Long-eared Owl

[telyt]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Today I visited Mercey Hot Springs near Firebaugh California (merceyhotsprings.com) located in the hills west of I-5 in the central valley. For those who have not travelled this stretch of freeway, it's considered amng the most boring freeways in California; winter at least has some green in the grasslands, but in summer the hills are light brown with dead grass and the sky, influenced by automotive pollution and grass fires, is nearly the same color.

 

Mercey Hot Springs is an oasis with a year-round water supply and a small grove of tamarix trees, the only substantial plant growth for many miles. During the winter months these tamarix trees are host to numerous Long-eared Owls who hunt for Kangaroo Rats in the surrounding desert by night and roost communally in the tamarix trees by day:

 

 

 

 

Technical stuff: (both photos) R8/DMR, tripod

 

first photo: 560mm f/6.8 Telyt at f/6.8

2nd photo: 280mm f/4 APO at about f/8 for DOF.

 

I also expect to have some film photos of these birds in about a week. All comments welcome.

[dan_drabek]

Startlingly brilliant shots Doug. I did a comic double take on the second one. The owl looks mighty proud. A fine catch--for both of you.

DD

[imported_peter_m]

I am all green with envy <G>

 

Very nice shots Doug!

 

Peter

[ejcaliguri@comcast.net]

Doug-

 

As usual -- THE BEST!!!

[kamilsukun]

Doug,

 

Beautiful creatures. Beautiful photographs. Second is one so innocent and cute. This is a true example of eye contact

 

Thanks for sharing.

[billh]

Doug, how do you manage to get these guys to sit still while you come up close to them, set up a tripod, then snap their picture!!?? It amazes me.

[fernando_b]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Doug,

second one seems looking interested to you (at least to your equipment)!

Fernando.

[stuny]

Doug -

 

Up to your normal, exceptionally high standards. Fabulous catches and details.

[billh]

Doug, how does the 560mm f/6.8 Telyt compare to the image quality of the Canon 500 and 600mm lenses? Also, how difficult is the 560mm f/6.8 Telyt to focus at f6.8?

 

Thanks,

 

Bill

[telyt]

Doug, how does the 560mm f/6.8 Telyt compare to the image quality of the Canon 500 and 600mm lenses?

 

I have no idea, I haven't used those Canons. The handling can make as much of a difference as optical properties and this IMHO is where the biggest differences are. The only Canon I've used recently was the FD 400mm f/2.8 and I wasn't terribly impressed with either the handling or the optics.

 

Also, how difficult is the 560mm f/6.8 Telyt to focus at f6.8?

 

depends a lot on the viewfinder. I've begun using the uniform matte screen in the R8, it's much easier to use than the standard universal screen. The SL is much easier than the R8's plain matte screen even with the 1.4x extender.

[billh]

I have no idea, I haven't used those Canons. The handling can make as much of a difference as optical properties and this IMHO is where the biggest differences are. The only Canon I've used recently was the FD 400mm f/2.8 and I wasn't terribly impressed with either the handling or the optics.

 

I have only used the 300f2.8IS, but I understand the 400 f2.8, and the 500 and 600 are excellent lenses. What problems did you find with the 400 f2.8” Was the image quality not good?

 

I need something longer than a 300 with a 1.4x for birds. The image quality is a major issue, and since some images need to be printed 17 x 24 or so, having to crop is not good. I would like to get at least as much detail as you see here - this is wide open with a 1.4x, ISO800 at 125th sec.

 

 

The 600 f4.0 is huge, plus it costs over $7000, and I can’t see using it for anything other than for birds. I don’t know anything about the 560 Leica lens other than it exists. I assume it will fit the Canon with an adapter like I use for the other R lenses on the 1Ds2. Does this sound like a reasonable alternative to the Canon lens, and if so, is there anything in particular I should look for (are there more than one version of this lens)? I saw one on eBay, but I don’t know if it is the correct lens.

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=012&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=220093205204&rd=1&rd=1

[smsmd]

Hi,

 

Thanks for posting the info on the location. I have driven by that stretch of freeway countless times and didn't know the park was there.

 

I really like the photos. I have an M8-not clear there would be any way to get these photos with my camera.

 

Thanks, steve

[telyt]

I have only used the 300f2.8IS, but I understand the 400 f2.8, and the 500 and 600 are excellent lenses. What problems did you find with the 400 f2.8” Was the image quality not good?

 

Optically the FD 400mm f/2.8 L lacked contrast, color saturation and detail unless stopped down a couple of stops, compared with the f/6.8 Telyts. Later versions of this lens are said to be much improved, the latest EF IS version rivalling the old non-modular 400mm f/2.8 APO-Telyt.

 

The handling of this lens left much to be desired as well. The tall tripod foot it has doubling as a carrying handle is what Canon seems to have standardized on, and this IMHO is the cause of all of its handling problems. The tall tripod foot makes the lens much more prone to vibration, vs the short tripod mount used on APO-Telyts. This tripod mount also makes it very difficult to support the lens with the heel of my focussing hand, leading to more vibration and forcing the elbow of my focussing hand out to the side if I want any kind of a grip on the focusing ring (less stable, more vibration). I found I had to use a much higher shutter speed with this lens to avoid blur from camera shake and I also found that to get the image quality I wanted and expected from my Telyts I had to stop it down to f/5.6 or so. In other words the f/2.8 aperture was useless to me and I was hauling a lot of weight around for no reason.

 

I need something longer than a 300 with a 1.4x for birds. The image quality is a major issue, and since some images need to be printed 17 x 24 or so, having to crop is not good. I would like to get at least as much detail as you see here - this is wide open with a 1.4x, ISO800 at 125th sec.

 

 

The 600 f4.0 is huge, plus it costs over $7000, and I can’t see using it for anything other than for birds. I don’t know anything about the 560 Leica lens other than it exists. I assume it will fit the Canon with an adapter like I use for the other R lenses on the 1Ds2. Does this sound like a reasonable alternative to the Canon lens, and if so, is there anything in particular I should look for (are there more than one version of this lens)? I saw one on eBay, but I don’t know if it is the correct lens.

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=012&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=220093205204&rd=1&rd=1

 

The lens in the auction has the scarce visoflex mount, adaptable to a wide variety of camera bodies. IMHO the 560mm f/6.8 is a good way to try out this sort of focal length without spending multiple thousands of dollars. It's probably not as sharp as a modern lens and the f/6.8 maximum aperture can be a problem sometimes. If you really need the f/4 maximum aperture the 560 Telyt is a stepping stone, testing the waters in the extreme focal length arena. If portability is important to you, the 560 f/6.8 Telyt might be just the thing you're looking for. It's light enough that I can hike with it in the mountains off-trail for hours and not regret carrying it:

 

 

Thanks for posting the info on the location. I have driven by that stretch of freeway countless times and didn't know the park was there.

 

It's a private resort. They're very friendly to visiting birders but they ask for a $5 day-use fee which I am glad to pay. If you tell them you're looking for the owls they'll show some to you. The owls will not be there much longer, they'll be dispersing soon for the breeding season.

 

I really like the photos. I have an M8-not clear there would be any way to get these photos with my camera.

 

Visoflex and a 560mm f/6.8 for the first photo, Visoflex and 280mm f/4.8 for the second

[wbesz]

Great work Doug!

 

(you must have a lot of patience )

[billh]

"The lens in the auction has the scarce visoflex mount, adaptable to a wide variety of camera bodies. IMHO the 560mm f/6.8 is a good way to try out this sort of focal length without spending multiple thousands of dollars. It's probably not as sharp as a modern lens and the f/6.8 maximum aperture can be a problem sometimes. If you really need the f/4 maximum aperture the 560 Telyt is a stepping stone, testing the waters in the extreme focal length arena. If portability is important to you, the 560 f/6.8 Telyt might be just the thing you're looking for. It's light enough that I can hike with it in the mountains off-trail for hours and not regret carrying it:"

 

Doug,

 

Thanks very much for the reply and information. Could I use this lens (in the auction) on the M8 with a visoflex? I assume it will also mount on the canon with an adapter?

 

Your owl photos are very sharp - they were from the 560 at f6.8 - correct?

[telyt]

Could I use this lens (in the auction) on the M8 with a visoflex? I assume it will also mount on the canon with an adapter?

 

Yes and yes.

 

Your owl photos are very sharp - they were from the 560 at f6.8 - correct?

 

The first owl photo and the Dall's Sheep photo were made with the 560 f/6.8 @ full aperture, the owl on a tripod and the sheep with my shoulder stock/monopod rig. I have numerous example photos of what the 560 can do with the DMR. IMHO the DMR makes the 560 much more usable than with film because I'm much more willing to use higher ISO for faster shutter speeds.

[billh]

Thanks once again. I sent a message to you.

 

Bill

[leicamann]

Nice shots Doug..just wondering about the "fog" in the lower left of the first shot....is that because something was in the sightline?

 

Thanks for sharing

 

Regards, Leicamann

[telyt]

..just wondering about the "fog" in the lower left of the first shot....is that because something was in the sightline?

most likely. A clear line of sight was a bit elusive << gross understatement

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear