I now feel that I at least have a good chance." 

I think it is called damning with faint praise.


----------



## Talys (Feb 1, 2018)

Thank you for your perspective, Grant!


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Feb 2, 2018)

applecider said:


> From Art's 1-26-18 famous pelican landing post -"I couldn't get this shot with a canon post."
> 
> "I tried and failed for decades to create images like this with my Canon gear. Do understand that many others, more skilled than I, have made images like this with their Canon gear. With my new Nikon gear I now feel that I at least have a good chance."
> 
> ...



Yup - you're not wrong !


----------



## AlanF (Feb 2, 2018)

I have been doing some reading about the difference between Nikon 3D and Canon iTR for tracking. Canon uses colour and the RGB detection to lock onto subjects. Nikon detects horizontal, vertical and diagonal movement. Nikon does have the edge for tracking movement against a background.


----------



## Grant Atkinson (Feb 6, 2018)

AlanF said:


> I have been doing some reading about the difference between Nikon 3D and Canon iTR for tracking. Canon uses colour and the RGB detection to lock onto subjects. Nikon detects horizontal, vertical and diagonal movement. Nikon does have the edge for tracking movement against a background.


Hi Alan
I have gotten my best results tracking fast birds/mammals moving against non-sky backgrounds using a Single AF point, or AF Expansion (One pt plus 4) or (AF Surround (One pt plus 8). Using the Canon iTR system on the 5d4, 1dx, 7d2 I do much worse as it seems to be overcome by speed. It tracks birds in a clear sky quite well though. The Nikon D5 that did better than my Canon bodies tracking birds against the non-sky background did so in One Point, or D9 or D21 point mode, not using 3 -D Tracking, with the user making a continued effort to keep that point on the moving subject. So far neither 3D Tracking nor iTR seems to be the best at holding onto a subject against a structured or dark background..if the subject is going fast, that is..slow subjects it works of course


----------



## tron (Feb 28, 2018)

On Feb the 8th' Art discovered (or "discovered" I am not in a position to know) how to take successful BIF pictures with Canon equipment and he sells this guide for 10$ !

Quoting from From it's blog dated February 8th, 2018
...
New Canon AF Settings for Birds in Flight/Free to all BAA Canon Camera User's Guide Owners
...
New Canon AF Settings for Birds in Flight
As I mentioned previously here, it is somewhat ironic that right before I switched to Nikon a third of the way into my San Diego trip I started getting my best-ever results with birds in flight with my Canon gear. That included images made with the 1DX II and the 5D Mark IV. I made one major change in the settings and for the first time, it made a world of difference (as you can see in the sharp-on-the-eyes image above, that with the bird flying right at me).
...
AI Servo/Shutter button AF as originally framed. The AF information including and especially the AF Area selection mode and the Case settings for this image are classified. 
...

Canon AF Settings for Birds in Flight … an illustrated e-mail: $10. Free with proof of purchase for any BAA Camera Users Guide. 

http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/2018/02/08/new-canon-af-settings-for-birds-in-flight-free-to-all-baa-canon-camera-users-guide-owners/

And my comment:

I wonder what you think/how you feel about all that...


----------



## Talys (Feb 28, 2018)

tron said:


> On Feb the 8th' Art discovered (or "discovered" I am not in a position to know) how to take successful BIF pictures with Canon equipment and he sells this guide for 10$ !
> 
> ...
> 
> I wonder what you think/how you feel about all that...



I just about spewed coffee laughing. It's so fortuitous that he figured this out just before he switched to Nikon!


----------



## ethanz (Feb 28, 2018)

And now charges $10 to us Canon Luddites to know what his secret sauce is.


----------



## Talys (Feb 28, 2018)

ethanz said:


> And now charges $10 to us Canon Luddites to know what his secret sauce is.



Secret sauce: point camera at bird more better!

By the way, he took that shot with a big tripod and a pro gimbal (Induro GIT304L + Mongoose M3.6). Guess what. I can get awesome, accurate autofocus ratios on big, slow-moving waterfowl when my camera is on a tripod and a gimbal, too. If you can't get a sharp photo of a pelican with a gimbal-mounted 5D4 or 1DXII, the solution is pretty simple: spend more time taking pictures.


----------



## tron (Feb 28, 2018)

Talys said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > On Feb the 8th' Art discovered (or "discovered" I am not in a position to know) how to take successful BIF pictures with Canon equipment and he sells this guide for 10$ !
> ...


 ;D And he switched to Nikon never the less. Maybe to ... punish Canon for not working so nice before ... his discovery ;D ;D ;D


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 28, 2018)

*mer·ce·nar·y* ˈmərsəˌnerē/ adjective
1. (of a person or their behavior) primarily concerned with making money at the expense of ethics


----------



## AlanF (Feb 28, 2018)

Who volunteers to spend $10 to find out the secret and publish it here?


----------



## tron (Feb 28, 2018)

And .... 

he was focusing BIF just nice even with 600mm + 2XIII see:

http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/2016/05/28/individual-birds-in-flight-at-1200mm-not-possible-or-is-it-with-the-1dx-mark-ii/

That time he was trying to make 10$ by selling the Lens Drive When AF Impossible Guide !!!
(As if setting it to False is not mentioned to about tens of sites about AF settings suggestions ;D )

By the way Neuro thanks for the definition. English is not my native language and I used to know the more common meaning - mainly because of the movies - of "mercenary" as a noun.


----------



## Talys (Feb 28, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Who volunteers to spend $10 to find out the secret and publish it here?



It's certainly not the $10; but I would hate to enrich such _mercenary_, as neuro puts it, duplicity.



tron said:


> And ....
> 
> he was focusing BIF just nice even with 600mm + 2XIII see:
> 
> ...



lol, that's funny. 

I wonder why he puts his AFMA setting on each of those photos. It's not like the +4 AFMA is of value to anyone else... or even himself, if he swaps that lens between his 1DX and 5D4.


----------



## ethanz (Feb 28, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Who volunteers to spend $10 to find out the secret and publish it here?



I will leave it up to those who are older and richer. ;D


----------



## tron (Feb 28, 2018)

Talys said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Who volunteers to spend $10 to find out the secret and publish it here?
> ...


To advertise his: LensAlign MK II incl/FocusTune (only $124.90 ;D ;D ;D )

There is a link to it in that article.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Mar 9, 2018)

I left this thread a while back and just thought to check it - some good laughs! 

Like a bunch of bloodhounds on a trail. 

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Mar 9, 2018)

Surely you read that his D5 bit the dust and he has sent it back to B&H, and the Nikon 600 doesn't focus as good as Canon using outer points. Also: 

"The Canon 400mm DO II is an incredible tool. I miss mine. Either bare or with the 1.4X TC it makes a great flight lens. With the 2X TC it gives you 800mm of hand held full frame reach.... At this time, Nikon has nothing that compares with the 400 DO II. "

Withdrawal symptoms! I simply could not give up my 400 DO II so Canon have me hooked!


----------



## ethanz (Mar 9, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Surely you read that his D5 bit the dust and he has sent it back to B&H, and the Nikon 600 doesn't focus as good as Canon using outer points. Also:
> 
> "The Canon 400mm DO II is an incredible tool. I miss mine. Either bare or with the 1.4X TC it makes a great flight lens. With the 2X TC it gives you 800mm of hand held full frame reach.... At this time, Nikon has nothing that compares with the 400 DO II. "
> 
> Withdrawal symptoms! I simply could not give up my 400 DO II so Canon have me hooked!



Wow, I didn't read that. Maybe he shouldn't have fire sold his Canon stuff lol.


----------



## Ozarker (Mar 9, 2018)

I wonder how many people actually follow these internet critics (making $/click) down these equipment rabbit trails?

My stuff works well for me. It will never matter to me who else uses what. My problem has never ever been the gear. The biggest problems I face is composition / lighting / laziness when shooting. I think talent comes into play more with composition and lighting than gear. Just my opinion. Not going to argue about differing opinions.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 1, 2020)

Tron's like got me looking back at this thread. What a laugh.

Does anyone have today's perspective on the topic. I left Birds as Art back then and have no desire to return.

And Alan, now without his 400 DO II - that's kind of sad but I personally understand aging very well and how heavy gear gets to be a pain. 

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Jul 2, 2020)

Jack, extract from the OP


AlanF said:


> Jack Douglas has alerted us to Art Morris switching to Nikon....
> The new Nikon D850 and D500 are awesome...
> I am not migrating to Nikon if the best lens available is a Tamron 150-600mm or its near-equivalent! My 400mm f/4 DO II has blazingly fast and accurate focus on the 5DIV, as well as being tack sharp corner to corner, and has given me consistently good birds in flight photos. If Nikkor could bring out a similar lens, then maybe I would consider it. By that time, however, Canon should have leapfrogged Nikon. In any case, for shots in good light, the Canon lenses on the 5DSR are difficult to beat for IQ.


A lot has happened since then. Nikon did come out with a similar lens that is as good and 0.8 kg lighter. Sony came out with the 200-600mm, and Art Morris has gone over to Sony. The facts are that none of the C, N and S are produce perfect all round systems for us birders and all three have weaknesses as well as pluses. I need lighter gear and the 1DXIII and 400mm DO II are too heavy for me now. Sony makes the only mirrorless with AF good enough for serious BIF and now the best, but too heavy for me, zoom. Canon makes for me the best lighter zoom, the 100-400mm II, and pretty good prosumer DSLRs. Nikon makes the best prosumer FF and APS-C DSLRs for AF with excellent IQ and fps but only one Nikkor lens I want. I now shoot across makers because of this, and the jury has yet to see the evidence if the R5 and new lenses will fulfil our needs.

This is not a whinge, quite the reverse. I am really happy with the choice of gear and am able to take much better photos now than I could have dreamed about a few years ago.


----------



## Del Paso (Jul 2, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Nikon didn't take the problem more seriously, they denied there was an issue at all until they were banned from selling the D600 in China.


Absolutely correct!


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 2, 2020)

AlanF said:


> Jack, extract from the OP
> 
> A lot has happened since then. Nikon did come out with a similar lens that is as good and 0.8 kg lighter. Sony came out with the 200-600mm, and Art Morris has gone over to Sony. The facts are that none of the C, N and S are produce perfect all round systems for us birders and all three have weaknesses as well as pluses. I need lighter gear and the 1DXIII and 400mm DO II are too heavy for me now. Sony makes the only mirrorless with AF good enough for serious BIF and now the best, but too heavy for me, zoom. Canon makes for me the best lighter zoom, the 100-400mm II, and pretty good prosumer DSLRs. Nikon makes the best prosumer FF and APS-C DSLRs for AF with excellent IQ and fps but only one Nikkor lens I want. I now shoot across makers because of this, and the jury has yet to see the evidence if the R5 and new lenses will fulfil our needs.
> 
> This is not a whinge, quite the reverse. I am really happy with the choice of gear and am able to take much better photos now than I could have dreamed about a few years ago.


Alan, the saying is, if it seems too good to be true ... so yes I too am cautious about the R5 hype but I'm different than you in that the weight isn't my problem yet, it's endurance because of lung issues and relative to gear I've only managed to get up to 20 MPs so I'm guessing the R5 will give me a significant cropping boost if nothing else. I can't justify too much more expense than that. And like you I'm not complaining for the same reason; I'm thrilled to have what I have and have really benefited from 400 X2 with better AF than one would expect out of X2.

Jack


----------

