Bird shots with my new 300 f/4: Take 2, please critique!!!

[Brendan7]

Hi all, last week I posted a few of my bird shots with my new 300 f/4 and received some extremely valuable feedback (especially from wickerprints and nate, thanks!). I went out again today (Sat) for an hour or two and shot some more. I learned some lessons last week on white balance, appropriate exposure, and framing.I tried to apply some of this todayAs my birdfeeder was often a huge distraction from the shots, I made some sort of "setup" using dead, small tree branches so I could shoot birds in a natural-looking setting. Well, without further ado, here are a couple from today:


C&C needed!


brendan


All 3 photos taken with Canon 7D, Ef 300mm f/4L IS USM


All 3 at f/5.6, 1/200, ISO 320. Manual Exposure, Handheld.


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.36.40/IMG_5F00_1664.jpg/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.36.40/IMG_5F00_1726.jpg


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.36.40/IMG_5F00_1575.jpg

[Jordan]

They're all nice, but I LOVE the middle one. They seem to be quite sharp with nice bokeh.... I'd keep going and see what you think. How many did you take total today?








- Jordan Murphy


www.freshphotohawaii.com ("http://www.freshphotohawaii.com/)


Equipment: Canon 7D, 50D, EF 24-105 f/4 L IS USM, EF 100-400 L IS USM, Tokina 10-17mm fisheye, EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro, Kenko extension tube 3pc set, 2 430EXII Speedlites, Manfrotto monopod and tripod with video pan head.

[Brendan7]

thanks for the compliment!



How many did you take total today?[:D]


I took a total of 218 photos so far today... finches, chickadees, mourning doves, titmice, and nuthatches. I use continuous shooting (8fps) on 7D all the time and so end up taking anywhere from 10-50 photos per bird.





brendan

[HiFiGuy1]

Brendan,


At least for me, it would be useful have shot parameters. That way, people can see how you shot it, and then offer suggestions for changes that might help. If you post-processed, an idea of what you did would even be good.


In the first one, the branch seems in focus, but the bird doesn't look as sharp as the second two for some reason. It could be an aperture + focus point issue. I would have to assume the Tv is adequate or the branch would also be blurry.


Saturation looks good, and I like how the branch angles across the frame. The background is nicely blurred, making the birds really pop.


I think you could experiment with cropping the third shot a little tighter. The second is also my overall favorite of these three.

[Jordan]

I don't want to sound like a mean-old professor or something here, but a very good and successful photographer I once apprenticed with told me this: He said something like "Don't look at your best shots. You learn more from looking at your worst." This is, in a sense, meaning that 8fps on a 7D (I have one too, they're great!) and blasting off shutter-clicks might not be the way to go. I know birds are finicky quick little creatures, but maybe if you keep it in HS Continuous but only take a few shots of each bird, you could focus more on composition and background. Not that either lacks in your photos (though the weird blur of some diagonal line in the middle photo is a little odd). I was thinking you might have taken 50 photos and picked 3 to share with us. At 218 photos, you should share some more (I'm sure you have a lot more than are just as good... can you post some more?) Also, do you have a 1.4x extender? 420mm f/5.6 would also do nicely! :)





- Jordan Murphy


www.freshphotohawaii.com ("http://www.freshphotohawaii.com/)


Equipment: Canon 7D, 50D, EF 24-105 f/4 L IS USM, EF 100-400 L IS USM, Tokina 10-17mm fisheye, EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro, Kenko extension tube 3pc set, 2 430EXII Speedlites, Manfrotto monopod and tripod with video pan head.

[Brendan7]

thanks for that quote, very interesting perspective [:)]



Also, do you have a 1.4x extender? 420mm f/5.6 would also do nicely! :)


Unfortunately, I do not. It's on my wishlist, though. I am not flush with $$$ and one other item is higher on the wishlist (tripod + head). But don't worry, a 1.4 extender is in the distant near future (hehe).



t 218 photos, you should share some more (I'm sure you have a lot more than are just as good... can you post some more?)


absolutely~here they are!


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.36.40/IMG_5F00_1480_5F00_2.jpg


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.36.40/IMG_5F00_1692.jpg

[Jordan]

Ohhh I like that second one a lot!

[George Spiridakis]

Nice photos, but i try to shoot with ISO 400 most of time, and reduce it if there is light enough to give me Tv 1/1000. I mean if i was you, i would shoot with ISO 400 and you would get a shutter speed of 1/250 or 1/320 for example. More speed, more focused subject i think (if you focus in the right point always). Otherwise, your shots seems to be quite good.


I use the 400 f/5,6 (i had the 300 f/4 before for a while but i sold it), but even with my 100-400 (which i use it only in cloudy days or places i need IS), i prefer to shoot birds at speeds 1/800 and higher. You can get nice shots even with speeds as the above, but i think faster speeds will give you slightly better results. If i am wrong, i will apreciate other opinions.


Also, as far as i know, ISO 320 has no difference in noise levels from ISO400 (not obvious at least).

[Brendan7]

Last week, I shot at 1/800, 1/640, and 1/1000, and ISO 400, 500, 640, and 800. All bird shots above were shot in dark, shady conditions. Honestly, IS solves a lot of problems for me and so fast shutters are not needed. And I like to shoot at f/5.0 or f/5.6 with my 300 f/4, and so if I used f/5.6 at 1/800, in the lighting conditions I encounter I would need ISO 1000+. (I think)



i think faster speeds will give you slightly better results.


I'll give that a shot! thanks! I'm still a newbie, so all advice is appreciated [:D]


brendan

[wickerprints]

Your previous photos were nice but these, these are leaps and bounds better! Here is what you did right:

Correct white balance.
I don't know exactly how you achieved it, but the lighting is freaking gorgeous. The position and softness are absolutely perfect.
You vastly improved the setup and composition.
The technical exposure is much better--I bet these images are sharper and less noisy.



My only critique, and it's a very, very small one, is that if it were possible to frame slightly tighter on a few of the pictures, that would be even better. The reason is because it is not really "typical" to see a single isolated branch with a bird sitting atop it, and the rest of the image is so strongly blurred. Usually, we see other branches, for example, even though they are not in sharp focus, they are still there. Now, bear in mind, this is something I had to really sit down and think about when looking at this series because I strongly preferred #2, but could not figure out why. At first I chalked it up to the fact that the bird is larger/more prominent, but that wasn't really the reason. Only after several minutes did I realize that it was the isolated branch. In #2, it's not an issue because your framing is just right, where you get a lovely background effect yet the bird and branch take up enough space so as not to make it look unnatural.


But really, I want to emphasize that ALL of these pictures are absolutely awesome, really very impressive especially considering they are shot @ 300mm. I think you must have taken Nate's tips to heart and dedicated yourself to these, you should be very proud of your work!


Oh and I do have a question: Typically, how large are these birds, and how much did you crop--if any--the originals? That is, did you find the focal length insufficient?

[Brendan7]

thanks so much, It's good to know I'm improving! [:)]



Oh and I do have a question: Typically, how large are these birds, and how much did you crop--if any--the originals? That is, did you find the focal length insufficient?


The focal length is fine. I bought the 300 f/4 because of its 5' MFD. I have a God-given talent of being able to get ridiculously close to birds. All my photos were taken at about 4-7' away. The first 2 were cropped only slightly to eliminate corner distractions (the birdfeeder). I think that the 300mm focal length is fine. I am never craving for the extra length. The birds themselves are anywhere from 4-8'' long. They are the size of my Rocket Air blower (~about).


thanks again.


brendan

[peety3]

I second the suggestion to not "spray and pray" - if anything, try it for a bit if you need some "data" to figure out what subject angles look best, etc. I think you'll end up with better shots if you apply more control to your shots. I'll admit that I did the high-speed drive thing for a while though. I feel as though the "winning" shot often comes between the first and second shot in a high-speed sequence, meaning that I should have waited a bit for the shot (and X fps wasn't enough, but let's not chase fps at the expense of good timing).


As another learning tool, you might want to read through various bulletins from Art Morris at http://www.birdsasart.com/bn.html. I think he's rather "proud of his work" and it shows in his writing, but he does have excellent results. Amongst other things, I do think he's quite good at interpreting the scene and knowing how much exposure compensation to dial in; I'd consider Av for your bird work instead of manual for the most part, perhaps with partial or spot metering.


Definitely good stuff already!

[HiFiGuy1]

Nice job on the second set. I really like the composition on both of them. The branch end being visible on the left is a great touch in the first photo. It seems on my monitor to be slightly OOF or soft for some reason, but I like how the bird is looking towards the other end of the branch. The overall shape and composition are excellent on the second, and there's even a soft catch light in the left eye. Well done overall.

[Sinh Nhut Nguyen]

Nice job in this set, I like the all the clean bg you have here. I find the images to be a little on the soft side, you need to apply some sharpening. Keep shooting.

[Brendan7]

good to know. I should be able to shoot some more tomorrow and possibly monday.

[Brendan7]

good to know. I should be able to shoot some more tomorrow and possibly monday.

[Brendan7]

Here's one more from this morning. I have no idea why, but my photos are a lot less sharp on TDP. anyways.


Canon 7D at f/5.0, 1/200, ISO 400. Manual Exposure, Handheld.


/resized-image.ashx/__size/800x600/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.36.40/IMG_5F00_1790.jpg

[Jordan]

Very nice!.... maybe run through a noise-reduction filter? There isn't much though so it's not a problem, just perhaps might make it look a little richer. You know... I'm bored off my a*s today - so I think when I return the 5D MK II and 14mm f/2.8 that I'm renting now, I'll pick up a 300 f/4 and a 1.4x converter and go to this little garden area nearby and shoot birds. I have the 7D (same as you right?) and I'll see how I like that lens. I own a 100-400 which I LOVE but..... it's not the sharpest tool in the shed. Very versatile though. I'll take some shots with no converter and with the 1.4x and see how it looks. I own a 2X converter... but I think that's too long and too slow for today. Maybe I'll bring it along just for the hell of it.... Oh yeah.. and I can take Macro shots with my EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro while I'm in the gardens.... yay!

[Brendan7]

have the 7D (same as you right?)


yep. awesome camera.



14mm f/2.8 that I'm renting now,


Based on your experience, do you like it? I've heard that it's extremely soft AND i've heard it's extremely sharp.


it's pouring rain today so the bird photography has come to a sudden halt [:(]


brendan

[Jordan]

I think the EF 14mm f/2.8 L USM is extremely sharp! As is the EF 24mm f/1.4 II L USM! The 14mm is EXTREMELY wide on a full-frame body (which I was renting today: the 5D Mark II) but even on my cropped body isn't quite wide!


I'm going to leave in a few minutes to go get that 300mm f/4 L IS ! I'll let you know what I think of it!


The included photo was taken about two hours ago. It's a bracketed exposure taken with the 5D Mark II and the 14mm f/2.8. It's quite sharp and anything that isn't perfectly sharp is actually coming from the editing process (Photomatix, Photoshop, Lightroom etc...). Thought you'd enjoy ;)

[Brendan7]

interesting... I am glad to hear that, for $2000 it better be!



I'm going to leave in a few minutes to go get that 300mm f/4 L IS ! I'll let you know what I think of it!


Awesome! It's a great lens. Light, sharp, and half-macro.



The included photo was taken about two hours ago. It's a bracketed exposure taken with the 5D Mark II and the 14mm f/2.8.


That is awesome. I am a wildlife photographer EXCLUSIVELY and so basically any good landscape looks great to me. But that one is superb.


let me know what you think of the 4/300!~


brendan

[Brendan7]

here's one more from today (jan 23)


Usually I am able to get within about 9-12 feet of the birds, but this nuthatch for some reason was having a nice day and was feeling like being approached. so, I approached him slowly until I was at MFD for my 300mm f/4. Here's the shot (uncropped). [H]


White breasted nuthatch


Canon 7D and 300mm f/4IS at f/5.6, 1/200, ISO 320. Manual Exposure, handheld. Uncropped (!).


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.36.40/IMG_5F00_2207.jpg

[Mark Elberson]

Wow! Beautiful!!

[Brendan7]

thanks!


I've been photographing nuthatches for a couple of weeks now, but this one today was tamer than my neighbor's dog. [H]


brendan b

[ddt0725]

this one today was tamer than my neighbor's dog


Heck, tamer than my 3 dogs ...they all run now when they see i have camera in hand!

This photo is fantastic, Brendan! Raining here today, didn't get to do any shooting outside! [:(]


Denise

[DavidEccleston]

Usually I am able to get within about 9-12 feet of the birds, but this nuthatch for some reason was having a nice day and was feeling like being approached.9-12 feet? We go out to the woods, maybe once a month, with sunflower seeds. Stick our hands out, and have the chickadees land in our hand. It's not uncommon for a red breasted nuthatch or a white breasted nuthatch to join in if they're around. They land right on our hand, grab a seed, and fly off. Sometimes they'll stick around for a few seconds and look around. Sometimes they're picky, and will take a seed, toss it aside, grab another, toss it aside, and grab some more. When they're not in hand, they're a few feet away in a tree eating their seed, then they're planning their return trip.


Here's an example taken today. T1i+50mm f/1.8 @ f/4.5, 1/160s, ISO 400.


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.28.63/chickadee2.JPG


And a previous one, T1i + 18-55mm IS @ 34mm, f/4.5, 1/160, ISO 400


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.28.63/chickadee1.JPG

[Brendan7]

I will definitely try that, but I will have to use a P&S. My only lens as of now is my 300 f/4 and so it won't focus inside of 5' lol. [:P]


brendan

[Brendan7]

speaking of chickadees here's a chickadee image from today:


Canon 7D + 300 f/4L IS USM at f/7.1, 1/125, ISO 320.


/resized-image.ashx/__size/800x600/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.36.40/IMG_5F00_2326.jpg

[btaylor]

These are a great improvement over your first lot mate - good to see you've got some benefit out of everyone's input.


They can only get even better from here. Well done!

[Fast Glass]

I think you need to learn how to post process your images.


A picture is worth a thousand words, so I edited one of your images.


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.28.86/untitled.JPG


John.

[Brendan7]

For some reason the photo did not show up.



I think you need to learn how to post process your images.


Right. What exactly do you think needs to be applied? Keep in mind I do not have Photoshop, Lightroom, etc. (but i do have DPP, of course)


brendan

[btaylor]

Brendan, I'll put this in a way that doesn't sound quiteso abrupt. [:O]


I think your images are great but they could benefit from a little sharpening in post. I haven't used DPP for a while (I use ACR, Lightroom and Photoshop for my adjustments) but from memory you can sharpen your images in there. Just remember to keep the radius somewhere between 0.1 and 0.5 otherwise you can get a lot of fringing on the edges. Experiment with it until you're happy.


Over sharpening can lead to extra artifacts as you can see in the background of John's modified image of yours where the background blur isn't as smooth as the original.


The level of colours are spot on if you ask me. I wouldn't bother increasing the saturation as it's a bit overbearing.


If you do end up having access tophotoshop the smart sharpen filter is the way to go.


Cheers, Ben.

[ddt0725]

Over sharpening can lead to extra artifacts as you can see in the background of John's modified image of yours where the background blur isn't as smooth as the original.



Maybe I'm just old school but I find the original unaltered natural photo of today's bird and the backgroundmuch more pleasing than the photoshopped version. Just my opinion.
Denise

[Brendan7]

What did you use to sharpen it?


brendan

[btaylor]

Maybe I'm just old school but I find the original unaltered natural photo of today's bird and the backgroundmuch more pleasing than the photoshopped version. Just my opinion.
Denise
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>



I agree entirely, maybemy wording was a bit confusing sorry. I think the original has fantastic background blur and applying too much sharpening can have an adverse affect on it.


Some sharpening, however, can accentuate the details in the bird's feathers etc so it's a fine line between a good amount of sharpening and too much.

[Fast Glass]

Wow, it's amazing how many people posted in just a few hours.


I used DPP, all I did was some levels and a slight tone curve. I just barely increased the saturation. When I saved in Jpeg it induced very bad artifacts, the image before saving it did not have any artifacts. I corected the nuthatch's color to be more neutrual and not so blue as in the original.


John.