Printable View
hi rich,thanks for the compliments.i took this with a canon 50d with 100-400 l at 1/800 f5.6 and at 400mm.i liveby dover delaware and ive been trying to get a pict of the bald eagle for 5 years lol.i have a few more ill post soon hope you like them.....thanks again rod
<div style="text-align: center;"][img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/600x450/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.46.19/9_2D00_9_2D00_10-_2800_55_29005F00_DxO.jpg[/img]</div>
<div style="text-align: center;"][img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/600x450/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.46.19/9_2D00_9_2D00_10-_2800_83_29002D00_1.jpg[/img]</div>
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Lane
Thank you Rich!
yes, this is how you can tell the differences between my 300mm 2.8 and 400mm 5.6.
Quote:
Originally Posted by neuroanatomist
Very Nice John!
The 100-400mm does it again. I like this frame filling shot and I especially like the sharpness and clarityof the eye, as well asthe blue sky peaking through andbelow the curvature of the beak.
Rich
Banman1,
I like the 1st eagle image best....it looks maybe a little over-sharpened and I would change the crop to minimize the perch and add some to the top and some to the left side to give the bird a space to look into.
On the second one you lost the shadows too much, you reprocess and work with the shadow/highlights adjustment.
Joel
Neuroanatomist,
The hawk portrait is very nice, sharp with good colors, the only critique I can offer would be maybe to dodge the dark are below and in front of the eye and perhaps add some to right and crop some from the left to get the eye out of the center of the frame.
Joel
A White Ibis from my recent one day Florida excursion
EOS 1D MKIII
500mm f/4L IS USM
Evaluative metering -2/3 stops
ISO 400
f/8
1/2000 sec
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.32.28/343V1629.jpg[/img]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joel Eade
Thanks for your feedback, Joel! I tend not to make specific photoshop-type adjustments, but you're right that this shot could use it. Under 'normal' circumstances (shooting people), I'd just add some fill flash - but I didn't think he'd appreciate that!
I can crop some from the left to get the eye out of the center...but I can't add anything to the right - the shot is uncropped.
Joel, nice shot, everything looks just perfect to me, sharpness, color, pose, compose ....., only one thing, could it be better if it had narrower DoF?
I'm not much of a bird guy but I was shooting at a restaurant on the river and popped a shot of this osprey.
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.25.81/_5F00_MG_5F00_2809cSm.jpg[/img]
Neuroanatomist,
There is a method of "adding canvas" in photoshop....comes in handy
http://www.photoshopessentials.com/photoshop-tips-tricks/canvas-space.php
you can find other tutorials as well but it's pretty easy once you do it a few times
Joel
Keith, I guess you were not using anything longer than 300mm for this shot since you were not planing to shoot birds?
I think this is a very good shot for a shorter lens, the bird looks very sharp, nice exposure for a sunny day , pose is pretty good too, I also like the blurred background.
This is the second GBH I've seen in person, and I was able to get close enough for a decent picture (the first was flying high overhead). The first one is an uncropped shot. [:D] I spent about 5 minutes slowly closing in on him for that one, then I guess I got a little too close, and spooked him across the river.
[url="http://www.flickr.com/photos/dr_brain/4997961977/lightbox/]http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4089/...e2bb4d03_z.jpg[/url]
EOS 7D, EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6<span style="color: red;"]L IS USM @ 400mm, 1/640 s, f/5.6, ISO 640
[url="http://www.flickr.com/photos/dr_brain/4998567740/in/photostream/lightbox/]http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4132/...4ba383a0_z.jpg[/url]
EOS 7D, EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6<span style="color: red;"]LIS USM @ 400mm, 1/1600 s, f/6.3, ISO 800
nice shorts John, look at your first picture, you really did a good job getting closer to the bird, I know GBHs usually are very shy.
Didn't you wish you had a 500mm 4.0 at the moment you press the shutter button?, just kidding!, I know you like your 100-400mm and i have to say it's a lot better than i thought.
Thanks JJ.
I actually shot it with 100-400@400 on my 5D2. That shot has been cropped way in also. It is amazing how tough it is to fill a frame on a full frame camera. Especially with birds.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith B
use 5D2 to shot BIF sounds pretty hard, but the IQ looks very nice even heavily cropped. I hope Canon will build a better AF system in the 5D III.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJphoto
Thanks!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJphoto
LOL. Sometimes, yes! I just have to stop buying all those small, light, cheap lenses like the 70-200mm f/2.8<span style="color: red;"]L IS II and 85mm f/1.2<span style="color: red;"]L II long enough to save up for one... [:P]
Seriously, though, the 100-400mm is a very nice lens. I like the flexibility of the zoom, but it spends a lot of time at 400mm. If Canon were to release a 400mm f/5.6L lens with IS, I'd certainly get that. 400mm, prime IQ, modern IS, and weather-sealing in a ~$2K package (presumably) would be very attractive. I think if I scrape together $6K to spend on gear, I'll stretch for the little extra to get a 1DsIV.
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.22.26/_5F00_MG_5F00_7127-mic.jpg[/img]
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.22.26/_5F00_MG_5F00_7057-mic.jpg[/img]
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.22.26/_5F00_MG_5F00_7053-mic.jpg[/img]
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJphoto
To tell you the truth this may have been the only BIF shot I have ever taken with the 5D2. The 5D2 AF is the reason I recently bought a used 1Ds2. I had a 7D but I'm just so use to FF I never felt comfy. If I get to a point where I can float 3 bodies I'll get another 7D. 400mm doesn't feel very long on a full frame.
Quote:
Originally Posted by adrian mandea
Hey Adrian,
These are all great, but this one is my Favorite. The composition and contrast are wonderful. The ripples in the water are so clear, and you really nailed the white balance.
Rich
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith B
no, not at all even on a cropped body like the 7D. Canon seems don't want to produce something like 500mm or 600mm 5.6[:(]
Nice shots, Adrian, I like the second and third one better, the first one seems a little out of focus on my screen IMO, but you caught a nice moment of action!
it looks like a beautiful lake( or ocean?) and there are a lot of birds around there[Y]
if you don't mind, I'd like to see some shooting data of your shots.
the first one is not out of focus,it looks like this because it was taken today using the canon 75-300mm -the cheapest tele lens and croped a bit.
the second and third were taken with my canon 40D and canon 400mm F 2.8 II ,iso 100 and the canon 1.4x extender attached.
Quote:
Originally Posted by adrian mandea
yes Adrian, the first one is just not that sharp cause of the lens you used. Wow, 400mm 2.8 II, no wonder the other 2 pictures look so different
.
John, I really like your shots of the GBH. I love the comp on the upright bird, but do wish it was a tad brighter (maybe my monitor). But, with the back lighting that might not be possible without really washing out the back. I also like the "jump to flight" shot, right on with the focus, even the foot splash is frozen--I think you captured the moment very well here.
Again, nice job
Bob
Quote:
Originally Posted by neuroanatomist
The shot is beautiful, John! You are so lucky to be able to get so close! I have been stalking this same bird every day after work for a week now! I climb over a guard rail, godown a steep hill to a large storm water retention pond and even though I'm on the opposite sidefrom him, if I move slightly he starts to walk away! I wish he would at least fly away ...more photos in flight would be nice instead of these super cropped versions of him just sitting there! One of these days, I know I'm going tofall right into this pond trying to get closer to him!
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4133/...bf38d18d_z.jpg
Denise, that's a wonderful shot of the hawk (a red-tail, I think)! [Y]
Thanks, John! [:)] I went to the Illinois State Beach Park to go deer "hunting" today and it is a rainy, dreary day. I didn't see any deer at all! All I saw was this hawk (I think it is ared-tail also) and some seagulls when I walked along the beach of Lake Michigan.
Denise
yes, Denis, I like this shot of the hawk too , especially the sharpness and full of details, well done[Y]
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJphoto
Thank you! Maybe there is hope for me yet![:P] [;)]
Denise
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.22.26/_5F00_MG_5F00_7028-mic.jpg[/img]
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.22.26/_5F00_MG_5F00_6687-mic.jpg[/img]
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.22.26/_5F00_MG_5F00_6961.jpg[/img]
canon 40D + canon 400mm f2.8 +canon extender 1.4x
Beautiful images!! I am jealous.
Ok so I am going to be brave and post my "best" bird shot. I hope you all find it favorable.
Taken with my 40D + EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L IS @ 370mm 1/8000s, f/5.6, iso 400.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4127/...25362758_z.jpg
I'd like the duck please... by doggiedoc@tcah.com, on Flickr
<div></div>
Hi, I have some new shots from my set-up in forest so I thought I could share them here. :) I have a problem with light (my camera settings usually are f/5.6, 1/20-50 and ISO 500, and you know how fast these little birds are). I tried to use on-camera flash, but I was getting better photos without it (and there were more birds in feeder). So now I usecontinuousshooting and am happy if I get a sharp photo. In one day I take 600-1000 photos (and spend 8-11 hours), only some images are good. Do you have any tips? ;)
Two shots ofNuthatch:
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.45.14/IMG_5F00_9420sbp.jpg[/img]
[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.45.14/IMG_5F00_9717sbp.jpg[/img]
Any comments, critics and questions are welcome.
Canon 50D + Canon 100-400mm
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="content-type" />
http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Tadas-Naujokaitis-photography/104571286264426?ref=sgm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tadas N.
Depending on the time of day, weather or shade; it sounds like you may have to bump up the ISO, because 1/20sec or 1/50sec in is not fast enough for moving birds at 400mm, it's even slow for static birds.
Please add anyadditional information that you could think of. What is the EXIF data for these shots, as compared to EXIF data for bad shots and pleasepost a bad shot. These look pretty good to me.
Some considerations for shooting in low light in the forest would be to; use a tripod, bump up the ISO to 800-1600, buy a wider aperture/ faster lens like f/2.8 or lastly, consider a FF Body or 1.3x crop body.
Rich
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tadas N.
Thats anything but a fast shutter speed! Fast action starts at LEAST 1/320th of a second and faster. Also, stay away from those in between ISO's, ISO 500 is worst than 800. The ISO that are 1/3 stopslower from say 800 or 1600 are still OK because they are just pulling the exposure,butthe ISO's that are 1/3 stop fasterthan 400 or 800arebad becuase they are pushing the exposure badly.Daniel Browning will give the technicall details.
John.
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="content-type" />
Fast Glass,I haven't seen your post when I wrote mine. That what you say about ISO is very interesting... Just I didn't understood everything clearly, maybe because I'm not good in English. As I understood, I should use ISO 400-800-1600, not between stops. And it's better to use 320-640-1250 than 500-1000-2000. Am I right?
-----------------------------------
The EXIF data of the first shot:
1/80 (because there was some sunshine through trees :) )
f/5.6
ISO 500
250mm
Of the second one:
1/50
f/5.6
ISO 500
300mm
I don't think it'snecessaryto post a bad shot, because bad shots are usually not sharp because of the movement of bird or slight camera shake. I've noticed that I get more sharp shots with shorter exposure time, but sometimes it's not enough light to use it. Earlier I was photographing with ISO 1600, but I was getting much too much noise, so I decided to use ISO not higher than 500. Also the DOF usually was too shallow, but I didn't want close aperture because I didn't have enough light, so I reduced the focal length. I use a tripod, but sometimes with longer exposures I get not sharp images. It would be very difficult to use a remote control because birds move very fast. Actually that fast birds' moving is the main reason of blurry images. However I don't know how to make them to be in one place longer (when they are still without food in their bill).
I think if I don't find a way to make birds pose longer, I will need to use a flash. As I said, I have tried some times to photograph with it, but birds usually fly away when I'm using it. But maybe after some time they will use to it? Additionally, when I set the camera's flash to give more light I get unnatural colors. Is it possible to solve this problem? Or is it necessary to buy some external flashes? Actually I have not enough money for a new lens/camera, even for external flash, but after some saving, it would be possible to buy it. But... maybe it's possible to make something with camera's fash?Thanks in advance!