Feelings about the 90-280

[caissa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

11 hours ago, Fedro said:

Not sure if you are serious or just joking.

I have to say that I am no expert on this, though I am enjoying reading this trail, but I imagine that drones would cause great stress to birds, and potentially kill them if one does not know what they are doing.

You say you are no expert - this is a mild way to describe it. Here you can see what is possible. https://www.fernsehserien.de/die-fantastische-reise-der-voegel      The original English name is earthflight and produced by the BBC.

The idea that makes it work is that the birds follow the camera not vice versa. It’s a longtime effort (a serious effort) to get them used to the drone. Not done away with a few casual (silly) remarks. (Just because you have no clue how it can be done, does not mean that nobody can do it. The idea came up already more than ten years ago.)

If you are genuinely interested, there is also a “making of”. (But it is now 10 years old and the equipment today is different. Much more new possibilities.)

 

Edited September 27, 2020 by caissa

[Alistairm]

This drone stuff really has nothing to do with the topic being discussed. 

[Fedro]

1 hour ago, caissa said:

You say you are no expert - this is a mild way to describe it. Here you can see what is possible. https://www.fernsehserien.de/die-fantastische-reise-der-voegel      The original English name is earthflight and produced by the BBC.

The idea that makes it work is that the birds follow the camera not vice versa. It’s a longtime effort (a serious effort) to get them used to the drone. Not done away with a few casual (silly) remarks. (Just because you have no clue how it can be done, does not mean that nobody can do it. The idea came up already more than ten years ago.)

If you are genuinely interested, there is also a “making of”. (But it is now 10 years old and the equipment today is different. Much more new possibilities.)

 

Cassia, in my post I did not doubt that anyone could do it, I doubted that you could do it

Thank you for sending me the link, it looks great and I will have a look

Anyways, as Alistair says this is for another thread probably, back to the amazing 90-280

[Michael Markey]

On 9/26/2020 at 8:20 PM, Alistairm said:

For wildlife photography, especially birds, I would in a heartbeat.

I’m currently in outback Australia. SL2 for landscapes and the wonderful 90-280 for budgerigars in flight, but on this trip so far I’ve taken around 130 shots with the SL2 and am approaching 3,500 with the 1DX mkii and 600 f/4... mostly with a 1.4x teleconverter. 280mm on the SL2 is almost uselessly short for small birds in the wild. Even with modern high density sensors, I still prefer to get the shot in the frame rather than rely on heavy cropping. And the SL2 AF is still miles behind even now outdated Canikon SLRs, at least for birding. 

Of course you can get wonderful bird photographs with a Leica, but there are much better alternatives. 

This is good advice ....

[lanetomlane]

Sorry, but for any type of Safari, or bird photography I use a Nikon D810 (backed up by a D800) and a 600mm f4 Nikkor. I also have the 1.4 and 2.0 extendors. The only exception is Galapagas where the birds a so tame I used a 70-200mm, I was last there in 2008 and so maybe things have changed with them allowing more tourists to visit.

For all my other photography I've used Leica since 1968.

https://photographybytomlane.com

[david a. edwards]

 

With the last update for the CL, #4, I think, you can do a 1.3 & a 1.7 crop.  I shoot the APO 90-280 on my CL.  With the 1.5x on the CL & the 1.7 this makes the 90-280 = to 714 on the long end.  Find that I can handhold this and get sharp Images.  No longer think/dream of a longer lens for birds & other wildlife. This update has saved me from spending thousands of $$$. 

This solves the need for a longer lens & I still get the to use one of the best lenses Leica has produced.  My Images stand out from those of my friends with non Leica lenses.  Hard to beat 714mm, hand held, with Leica results.  Why haven't some of you tried this?   

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have - and I find the combo of CL + 90-280 way too unbalanced for comfortable shooting.

YMMV. 

Edited October 30, 2020 by LocalHero1953

[aksclix]

it's interesting there's still talk of the Nikons and Canons when Sony is clearly winning the BIF category with the amazing a9 and a9II to go with 600 f4 and even the incredibly affordable 200-600.. 

anyway, just got a 90-280 and digging up some threads and images to look at 
I guess this lens would be amazing at a bird sanctuary and/or zoos where the animals/birds aren't too far away.

 

 

[BernardC]

On 1/20/2021 at 2:38 AM, aksclix said:

it's interesting there's still talk of the Nikons and Canons when Sony is clearly winning the BIF category with the amazing a9 and a9II to go with 600 f4 and even the incredibly affordable 200-600.. 

Personally, I wouldn't consider full-frame for this type of photography. You won't get much benefit in daylight.

Does Canon still offer their 100-400? That and a 90D (APS-C) should be unbeatable for BiF, and reasonably light. I'm sure that Nikon has an equivalent setup, they always do, but I am not as familiar with their range.

Of course, everyone will have their favourites, but that's what I would pick if bird-in-flight was my hobby. You can get a system for less than the price of a Leica 90-280.

[Michael Markey]

26 minutes ago, BernardC said:

Does Canon still offer their 100-400? That and a 90D (APS-C) should be unbeatable for BiF, and reasonably light. I'm sure that Nikon has an equivalent setup, they always do, but I am not as familiar with their range.

 

They do and I think its considered as travelling light .

I`m a bird watcher (always have been) rather than a bird photographer but I have a bash at the later sometimes .

A 400 mm lens is considered a minimum requirement ,at least in the UK.

A 500 is usually the norm backed up with an extender .

If I were to do bird photography full time I`d be looking in the range 5 ,6 or 800 mm .

If you`re living in the right place Canon have brought two fixed aperture , light weight lenses out in RF mount  .... a 600/11 and an 800/11 .

Both under £1k 

They know the market 

Edited January 21, 2021 by Michael Markey

[Alistairm]

On 10/31/2020 at 5:35 AM, LocalHero1953 said:

I have - and I find the combo of CL + 90-280 way too unbalanced for comfortable shooting.

YMMV. 

Also tried it. Liked the images, but the lack of back button focus is a deal breaker for me. Agree that handling in general is suboptimal. The CL is great for travel/walk around, but didn’t work for me as a main body.

Edited January 21, 2021 by Alistairm

[aksclix]

4 hours ago, BernardC said:

Personally, I wouldn't consider full-frame for this type of photography. You won't get much benefit in daylight.

Does Canon still offer their 100-400? That and a 90D (APS-C) should be unbeatable for BiF, and reasonably light. I'm sure that Nikon has an equivalent setup, they always do, but I am not as familiar with their range.

Of course, everyone will have their favourites, but that's what I would pick if bird-in-flight was my hobby. You can get a system for less than the price of a Leica 90-280.

The Sony a9 + 200-600mm zoom is a proven combo.. I own it and have personally take some nice pictures with it.. bought it only last year so it hasn't been used to full potential yet.. but I did get some really great sharp BIF photos.. 

tried the Canon 100-500 rf lens with R6 as well because it's much lighter but I like the images from A9 better.. 

90D seems to have issues with AF and tracking.. have seen people online prefer the 7d MII over the 90D..

I even tried the Canon M6 MII with 400mm DO IS USM.. its good but the body was just too tiny for me.. sold it all away.. will stick to the 200-600 Sony for all birding stuff for now.. 

In fact, Nikon D500 + 200-500 setup was pretty awesome and inexpensive actually.. I had a D4 and 200-500 that I sold off last year

Edited January 21, 2021 by aksclix

[aksclix]

4 hours ago, Michael Markey said:

They do and I think its considered as travelling light .

I`m a bird watcher (always have been) rather than a bird photographer but I have a bash at the later sometimes .

A 400 mm lens is considered a minimum requirement ,at least in the UK.

A 500 is usually the norm backed up with an extender .

If I were to do bird photography full time I`d be looking in the range 5 ,6 or 800 mm .

If you`re living in the right place Canon have brought two fixed aperture , light weight lenses out in RF mount  .... a 600/11 and an 800/11 .

Both under £1k 

They know the market 

check out Mark Smith Photography on youtube or on his website.. he is the master of BIF photography and he has the Sony setup.. the A9 and 200-600mm is not just good enough.. its more than enough IMO.. 

[Michael Markey]

4 hours ago, aksclix said:

check out Mark Smith Photography on youtube or on his website.. he is the master of BIF photography and he has the Sony setup.. the A9 and 200-600mm is not just good enough.. its more than enough IMO.. 

Thank you .... I`ve watched that .

If you do BIF that combination takes some beating .

Fortunately I don`t ... the fastest it gets for me is equestrian shots so the CL and my film M`s work fine .

I hang around SL threads trying to work up the courage to dump my Sony and Batis lenses for an SL2 or S 

 

 

[sillbeers15]

The VE90-280mm + SL2 works fine for me on BIF. On APSC format, the range extends to 420mm without lost of aperture like a teleconverter would and I still get a decent 20MPx. Beyond that, choose the birding spot intelligently that the reach of the lens works just as locating the appropriate spot and time to get the sun at the right place. 

I also found novice photographer two common trendy habits. One is to start shooting whenever the subjects appear regardless of distance and direction against the sun. The other is the trigger free habit on high drive speed. In other words, highly quantity but hardly any quality.