You DONT need a 600mm Lens!!! Just do THIS..

[@StefanMalloch]

If you like these videos, make sure to hit that like and subscribe button and drop a comment below! Its the best way to support the work I do here and is much appreciated!

[@cameraprepper7938]

I have several times used my Sony 135mm 1.8 GM as a 300+mm Lens cropping from 61 megapixels to much less than APSC format. that said I am SO tired of watching thousands of bird photos were you only can see the bird, you cannot see if it a wild bird or a bird in captivity (like in your video here !), I have done bird photography since 1980 and I like to see the free birds in their natural environment.

[@gavinmccue2894]

yeah you don't need a 600mm lens if your hanging out in parks with nothing but habituated ducks and geese...very true

[@stevenlui8105]

Won’t disagree with your points but as an enthusiastic birder I’d stick with my big telephoto prime lenses. After all I don’t need to get the shot every single time I shoot for money but to enjoy the process as much as I could.

[@arildhagen3820]

I see your point but still. You cant get around the information and the details captured with a 600mm prime versus a upscaled or cropped image. Living up north where light is always an issue the 1,5 stop light advantage with the f/4.0 makes a huge difference. Mind to get max sharpness from the 200-600 the lens should be stopped down to f/8.0. Given the same shutterspeed for BIF and if you get ISO 12800 by exposing correct with the 200-600, the same image taken with f/4.0 will give iso 3200. At the end the end image from the f/4.0 will be sharper and more detiailed. I can add a 1.4X teleconverter and get 840mm f/5.6, 240mm longer reach and still not reaching the base f/stop for the 200-600 with it's f/6.3 at the long end. The 600 mm prime is a cray piece in terms of size, weight and price but for a reason. If theres atmospheric pollution in the air and you take the image at 400mm over the 600 and crop in it will still show the pollution and heat haze if present. Upscaling will only upscale the noise and artifacts to. Not everyone is able or interested in utting that much money into photography so it's down to the invidividual shooter, but don't say you don't need it as to say a 100-400 is equally good- It isn't

[@eerofi]

Amen.

[@Astronomynatureandmusic]

Agree with this one. Advertising Topaz as to remove noise takes away from the original premisse. Especially in less light it is not feasible to crop instead of zoom. Adding to that: not everyone has a high quality full frame sensor.

[@ali_luxlike]

One more note: The effect of the "dirty air" ist absolutly the sam with 400mm no crop and 100mm 4x crop. And the reason is esay, its the same air ;-)

[@dab7963]

What great advice. I was using a 150 - 600 and missed a ton of pictures. Next I tried DX but that sucked too. Next I used my Nikon Z9 camera and my Nikon 70 - 200 2.8 VR lens and I cropped in later and used Topaz labs and now my keeper rate is greatly improved. The met is to use a 70 - 200 2.8 and crop in later and topaz labs is all I needed. Been shooting humming birds. I did just purchased a 2x Nikon teleconverter and will try that too. Also a gimbal head for the tripod was also an essential piece of gear. Great video thanks for sharing

[@BURTBROWN]

WOW!!! I have been a LONGTIME user of Topaz products and this showed even MORE versatility to them! My Tamron 18-300mm does a great job and might even be doing a better job than I anticipated... I just haven't been trying to shoot and enlarge over long distances!!! The one thing a 600mm WILL do is actually allow you to SEE BETTER at a long distance, say a smaller bird, etc. and catch better shots, but all at the disadvantage of weight. Glad I have held off in getting the 600mm zoom so far so I can apply your processes!!! Many thanks!!!

[@MattisProbably]

Right now I am in love with my Nikkor 180-600 because for my kind of photography it is pretty much ideal. I am staff photographer for a local zoo, portaits and general close ups of our critters are what I enjoy the most. I just like to get in close to show our animals as individuals to make people want to meet them in person. But 180-600mm on my Z7 II are also a great range for action shots. So as you said, zoom out, grab the action and crop. It just happens to be the perfect range for what I do. Easily the most versatile lens in my arsenal right now. The weight isn't an issue either and the ergonomics are improved a lot compared to my previous 200-500. An exception are our free-roaming lemurs. For them I usually use my 70-200 and in some cases even the 24-70 works out when they decide to be curious about what I'm doing! 🙂

[@ShaunWilliams]

Good points. Also just with lightroom you can achieve good results. If you have a 24mp photo and need to crop in to a quarter you end up with a low res 6mp pic. But if you superres it first in lightroom, then you go from 24 to 96Mp and then crop back down the 24Mp... works very well.

[@StefanMalloch]

Absolutely!

[@xbfotos]

I disagree… taking shots of those hummingbirds being fed with the plastic feeder is different than birds in rainforests or jungles. Also if we are talking about lions or dogs or those big birds who aren’t shy and come close then it’s ok but you definitely need a super zoom lens otherwise cropping and up scaling won’t work

[@torbjornwiken]

I would say it is very situational if you need the big lens or not. I have both, mid-range lenses and the big prime 600 mm (and a 1.4 TC). If I know that the wildlife Im trying to capture are elusive and shy, I def. will pack the 600 mm and the TC to keep enough distance between myself and the animal. And don’t underestimate how well a longer focal length isolates subjects! I would say it like this; if you are serious about doing wildlife, get the big primes. At least a 500 mm prime. If you are just starting on a budget, sure don’t let the lack of focal length stop you from taking wildlife photos. If you are into smaller bird photography, I would go so far as saying that enough reach is essential. And remember, it is possible to buy great prime lenses second hand! And one more thing; the big primes are more expensive for a reason, they have amazing qualities and glass! It is noticable. I don’t want to undermine your video, at the same time i think it is neccessary to not undermine the great benefits you do get with longer focal lengths and especially big primes. Let it be a dream to own one someday. I photographed for 20 years before I bought my dream prime 600mm second hand! ☺️

[@larbueno]

I finally got the Sigma 60-600 a few days ago for wildlife filmmaking. Thankfully we motion shooters don't have to deal with the high shutter speeds needed for wildlife photography. Granted, this amazing zoom lens doesn't have the ridiculous sharpness of a 600mm f4 prime, but the versatility is so high value to me that a little loss of detail and light is worth it...and I'm using a micro43 camera, too! I can zoom out to 60mm for context...showing the tree the bird nests in, then zoom into 600mm and show a nice close shot of the bird leaving it's nest hole. I'll keep my 600. It's a great storytelling tool!

[@nicedward7544]

The 70-350 g lens is an awesome alternative too if you have the resolution to crop with an R series or A1. Super small and light. For hummingbirds i use a 200 canon prime on my Sony. The main reason i shoot R cameras is for heavy cropping.

[@cameratool]

Why didn't you use Topaz on the 600mm file for the comparison?

[@YoungValor]

I use the Sigma 150-600mm love that lens

[@Durio_zibethinus]

That's a solid, classic choice for a long time.

[@AjaySingh-228]

Wow, Stefan! This is a game changer. I always thought I needed a giant lens for wildlife photos, but you've convinced me that a 100-400mm could be perfect. Especially with cropping in modern cameras, a smaller lens sounds way easier to carry around. Thanks for the helpful tips bro

[@IcedReaver]

I use the same approach with my XF 50-140mm w/1.4 TC (turns it into 70-200mm). My Fuji X-T4 has a large enough pixel count to crop in post and still keep detail. Furthermore, I can pre-process these with DXO PureRAW (alternative to Topaz) and the resulting images look superb before I even touch them with image processing. Working with a lower focal length also forces you to get closer to the subject!

[@Natahsz]

lumix gm5 and olympus 40 150mm f4,5.6 and no need more, for the city or landspace 14mm 2.5f, 45mm 1.7 for portrait... i love it

[@neutrinostorm]

After investing a year of time and as little money as possible into this great hobby, I've basically come to the same conclusion. I always wanted more range after buying a Tamron 18-300 for my ZV-E10. But at the same time I was working on DxO and Topaz Photo AI. The results of DxO with noise reduction combined with the DxO lens modules, which sharpen much better than Topaz, result in a different lens selection workflow. That's why I bought a Tamron 150-500 and an A6700, the lens mainly because of the good aperture values ​​in relation to the focal length and it is fully supported by DxO. And the a6700 does significantly better focusing than the ZV-E10. My dream of the Sigma 60-600 has long since ended due to the lack of lens support in DxO. My newest tool is the Samyang 135mm F1.8, which is also fully supported in DxO and after reading reviews from Christopher Frost and Dustin Abbott. The only way to get the motion blur of flying birds under control is to use a faster shutter speed and as wide an aperture as possible!

[@alancornes8916]

Believe it or not, I took some great photos of the Bee Hummingbird when I was in Cuba. I only had my Fujifilm X100V while another photographer next to me had a zoom but couldn’t follow the rapid movement of the birds. My 35 mm equivalent fixed lens caught fantastic shots though I had to set the shutter to the max, 1/4000 th sec. We compared our photos later and mine were certainly better even though I’d cropped dramatically.

[@gitithadani]

I use an sony a7r5 with the tamron 50-400. I use this combination a lot for bird sanctuaries & it's great to be able to do so much handheld. There is also excellent ibis & with an iso around 800 to 1000 one can get some really amazing results. I was on a mounttain top and there was a small swallow in the cabin - very dimply lit yet I got an excellent image. With a heavier lens I would have had to set it up and not caught the flight of the swallow. I also have the 500gms tamron 70-300 and because of its lightness was able to get images of fast flying sea eagle from the room balcony. There is so much detail that we can get from these modern sensors so the crops can easily be upscaled with software which with increased AI will only become better. I also sometimes use clear image zoom

[@adolfjoubert1995]

The AF of the high res camera does not find the eye with a short lens, the way it does with longer lens when shooting small subjects at a distance. Post processing and cropping does not fix the problem when you missed the focus point...

[@IC3N1N3]

I'm shooting with my g9 is that enough megapixels to crop like you are? I haven't bought any prime lens currently just running with 25mm, 45-150mm, and 100-300mm. The 4/3 camera has a 2x crop factor so really everything is doubled.

[@jeroenvdw]

I feel the same way, although you do need some really high quality glass to be able to crop in that much. I have a Sony A7RV with a 61mp image sensor and I used it with the Tamron 150-500 for some time. The Tamron isn't a very sharp lens, so when I was shooting wildlife at 500mm I sometimes used crop mode to get 26mp pics at 750mm. The results were not great, pretty soft images and also it didn't locked on to the eyes of animals very accurately. Sold it and now I'm in need of something to replace it, but until then my Sony 135mm 1.8 GM does wonders, it's insanely sharp even cropped.

[@WhiteCole1-bf9ko]

I was thinking about getting the 70-200gm1. But then the reviews were bad. So I got a 35-150 Tamron. But I still wanted more reach. After countless videos. Stefan was my savour and I bought the Sony 100-400gm. So sharp & crisp. Very happy. Now, for that final reach, 1.4 converter. Thanks.

[@StefanMalloch]

Glad it worked out! One of the best

[@meibing4912]

You should imho mention that background blur and bokeh will typically be better using a long prime lens. Especially compared to a slower zoom. To me this makes a huge difference justifying using a 300mm f/2.8 even over a 135 f/1.8 (no slouch either) because my backdrops tend to be insanely busy. I agree that the high MPIX cameras we have today allow cropping a lot. But I would also recommend people to go for high MPIX cameras if they want to go the crop route. 60 MPIX with a great prime allows a lot of flex in post.

[@Jonathantuba]

Cropping amount depends on resolution of camera and intended use. If for Instagram and you are shooting with 60mp A7Rv a huge crop is possible with still acceptable results, but if you start with 24mp and want to make prints or enter prestigious photo competitions then not so much. I try not to crop smaller than 4K size, so 3840px on long side, but with Topaz AI have recovered very usable images from those cropped to less than 1750 px long side. In short I think using 300mm lens instead of 600mm often works - but would not go shooting wildlife with 135mm unless it was big mammals or fairly obliging birds, such as in public park. I agree that using a bit wider makes getting subject in frame easier and definitely a lot nicer to carry. For myself I now mostly use the new 300 F2.8 GM instead the 600 F4 GM, although I am lucky enough to own both and take my wildlife photography seriously.

[@ch_boki]

That's why I love my R7 with 70-200 + 1.4x. It's my go to combo. Awesome content btw!

[@StefanMalloch]

Appreciate it!

[@Steve-qi7hc]

My go to for wildlife and birds is Nikon D500 with the full frame AF-P 70-300. It gives reach with subject acquisition and can even do close up if I come across an interesting insect.

[@chak_dz6961]

The self introduction got me HOOKED ❤

[@cameronward9443]

You'll get a flatter image from a shorter focal length opposed to the 600 which can be seen in the dog picture. It's not a really a fair comparison though since the dog photo is more of a portrait and not a true wildlife shot.

[@Freewxll614]

Wow this is exactly what I needed. I had a question tho, I own the Tamron 35-150 and have been looking into a longer lens for nighttime football games, do you have any recommendations? I have been considering something like a 70-200 with a teleconverter or the 100-400 or even the Tamron 50-400/150-500. Is that even necessary or is cropping @ 150mm enough in your opinion?

[@bowerdw]

I don't generally like to take long distant shots unless I have to. Even then it is for the pride of getting something far away. I generally see more distortion on those shots. Sure I can spend 10 to 12 thousand dollars to get a superior lens, but I don't make money on photography and certainly wouldn't get my investment back. I made a simple adjustment using a 70 - 300 mm lens. I am now shooting at 1/3000 with auto ISO and a smaller aperture. What happens? More noise in well lightened scenes. Guess what? Denoise AI removes the noise. Details are captured or remain that I have wanted for years without over sharpening occurring. Cropping is not the problem it used to be. These settings have to change with low light. However, this is such a new find for me, I haven't had occasion to see what adjustments I need to make. I am looking forward to finding out. This was a helpful video since I seldom use 600mm, but can if necessary.

[@zadnitsa]

For my opinion, the most important things is have fun in the process, and.. (for me) probably our carrying abilities, so weight and size of camera+lens kit is important, it's just mentally easier to go with a small walk-around kit. maybe if you're using a car a lot that's not that important, but... This is priceless when you can just put your kit into any bag or even a pocket (i carried my nikon 70-300 kit in pocket) and go out. Also, if your kit is not that big, you can take it into low-cost flights with you and still have enough space for other stuff. And.. you can even have this with reach you want, we have crop cameras with 20-30mp sensors. But of course technique and patience is always the main thing here. Also, agree with the thing about zooming out. Just because sometimes you can stick with this thing with having bird/animal big in the frame, but sometimes you can get amazing habitat or landscape photos with zooming out. Especially good if other birds and animal is coming into frame, sometimes quite suddenly and without zooming out you can miss a shot. But of course it's about preferences :) 😜

[@zacharymoran7596]

This is why likely my next lens will be the Sony 300mm f/2.8. My 70-200 f/2.8 has consistently gotten me some of my best photos- yes, some are missed, but the shooting experience is a lot more fun than using my 200-600. There are many situations I *need* that 200-600 (especially when filming wildlife where I can’t just zoom as much in post), but a smaller, lighter, wider and brighter lens might honestly be more useful much of the time. Plus, I think my most used lens for this application has been my 70-350 lens for APS-C. And it’s a rare day that isn’t enough for me.

[@ErrantHippo]

You could even use a 24 mm lens and just walk right up to the tiger. You don't need a 600 mm lens ever if you can just stand among the tigers that you're taking photos of

[@nightdonutstudio]

Not on this topic. But that is why I do not feel the need or the excitement to buy a7rV😂 I feel 33mp from a7IV is enough and can be upscaled.

[@26BloodKiller]

if you only have an entry level camera like I do (D5300) I've shot some of my best images on my sigma 150-600mm.

[@David_Quinn_Photography]

A few of the guys at the local eagle spot and I were just talking about that this morning, one has the R5 a 45mp camera and he uses a 100-400 while I need a 600mm and can get at most at 60% crop with my 18mp camera.

[@tmjcbs]

Perhaps some bird photography can indeed be done with 300 or less mm, but mostly you can use all the reach you can afford, especially with small and shy birds (or other smaller animals for that matter). The improvements possible with Topaz and similar software can also be applied with (cropped) photos from a 600mm lens. The example with a large and close dog is far from convincing, a small and faraway little songbird just as easily demonstrates the opposite. And: missed shots? Apart from prime lenses with most telezooms one can easily zoom out to 200 or so mm. If I would go out and shoot wildlife with a 70-300mm I'm pretty sure I would miss much more photo opportunities than with a 200-600mm lens.

[@nams19873]

Interesting take. I guess the amount of crop will depend on the resolution of the camera. I have been considering a 70-200 F2.8 lens with a 2x TC rather than a 200-600. It would give me 140-400 at F5.6. It is lighter than 600 lens, comparable in price and will require less cropping

[@Vantrakter]

The thought has crossed my mind too : ) Easier to carry with, a bit less of a project than the 200-600. Between 4-5 times more expensive though (70-200 GMii + SEL2tc)

[@nams19873]

@@Vantrakter gm i is 2000, gm ii is 2600. 2x TC is 550. 200-600 sony lens is 2000. So with gm i, you are spending 550 extra and with gm ii, 1150 extra. The weight difference is quite large though

[@Vantrakter]

@@nams19873 Here the 200-600 is 17 500 SEK currently, where the 70-200 GM II is 33 000 SEK and the SEL20TC 6 300 SEK. So 17 500 SEK vs 39 300 SEK. It's not 4-5 times by a long stretch (I was exaggerating) but it is a wider gulf than in the U.S for certain.

[@nams19873]

@@Vantrakter yeah that's a larger difference than US. Sigma has similar lens for half the price in US but no TC allowed. So that limits the focal length

[@stretch90]

@@Vantrakter The image quality would be better with the 70-200 as well. The Sony 200-600 isn't a GM and the contrast/colours aren't great imo.

[@joshuabachman3010]

This is why I carry a 70-200 on an old camera along side my 200-600. I practice switching them like tacticool guys do with guns lol

[@timleberman4758]

Wyocowboy I use a SonyRX10III with 24 - 600 lens. Nice pics easy to carry and focuses quickly. Good video.

[@lawrence-k7v]

I have heard this theory before from someone else, so I might try it, because I simply can't afford a big lens like a 100 to 600. Thanks for the video. Much appreciated.

[@therandomdrawer]

I was really invested to try out the Topaz Labs untill i saw the price!

[@fy7589]

There are a lot of right points in your argument however there are a lot of other factors you did not mention, what about the background blur? The more you're zoomed in, the background will be a lot more compressed. For smaller birds like sparrows, you'll likely need a long 600mm or even more reach. There are gonna be times you'd wish you had that big lens. These days canon has a lot of good and fairly cheap lenses on their RF system, I'd probably get a 100-400 and a 800 F/11 prime as both of these lenses are relatively lightweight and compact and even a 1.4 extender to get that crazy reach to capture tiny birds like sparrows etc. Yeah for instagram posting even a 135mm kit lens + cropping will work just fine but you're never gonna capture what you could get with a 600 F/4 prime even with the 800 F/11. Nothing's gonna beat the background blur and the sharpness of the infamous F/4 600mm primes.

[@davidforshaw6447]

New sub here. Great to see a Canadian photographer doing so good.

[@StefanMalloch]

Appreciate that my friend 👊

[@heartyfisher]

I don't have a million bucks .. but I do have a 180-600 and an 80-400 LOL !! yeah that topaz ai is nice. I love it ! Recovered some nice old images that i have from decades ago. Thanks for your video.

[@hiyouseemcool]

how do you clean the 100-400 after years of it sucking in dust?

[@brradv3552]

I currently own a Canon rp with the 200-800mm and I can get very nice images from close to mid range but I'm still struggling at long range... for example, there's a somewhat small lake near me (lake Clare, huntington IN) that eagles like to hang out at. I have yet to be able to get a good shot because they are almost always on the opposite side of the lake... I can zoom all the way to 800mm but all the shots are extremely blurry. Idk if it's the rp holding back the lense or if I'm simply out of range...? I'll be heading to San Diego soon and I'll be renting a much more powerful setup, the r3 with the 200-500mm L and the 24-105 f/2.8L. 👌

[@eerofi]

Nothing beats getting physically close to your subject. At 800mm there is always a lot of air in between you and the subject, heat haze, dust, and whatnot. And cropping in doesn't make it any better. The best way to get sharp photos is to get close. And then choose the lens accordingly, based on your subject and what kind of photos you want to achieve.

[@brradv3552]

@eerofi yep I shouldn't have any issues getting close when I'm at the San Diego zoo or the animal park. Unfortunately I wasn't able to rent the R3 because the people renting the camera wanted me to have $6k on hold in my bank in order to cover potential damage..... 😕 ❓️ if I had that kind of money, I'd be buying the camera.

[@chikstarws]

The 5s summary translation of : zoom out and get closer is GOLD! Thanks

[@tmjcbs]

Animals mostly don't like it if you get close...

[@robertgiguere875]

Great video! Of course the lense manufacturers aren’t going to be happy with you. the first 8” behind the viewfinder are most important

[@stevenwaldstein2249]

Thank you for the video. While I don’t have the big 600mm prime I do use a 200-600mm zoom at home but more likely to use my 100-400mm in the field and take a 1.4x TC with me. Like the travel flexibility at my age. Appreciate you sharing your results.

[@manaphyex]

You can fix the lack of resolution, but what about bokeh? Longer focal lengths always produce more bokeh.

[@shang-hsienyang1284]

That is even easier with recent versions of Photoshop

[@frankfeng2701]

@@shang-hsienyang1284 Not applicable to video or quick turnaround work.

[@StefanMalloch]

Compression will vary but easy to add blur in post.

[@eerofi]

@@StefanMalloch yep, for hobbyist quality.

[@Narsuitus]

I do not need a 600mm lens for bird and/or wildlife photography. I use the following: 80-200mm f/2.8 500mm f/4 1000mm f/11 mirror

[@ritammelgunov]

100% agree with you. I always try to explain the same thing to people. When you have the most lightweight setup, you are most versatile, fastest to react and therefore most effective in your photography. I came to use the most lightweight setup possible Canon R7 plus Canon RF 100-400. The camera with the length weights just 1 kg! And it's extremely versatile setup and very effective. Each time when I photograph together with people who carry big telephoto lenses, I manage to take incomparably more very interesting and diverse photos than them, because they just cannot react so quickly as I do because their setup is too heavy and makes them too slow to react.

[@dominicwroblewski5832]

Why didn't you tell me this before I bought a 200-500mm lens ?

[@StefanMalloch]

#alllensesmatter

[@bamsemh1]

You don't need any tele! Do reverse macro on the 50mm and enjoy disturbing everything 💪😉

[@mohankp6317]

Brother, with your expertise, pls suggest me a camera between a6700 vs A7M-4, assume that both are getting me for same pricing.. purpose is to wildlife safari photos & videos.. Birding.. Tq

[@StefanMalloch]

Both are great. Depends on your shooting style. Safari you want reach so crop is nice but the IQ of FF is better. Lenses for FF are more expensive but more to choose from. Hard to go wrong.

[@golden4523]

I agree with this so much. My go to is my 135mm f2.8 and maybe the 1.7 teleconverter for my x2D. With 102mp I can crop for dayssss

[@fdemarqui]

which camera did you use?

[@StefanMalloch]

For the most part I shoot with the A74 (33MP)

[@charlesandaloro7709]

Stefan totally agree. I use the same Tamron lens and Topaz software and get satisfactory results. I do want to upgrade to a higher megapixel sensor for those longer range shots. I tried carrying the 200 to 600 and found it not much fun.

[@Vantrakter]

I find the only reasonable way to carry the 200-600 is in a black rapid strap, where it hangs at the side of my hip at an angle, easy to pick up and shoot. (This is if I'm not shooting from a hide with a tripod, which I rarely do). It isn't much fun holding it up for longer periods though. I might lookup if there are any upscalers for Linux. As it is, I tend to crop quite a lot from 600mm shots and if you want a photo at least 4k in size (because I like to look at photos like that, on a larger 4k display) you can't crop a whole lot if you're starting at 33MP.

[@vntrgirl]

Oh, good! I don't have the money for big glass anyway, so it works out 😂

[@svaphrodite]

If you can closer….

[@davidf6326]

00:56 Was the lady second in from the right photoshopped into that picture? It certainly looks like it 😁

[@StefanMalloch]

Definitely not lol.. that's Cassandra Jones.

[@jmvldz]

I love my Tamron 50-400 and it made me happy to hear you use it so often! It’s my go to lens these days. I have been wondering how well the upscaling worked with Topaz. I’ll be giving it a try on some of my images.

[@eerofi]

Zoom out if the subject doesn't stay in the frame. This is basic knowledge for anyone with a few months of experience in the field, I am surprised that this came as a game-changer to a professional photographer. Anyway, it really depends on what you are shooting and what kind of images you want to create. In many cases, especially in bird photography, nothing beats long primes. Sidenote... "not in any way sponsored by Topaz Labs", buuuut getting affiliate commissions. Not a big difference. But it is great software, so nothing wrong with that.

[@jamesnelson1443]

Yes you do need a 600mm!!! Others are way too short!!!

[@nicknico4121]

the cropped 200mm actually looks sharper than the 600mm.

[@catherinegrimes2308]

I thought that it looked sharper as well, the 200mm should have a greater depth of field.

[@greyishdun]

But topaz is very expensive.

[@StefanMalloch]

Under $100 for photo AI on sale..

[@greyishdun]

@@StefanMalloch which is expensive.

[@aliavdic5940]

bro you are sitting in park, ofc you dont need 600mm, 600mm is for somone who loves shooting in a wild, and even then sometimes we wish to have more reach

[@ashgiles4401]

Or get a p1000 And zoom in like there is no tomorrow!

[@billbraski]

Carrying a lens is hard on the body is a ridiculous statement 🤣🤣🤣. Keep good posture and be in shape.

[@StefanMalloch]

My neck and back are toast from a few bad accidents.. A huge telephoto hurts the next day.

[@simmo303]

Strap over left shoulder and under right keeps weight off you neck and stops the camera from swinging out if yo bend. Broad neoprene, not the makers strap. Kood Quick Release is one.

[@simonpayne7994]

The simple truth is that Topaz makes extremely heavy and expensive telephoto lenses almost obsolete. At the same time it deals with noise. At the end of the day nobody can tell the difference. You can even ditch FF and go right down to 1 inch. The only difference actually discernible in the final image is the increased DOF - i.e. 2.7 times less background bokeh - for a specific FF equivalent focal length. In most cases this is actually an asset for wildlife photography.

[@pakun9527]

This video is not worth the time

[@StefanMalloch]

Thanks dude appreciate that!