New camera who dis?

The new Reconyx Hyperfire 4K has been going through its trials at the bird box the past few days. I saw a bluebird fly by for the first time this year so I figured it was time to check it. There was a bluebird on Saturday, and plenty of magpies and crows to give the camera a workout.

First of all, the 8mp resolution is the best I've had in a trail camera. As everyone knows, all the companies except Reconyx LIE about their resolution. A 5mb image upsized to 32mb is not a 32mb image. Someone should sue Browning and the others for misleading advertising. The resolution of the Reconyx is better than my two newer Browning cameras, which I believe are 5mp sensors.

These images were taken in full sunlight, into the sun. The camera reports shutter speeds between 1/5000 and 1/800 at ISO 100. The detail in the shadowed areas is noisy (bluebird) or completely blown out (crow). The harsh light isn't the usual condition where I'm going to put this camera, so we'll see how it does there. There were no nighttime images so I don't know how the flash performs.

The second image of the bluebird is too close and probably slightly out of focus but the others are OK. The magpie in flight may be the sharpest trailcam image I've ever gotten. The focus on this Reconyx camera can be changed if its intended use is closeup, but that is a factory modification, not a menu selection.

So there are some things I am happy about (resolution, sharpness at medium distance) and some things I'm not (noise or loss of detail in shadows). Unless we have a blizzard in the next few days (which is not predicted), I will try to get this camera out in the woods sometime next week.

I also checked Browning #11, which has been on shed duty. The snowdrifts are still deep enough that we are not getting deer in the yard. I got 2,000 images of me going in and out of the shed and not much else. But I'm generally satisfied with that camera also. It is reasonably sharp. What I really want to see is the newer but similar Browning #15, which has been out in the woods for quite a while now and I still haven't posted any images from it.

I don't know if I want to use the new R5 on motion sensor very much, but I do want to try it with the 100mm macro lens I got for it. I wonder if some of the automatic focusing modes that detect an animal's eye will work. That would be fantastic. Even if I have to use preset focus, R5 images should be 100 times better than those from the new Reconyx.

Going Yard

Not only have I been unable to get to my cameras in the national forest because of the snow, I have been unable to get to my back fence to see what has hopped through the yard. I think my last check of Melted Browning #6 was in late December. Yesterday I swapped out #6 for Browning #11, which I rescued from a snowdrift a few weeks ago.

The story of January is the ancient tale of the fox and the hare. Actually these images are six days apart, but I'm not letting it interfere with the storyline.

Earlier in the month when the show was quite a bit lower, this snow-capped deer wandered into frame. After the snow got about three feet high where the deer is standing, they weren't around any more. They seem to prefer town where the streets are plowed and it is easier to get around.

At last count, I have had 10 trail cameras and still have eight of them. Today I received another one, which will be designated as Reconyx #19, my third Reconyx. (I also have assigned numbers to other devices besides trail cameras; that's why the numbering doesn't line up.) This camera brand is more expensive than others, but there are several things to like about them. First, they are based in Wisconsin just north of the city where I was born, and they actually service their products. When Reconyx #2 was damaged in the 2017 fire that also damaged Melted Browning #6 and destroyed Moultrie #3, I was able to get it serviced by the factory. I didn't bother to try to find service for the Browning. Second, Reconyx does not lie about their camera resolution as EVERY OTHER manufacturer does. My first two Reconyx were 3Mp. This one, named the Hyperfire 4K Professional, uses an 8Mp Sony chip. Good luck trying to find out what the other manufacturers use for chips.

I am hoping that the latest generation of Reconyx cameras is the Great Leap Forward. If you compare the specs for my first Reconyx bought in 2011, my second one bought in 2018, and cameras available just last year, there wasn't that much difference. This new one appears to have some other interesting features besides higher resolution, including customizable maximum night ISO (400-6400) and minimum shutter speed (1/30-1/960). I set ISO 1600 and shutter speed 1/60.

Since I still may not be able to get to my cameras in the woods for a couple more weeks, my plan is to deploy the new camera at the bluebird box. We have seen bluebirds here at the end of March before, so they might be around. After that, it will go out in the woods with the other two Reconyx and my newest Browning, #15. Browning #11 probably will remain on shed duty, and the close focus Gardepro T5CF #14 will come out of winter hibernation and get the bluebird box or the birdbath. Then I can finally retire Brownings #5 and #6, and the generally awful Primos #4. I want to do some remote or motion triggering with my new Canon R5, but that's a whole nother topic.

Moose

We are getting a lot more snow than last year and I have not visited my trail cameras in the national forest since October. I can't even get to the camera on the back fence in my yard. I'm hoping to get out in the woods sometime in the next month to see what I have and to replace the inevitable dead batteries. For now, all I can do is look at old pictures.

Even before we moved to Montana, I had trail cameras in this area. At the time, my brother had a cabin on a mountain near Luther and I stashed my original Browning up there the winter of 2017-18. I eventually collected this image.

The Browning has always had a weird vignetting, not just of exposure but of color. I corrected for it somewhat here, but what is an accurate color representation of a moose in a raging snowstorm? I've had three images from this sequence on the web site since 2018, and today added three more of the moose moving off to the left but still in frame.

Click on the image to see the other images in this sequence on my site.

First real test

I've been roaming around town with my new Canon R5 Mark II to get some turkey and deer shots, but the first real test was Sunday with the Ski Jorning National Finals at the nearby fairgrounds. Simply put, ski joring is crazy people on skis getting pulled by horses. The most difficult thing to do was figure out which autofocus settings to use, particularly with skiiers going over the last jump. I wasn't able to see them until they got near the jump so couldn't just follow them with Servo. I eventually turned off eye recognition and just went with a simple center focus point.

When the R5 snaps into focus, which it does a high percentage of time, the detail in the images is incredible. The fairgrounds is right next to the airport, and I snapped this image of one of the local planes taking off. The tight crop is unresized 1800x1200 pixels, which is less than 5% of the 45Mp image. Very sharp. The image of the skiier is full frame, resized. Also very sharp. At this point I'm very happy with the R5. My only worries are disk space and battery power. The sequence of the skier coming over the jump and wiping out was more than 60 images, each taking up more than 50Mb. No buffering. I cannibalized the 6D for its battery and didn't have to use it, but it was close. With great power comes great responsibility.

This final image is one of the drones that was used to chase the competitors as they raced around the track. Very nimble. I'm not sure which model this is but it bears a family resemblance to our DJI Mavic 3 Pro. I have never tried the follow function, but on this drone it had no trouble keeping up with the racers.

We have a problem

As mentioned in the previous post, the power converter that works with the 6D does not work with the R5, despite the same form factor. The aurora was forecast last night, so I put out the R5 with its battery to see how long it might last. The answer was two hours and 20 minutes, 272 thirty-second exposures with one second in between. The last image was taken at 11:17. I went out at midnight to reset the intervalometer and the camera had a light on it, so I thought it was still working. I even re-aimed the camera further west at what looked like a streak of light in the sky. But I got no images of that. In retrospect, I think it was a red light indicating the battery was depleted. Also in retrospect, I should have swapped in the 6D battery at midnight. I know it isn't powerful enough to shoot video in the R5, but it can take stills.

The forecast for tonight isn't as good for the aurora, so I may not bother, but my only choice in the short run is to use the 6D and the manual-focus 14mm rather than my sparkly new R5 and 14-35mm. And, as mentioned yesterday, the only long-range solution seems to be the $150 device from Canon. Since I didn't get the aurora, here are 2 hours and 20 minutes of star trails. This is just a quick processing with StarStaX. I could probably do better if I spent a couple hours fiddling with the images in Lightroom and Photoshop, but I've got longer, better star trail efforts so why bother? I also think the images are underexposed. I forgot to take into account that the new lens, as fabulous as it is, is only f/4, a fuill stop slower than the more primitive f/2.8 lens. Below the star trails is a single Photoshop-processed image from 10:30. Meh.

Now I've got to hit the streets to find one more turkey or deer to pose for Photo of the Day. Today is the last hole in my calendar.

A few hours later: The DJI Mavic 3 Pro drone comes with a fast USB-C charger rated at 65 watts. From what I can tell (it is not easy to find), the $150 Canon device is rated at 65 watts through a USB-C plug. I plugged the camera into the DJI charger and it shows a "charging" icon, which it doesn't do with your normal USB chargers. I did an Amazon search and found several 65W chargers with USB-C plugs described as laptop replacement power sources, prices as low as $9.99, although if I went that route I would probably get the $16.99 one that has better reviews. We may have a workaround, and/or I may have voided the warranty. (Later on, I also noticed that the "charging" icon shows up when plugged by USB-C into my computer.)

And I got a deer to complete my POD calendar.

Final word: A month later and I have an Anker wall plug that will power the camera, about $30. I tried an off-brand plug for a few dollars less, but it seemed quirky.

Obsolescence

Canon is moving on from the EF-mount lenses and SLR cameras which (including film) I have been using since 1999. All the new stuff is RF mount for their mirrorless cameras. I took the plunge recently with the R5 Mark II camera and two RF lenses, the 100mm macro zoom and 14-35mm wide angle zoom. Since I still have the EF-mount 6D Mark II as a backup, the plan is to keep the four EF lenses I still have (24-105, 70-200, 100-400, 500) and use the EF-RF adapter when necessary.

The R5 and 6D take the same battery.* That is a big asterisk. The batteries have the same form factor and use the same charger, but are NOT the same. The battery from the 6D will power the R5 to take still images, but the faster burst speeds and higher video resolutions are not available. Oh well, I don't shoot much video anyway. But there is a possibility of Aurora Borealis tonight, so I plugged in the AC adapter that I was using with the 6D and the dearly departed 5D Mark III. It doesn't work with the R5.

Canon's official solution is an adapter that plugs into the camera's USB-C port. The Canon USA site does not say whether the device will power the camera, or just charge the battery. I don't need a $150 battery charger, I need a power adapter. I tried watching a You-Tube video that supposedly demonstrated the device, but the guy was so disorganized that I gave up on it. Just a suggestion for You-Tubers, minimize your fumbling around by taking a minute to jot down a script outline, and learn how to use the basic functions of DaVinci Resolve to do some simple edits of your video before you waste everyone's time with a disorganized mess. Additional searching found the Q&A on the B&H site, which is probably as authoritative as I will find given Canon's negligence, and it seems the device will power the camera.

On a more positive note, R5 has the same remote trigger plug as the 6D (and 5D). So, if I wanted to, I could use either the motion trigger or the remote trigger. The upside of using the R5 instead of the 6D is I might be able to get away without prefocusing, and instead let the new camera's eye recognition set the focus. It supposedly works with animals. I tried a few autofocus sessions at the birdbath last summer, and the success rate was very low.

Anyway, one of my new lenses is a 14-35mm wide angle zoom, and I want to use it tonight in case the predicted Aurora is visible. I will use the built-in intervalometer set on unlimited, start it at about 9:00, and see how long it lasts before the battery dies. Here's a stitched panaroma of Red Lodge, MT that I shot just after I took delivery today. Below that is a followup to the previous post, another shot of a turkey with the 100-400mm zoom with the RF-EF adapter on the R5.

Snow

I haven't posted images from my trailcams because they are snowed in. I won't be able to get to the National Forest trailcams for a few weeks at the soonest, and even the two in my back yard and hard to get to. I dug a trench to reach the one in the middle of the yard, and found that the batteries were still good even though it was totally buried for a few weeks. It got a few images of a jackrabbit and a fox. I also got an image of two shiny eyeballs peering through the fence, which I'm guessing wais the fox. To reach my other camera, which is the on the back fence pointed toward the shed, I have to dig another trench.

Bunny rabbit

Fox

Mystery Guest

The astounding new R5

I went for a drive today just to get a few initial images with the Canon R5 Mark II. My initial impression is it seems like a quantum leap from the 6D II and 5D III. (Good thing, because I shipped the 5D off to an eBay buyer today.) Since the viewfinder view is electronic, there is so much more they can do to show focusing points.

But is the 45mp resolution so much better than the 6D's 26.2? I can't say yet. Here are two crops of a turkey image I took today. The tight crop is the actual pixels, 1800x1200. The other one obviously is not as tight. Good, yes. Does it blow me away? Not yet. Stand by.

And I always come back to this. My most commercially-successful image was shot with a 4mp sensor in 2004. What I'm hoping for from the R5 is not millions of pixels to put on a billboard, but world-class autofocus to get more keeper images for my web site.

Little Brothers, 2004

Coons

With the astounding new Canon R5 Mark II sitting on my desk and not much opportunity to use it yet, I'm finally getting around to taking the final step in archiving old images, burning them to 22Gb BD-R discs. These are supposedly the longest-lasting medium, outlasting hard drives, solid states and USB devices by decades. Supposedly. Anyway, I am backing up originals of everything on my web site, and relegating unpublished images to less secure storage. I ran across this one from 2005, a family of raccoons that had just crossed the road in Squaw Creek National Wildlife Refuge, which now goes by the more politically-correct name of Loess Bluffs.

I usually shoot RAW, and the Canon G6 I used for this image is capable of that. But I remember on this extended trip I was often short of space on my memory cards, so this original is JPG. It's also cropped as much as I dared. I don't have other images like this, so it gets upgraded from the "unused" folder. I was on a multi-week work assignment in Kansas City and did not have my big camera (1D II a the time), so all I had was the G6 on side trips to the KC Zoo, Squaw Creek, the Kansas Cosmosphere, Milwaukee, St. Louis and Colorado. I had just gotten the G6 the month before, and it got quite a workout that summer. For the time, it was an impressive camera with 7Mp sensor and 35-140mm zoom (equivalent), but it didn't have quite the reach I would want for these raccoons. As with the 1D II, I still have the G6 and I know it works, but unlike the DSLR I have no reason to use it.

I've mentioned this before, but it is astounding that you can now buy a 256Gb card for less than $20, and back in 2005 when I needed more space it was $70 for a card with 1/250th the capacity. That is enough to hold about 150 RAW G6 images, so when I ran short I switched to JPG which takes up one-third the space. And, at the time I'm sure I thought that was a great price compared to a few years before. Eggs are now unaffordable, but memory is cheap.

The second image here also has been promoted from the 2005 "unused" folder. On my side trip to Colorado, I snapped these geese at dusk using the G6 flash, and got reflections from all of their eyes.

Finally, one of my favorites that did not need to be promoted is this bee that I snapped in Kansas City. Once again, the original is JPG. With good lighting and color balance, RAW isn't as important, but now that I always have enough storage I never shoot JPG if I have a choice.

Bringing it back to the theme of this site, remote cameras, why is it that the G6 introduced in August 2004 has better specs than any current trailcam of which I am aware? If I could slap a motion sensor on the G6 and leave it outside for three months, I would do it. 7Mp and a good lens, sign me up.

First Light

When I got the 6D Mark II a couple years ago, it was an improvement over the 5D Mark III I got back in 2012. But only an incremental improvement. The rotating display is probably the most significant difference. There is a slight increase in resolution, built-in GPS, and ... that's about all I can think of. I don't think the focusing is any better.

However, the R5 Mark II mirrorless camera is not incremental. It's a vast increase in resolution, and a supposed vast improvement in focusing speed and accuracy. I don't know, I haven't had a chance to mess with it yet. We were hit with a lot of snow the past few days, and there are no animals running around for me to chase. After a few days of thinking about it, I pulled the trigger on the R5 yesterday, and B&H rushed it through the snowstorm for me to get it today. The only RF-mount lens I decided to get at this time is the 100mm macro, replacing the EF version I've had forever. I've had the EF-RF converter for a while to use on my spouse's R10, a consumer-grade camera. Besides the solar eclipse last year, I haven't used it much. Supposedly there is no problem with using EF lenses except for a possible loss of burst speed. Supposedly, focusing speed and accuracy is better for an EF lens on an RF body versus an EF lens on an EF body, but not as good as an RF lens on an RF body. Confusing, not at all. Oh well, as long as I'm keeping the 6D as my backup, I'll be keeping mostly EF lenses.

I wanted to do something other than just shooting my bookshelf for first light, so I snapped a rose that was given to my spouse at the dinner we went to last Thursday. However, the camera was set to large JPG rather than RAW, so that took a wrong turn right away. Anyway. I use the Adobe RAW filter on JPG images all the time, and I did it on this one. What impressed me first was the red was not blown out. When I was processing the last batch of butterfly images from the 6D, there were some blown out reds.

So the 5D is headed to eBay, along with the 100mm macro lens and three other lenses. Most significant is my first "L" lens, the 300mm f/4. When I got my first 100-400 a few years later, the 300 fell out of favor. Also going on the block is the 50mm f/1.4 and the Tamron 28-300 zoom. All four lenses being auctioned are 20-25 years old. The focus on the 50mm broke when I was in Antarctica in 2003. I sent it to Canon to get fixed, and it broke again a few years later. At that point I decided not to bother with it any more. The Tamron was probably a pretty good consumer zoom lens at the time, but I just didn't use it much after I got the 300 and some other good Canon lenses. We'll see if anyone bites.

The R5 felt light, so I decided to weigh all the cameras. The R5 is lighter than the 5D by seven ounces, but only a fraction of an ounce lighter than the 6D. Here are the numbers:

R10	- 1 lb, 0.2 ounces
R5	- 1 lb, 11 ounces
6D	- 1 lb, 11.9 ounces
5D	- 2 lbs, 2.3 ounced
1D	- 3 lbs, 0.7 ounces

It should be noted that I weighed the 1D without its real battery, just the AC adapter which is much lighter. It is one heavy chunk of metal. I used to wave that thing around with the 300mm lens attached. That's why I had Popeye arms in the 2000s.

What's the point and how does this relate to this remote shooting blog? This acquisition also had me reflecting on the state of DSLRs in 2025 versus 2002 when I got my first one, the flawed 1D Mark I. Horrible banding in underexposed areas, only 4Mp, but still capable of fine images if the lighting was good and if you got close enough. The R5 has ten times the resolution and 20+ years of technological advancement built into it. And now to bring it back to remote shooting, why in the hell have trailcam manufacturers decided to lie about increased resolution rather than actually doing something about it? I wish trailcams had advanced as much since (just picking a date) 2017 as Canon's high-end cameras have. There has been a revolution in the transition from DSLR to mirrorless, and there has been no real innovation in the trailcam world during that time.

Droner

I took a couple of droning jobs this week even though the distance I had to drive probably didn't make sense. But I haven't flown the drones lately and it gave me a chance to get some practice in. First was a photo-only shoot in Riverton, Wyoming. It was a relatively easy job, although maximum altitude was only 200 feet due to a nearby airport. (The client wanted 350 feet.) The next job, photos and video, was more challenging for a couple reasons. First, it was extremely cold in central Montana near Great Falls, 0 degrees, and my fingers started freezing up. Besides frostbite, I also was concerned that I would have shortened battery life due to the temperature, which was below the rated operating parameters for the drone. As it turned out, the batteries were fine.

My second concern was the property was bare land covered with snow. The images were for a real estate deal and didn't need to be artistic, but how do you take an interesting picture of a white field? Fortunately there were enough surrounding mountains to give the image shown below some interest. Third, the lot was large (40 acres), and it was impossible to maintain visual contact with the drone as required by the FAA when it was 2,000 feet away and at an altitude of 400 feet. But it always was in contact with the controller. Supposedly the controller can maintain contact with the drone up to 9.3 miles away, which if you think about it is rather impressive, but in my opinion is inconsistent with what the FAA says you should be doing.

This blog started out as a trailcam site, and it has evolved into one that covers all sorts of remote-controlled cameras, including drones. I would like to use the drones for more than shooting real estate. As I was driving back from the Wyoming job, I saw a herd of pronghorn in a field. I got a few shots with my DSLR and 400mm zoom, but they were not close. I was tempted to get out my mini drone and send it into the field, but did not. I didn't think it would spook the herd, but it did concern me. But my primary concern was having to climb over a barbed wire fence to retrieve the drone if it went down. It was a bit windy, probably well within even the mini drone's limits, but still a concern. The big drone is more robust and I did have one fully-charged battery remaining after the shoot, but I still lacked the courage to attempt it. I'm including the DSLR image, which shows only about a third of the herd.

Wyoming, limited to 200-foot altitude.

Montana, 400 feet above the center of the property looking at mountains to the East.

Pronghorn herd, DSLR.

Enhanced Photoshop

I haven't taken any remote shots lately, just improving old images with full Photoshop. I still say "full Photoshop" because I spent so many years using Photoshop Elements. Elements is a fine program but I don't think I can ever go back. Anyway, there are two "enhanced" modes in (full) Photoshop Camera Raw, DeNoise and Super Resolution. What happens if you take an 8 Mp image from the 1D Mark II and apply Super Resolution? You get an image with four times as many pixels. I tried it on this 2012 image of an eagle in flight, Mississippi River Lock and Dam 18, Illinois.

I cropped this without resizing, so these are the pixels that Photoshop gives you. There is a little bit of noise in the darker parts of the original, which is only more obvious when the image is upsized, but the well-lit eye and beak are sharp as can be. I also include the version of the image I posted on my site. This just reinforces what I have said before. The 8 Mp second generation 1D (vintage 2004) can produce good images under proper conditions. The difference between it and more modern cameras, such as the 5D Mark III I got later in 2012, is the ability to get a good image under less than optimal conditions. The older camera is more prone to noise in areas that are underexposed. But going back and processing 1D Mark II images from more than 10 years ago is a breeze with (full) Photoshop. What wondrous times in which we live.

Below that is an image taken at the Butterfly Conservatory in the American Museum of Natural History, New York, also back in 2012. As I was in work travel status, I did not have my big camera with me and this was taken with the 10 Mb Canon S95 Powershot. I still have it in my arsenal, although I use the 24 Mp Canon M100 as my small camera now unless space is at an absolute premium. Once again, after applying the Super Resolution, I cropped without resizing. The normally-processed image is included for comparison. Super Resolution applied to a 10 Mp image from an old point-and-shoot can't replace what you get with a real macro lens on a modern camera, but it is pretty good.

New Year

There were prediction of Northern Lights last night, so I set out the 6D with the 14mm lens. I got 710 images, 29 seconds each, ISO 400 between 7 PM and 1 AM. The AC adapter replacing the battery works great. I brought the camera in at 1:00 because it looked cloudy, but when I looked at the images later there were some hints of activity at the end. These single images were from about 10 PM. The images were not as spectacular as the ones in October, so I wasn't shy here about pumping up the color. The first composite covers the entire time and includes car headlights lighting up the landscape. The second composite is fewer images from the latter part of the shoot, so the trails are shorter. I did the composites with StarStaX because it is so much faster than doing it in Photoshop.