Post Your Best Nature Shots!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joel Eade

The biggest challenge is to get a fast enough shutter speed to get a really sharp image.

---

Are you hand-holding the camera? That would seem to me to be the main reason to want a higher shutter speed. Have you tried setting up some sort of support, like a tripod? The reason I ask is that your lens will have a VERY shallow depth of field, especially fairly close. 420mm, f/4 (the lens apparently wide open with a 1.4x extender), at a distance of, what, 10 ft? (You'd have to be close for the bird to be that large on the image.) DOF would be something like 0.02 ft, or 0.24". At 20 ft, it would be 0.1 ft or 1.2", but only 0.6" in front and behind the focus distance. That seems to agree with the last photo. While the focus is perfect on the eye and beak, the bird's body fades away to a blur about half-way down. F/8 would double the DOF. A suggestion: try raising the ISO to 800 & using aperture priority, rather than shutter priority, then different apertures (and speeds, of course) to see if it makes a difference. Most of the articles I've read on photographing birds have not suggested shutter priority, probably because, unless the bird is moving, the shutter speed doesn't matter to them as much as controlling DOF.


Another way to improve the light might be to use fill flash. Your lens is a perfect match for a decent E-TTL II flash (e.g., 430EX, 580EX) and a Better Beamer flash extender, depending upon the distance. Lots of bird photographers use fill flash (Nate does, as I recall). Putting the flash on the hot shoe will work, but raising it a bit higher on a bracket can be better. You can find good info about the Better Beamer by Luminous Landscape, the Strobist crew, Moose Peterson, and Ralph Paonessa's site. (Ralph sells the Better Beamer and has the best information I've found.) It is recommended (and sold) Art Morris, probably one of the best bird photographers around. The Better Beamer is sold by B&H, Adorama, Naturescapes, and other sources.

George,


I am using a tripod (an el-cheapo aluminum one) and shooting relatively close (10-20ft) as you noticed DOF is an issue. These little birds are constantly moving and even with a tripod anything less than 1/200 sec will frequently be blurred. I do have a 430ex flash but not the extender...that could be worth exploring for sure. I have tried the flash but I'm sitting inside a blind and it doesn't work too well...the results have very strong shadows, also the birds sometimes are so quick they will move before the shutter actuates when the flash fires.(ie blurred image) I might try moving the flash location...my son-in-law has a pocket wizard system I may be able to borrow it sometime. (I used it on some hummingbird pics last year.)


I have also tried the higher iso as you suggested but I seem to get too much noise to suit me most of the time. It's seems my 40D doesn't like anything much above 500 iso.


As far as f-stops go I think the sweet spot for my pics is 7.1 If I back off a bit, as you said, the DOF is better, it's just a matter of getting the right light (funny how it boils down to that every time) so I can use the optimum settings. I wonder if some type of continuous light source with a softbox or diffuser might work? Is there something that mimicks daylight?


thanks again George for the helpful hints!


I have a carbon fiber tripod and a nice ball head on my wish list but just finished paying for the lens and extenders, the better beamer is relatively cheap...maybe I can get past the finance minister (wife) on that one!

An autumn picture showing some leaves below 10cm of water.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.34.20/export_2D00_1194.jpg[/img]


Richard

Richard,

Love the shot but maybe a Circular Polarizer to remove the last little bit ofreflection off the water next time? Other then that love theshot.

Fred~

[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.32.28.birds/IMG_5F00_1642.jpg[/img]





Another attempt with 40D + 300mm f2.8L lens .... this one taken from a little further away, maybe 20-25 feet, but it's a bigger bird and fills the frame pretty well. This was f/4.5, 1/60 sec, ISO 250 with the 1.4x extender.

http://www.pscvn.org/members/308/10-...8-28-24_AM.jpg


Reddish Egret and a lucky fish


40D & 500 f/4L IS, f/5.6, 1/2000, ISO 250 - Fish is overexposed, the head is a little bit out of focus in the larger version, f/5.6 of the 500 is shallower than f/5.6 of my 400. Thanks for viewing and commenting.


Nate,

Nate all I have to say is wow! That is an amazing shot.


Joel

I'll second that! Fantastic light...great capture!

Nate,


Another shot worthy of the cover of Nat Geo.


I noticed your ISO @ 250. Did you know that ISO 320 is faster and cleaner on the 40D? Canon 40D Dark Noise Histograms(page down to noise graph) When using my 40D, I find 160, 320, and 640 yield the best results. The compromise is 1/3 ev of dynamic range overhead. Instead of being able torecover 1.3 ev of blown highlights in raw processing you'll only be able to pull down 1.0. Worth it to me for a cleaner image. If you already know all of this...please ignore me for there's nothing more I can offer that could add any more quality to this already exemplary work.

Nate, that is just fantastic. You have really captured the action. Your images always amaze me. Please continue to share!!!


Dave.


Hewas a lucky little guy huh?

Thanks everyone for the compliments [:)],


Chuck, thanks for pointing that out, I didn't really know about it, I'm gonna try it.

Here are couple from me. My computer was acting up and I couldn't resize and post here for a while.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.28.86/0130.TIF-reduced.JPG[/img]





[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.28.86/002-reduced.JPG[/img]





Hope you like them.


John.

found this little bugger while out on a hike. I wasn't sure whether to put this here or under your favorite portraits :)


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.31.08/_5F00_MG_5F00_0178.jpg[/img]


XTi, Sigma 150mm macro very near to 1:1, f/4.0, 1/400, ISO 100, upped saturation and contrast in PP.





Here is a side shot I don't like nearly as much, partially because the eyes are slightly OOF. Also I have no idea what is going on on the right side of the frame.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.31.08/_5F00_MG_5F00_0185.jpg[/img]


XTi, Sigma 150mm, f/3.5, 1/250, ISO 100, slight contrast increase in PP

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Whatsreal

Here is a side shot I don't like nearly as much, partially because the eyes are slightly OOF. Also I have no idea what is going on on the right side of the frame.





XTi, Sigma 150mm, f/3.5, 1/250, ISO 100, slight contrast increase in PP
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

---

The phenomenon on the right side of the frame appears to be a shutter malfunction. You need to take more test shots and see if the problem occurs again; if so, the body will need servicing.

I'm still learning with the 300mm f2.8L and my 40D...I took this pic of a Downy Woodpecker using the 1.4x extender from about 10 ft. away.[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.32.28/IMG_5F00_3588.jpg[/img]

24-105-xsi 1/100 f4.0 ISO 100


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.33.50/IMG_5F00_6792-copy11.jpg[/img]


comments and advice are always taken.





--matt

Another stunner Joel! The sharpness of that lens blows me away. That perch is starting to look familiar [:P]

Thanks I need to find some different dead branches to place next to the bird feeder .... the lens is very sharp and also it seems you can add more sharpness in post processing without it looking too over-done compared to my other lenses. The 1.4 extender doesn't seem to take much away from the lens performance as far as I can tell so far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by btaylor

The sharpness of that lens blows me away.

---

Are you judging from this small web sized image? If you are that is a common mistake, if the picture was very soft you would not be able to tell. Because there is enough detail inmost pictures to make a sharp web sized image.


Here is a link to explane what I am talking about http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/articles/judging_image_quality_photos_web.htm.


Great shot Joel.

I'm judging it by the fact that when I look at it... it looks very bloody sharp!!! Pretty good strategy if you ask me.


Let's have a reality check shall we... the web is a very common medium for people to display their images nowadays. So if it's sharp when I'm looking at it on the web then I'm happy because there's a pretty real chance I won't be seeing an actual print of Joel's lovely sharp photos taken with his new lovely sharp lens.


And it would want to be sharp - because it costs a lot of money. But you get what you pay for 90% of the time which is why cheaper, equivalent focal length lensesare often inferior in image quality when compared to Canon products.

I have posted some pictures that areBLURY and you would nerver guess, you are just starring at the sharpening not the actual sharpness.

Took this a few minutes ago with the 40D, 300mm f2.8L + 1.4x extender, f/4.0, 1/125 sec., ISO 320 and fill flash with 430exii as George suggested a few posts back.[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.32.28/IMG_5F00_3661.jpg[/img]

Great shot Joel. I realy like it.


Here is a shot while I wason a trip to Texas.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.28.86/_5F00_MG_5F00_4217-reduced.JPG[/img]





I would really like your opinions.


John.

Cool.


I might suggest the skyline should be higher. But then I might be crazy to do so.

Very cool Fast Glass [H]

Cool shot John...I like how the tracks seem like they're lit up all the way into the distance. Did you try an HDR at that spot?

No I did not try a HDR, but it kind-of looks like one.

Here is another one at a different place.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.28.86/_5F00_MG_5F00_4221-reduced.JPG[/img]


What do ya think?


John.

HAH! I found a few more bird shots, I thought I ran out of those.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.28.86/223-reduced.JPG[/img]





[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.28.86/0215-edited.TIF-reduced.JPG[/img]


The first one is a lightcrop from my bare 600mm and the secong one is taken with a 2X exetender withno croping.


I would really like your comments, good or bad.

[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.22.91/0910_5F00_SanDiegoZoo_5F00_0496_2D00_3.jpg[/img]


Canon 40D, Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM Lens, 1/160 @ f/5.6, 400mm

I really like those birds in the grass with all the dandelions it just feels like spring...good work! Here's one I took this afternoon:[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.32.28/IMG_5F00_3866.jpg[/img]

Nice shot Joel, all these telephoto pictures is making me want to go outside! It looks like he is saying "What the heck are you doing!".

Joel, the bokeh and expression are excellent. Good job.

Hereis another one.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.28.86/0133_2300_-reduced.JPG[/img]


What do you guys think?

I'm in no way shape or form anywhere near as good as you Fastglass, but from reading other critiques on other images, I think the only thing "wrong" with this is eye contact. Other than that, it looks great! Heck, it looks great even w/o the eye contact!


-Rodger

Beautiful little bird and well shot.


I'm shooting smaller stuff at the moment, no choice, all these bird shots are making me want a tele lens.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.33.11/IMG_5F00_0089-copy.jpg[/img]


7D 100m f2.8 usm macro.

nice shot, muc1. Exposure is spot on, I'd try to crop a tighter for more impact.

muc1- beautiful exposure and that bokeh is smooth as silt. I agree with Nate, cropping would give it a bit more impact but it's great nonetheless.

Here is another one. I don't care for the branch in front of the bird, but you can't win them all!


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.28.86/0119-edited-reduced.JPG[/img]





Hope you like it.

muc1 I must complement not only your excellent photo, but your nerve of steel. Bees freak me out! I have a 150mm macro lens and I can't bring myself to get close enough to a bee to get a good picture like that.