Post your best bird shots!

Nice capture Joel:


Boy are you guys lucky being able to put out HBFs. We can't get away with that at all. Yup you guessed it, bears think we put them out for them and treat them as their personal property. Yesterday when I was out shooting water falls I saw a female at some fire weed. However same old story, wrong lens to try and capture her. Gone before I could get my 100-400 out of my pack. Keep up the great work.





Adrian


That Turn (?) in front of the cow back drop is really neat. You actually shot it that way? Good for you.


<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"]</input><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden" />
<div id="refHTML"]</div>

What isit withRomanians and VIVID colors.[Y] Nice shots.


John.

Another Hummer.....Using two 430 EXII flashes and camera mounted 530 EXII set to 1/16 output and triggered with pocket wizard TT5's.....this was taken with 1D MKIII and 300 mm2.8L


Camera is in manual mode, 1/160 sec+ iso 160+ f/10 : this allowed some ambient light so that the wings are blurred a little and the trees in the backgroundare seen.


I've noticed that by varying the iso and/or f stop you can control how much wing blur will be seen in the image. (themore ambient light you allow the more the wings will blur) Altering the shutter speed has much less effect.





[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.32.28/343V9931.jpg[/img]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joel Eade

Another Hummer

---

And another great shot Joel---Again, thanks for sharing your setup and technique. I learn so much from those like you who offer this information with thier shots.


Bob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joel Eade

Another Hummer.....Using two 430 EXII flashes and camera mounted 530 EXII set to 1/16 output and triggered with pocket wizard TT5's.....this was taken with 1D MKIII and 300 mm2.8L


Camera is in manual mode, 1/160 sec+ iso 160+ f/10 : this allowed some ambient light so that the wings are blurred a little and the trees in the backgroundare seen.


I've noticed that by varying the iso and/or f stop you can control how much wing blur will be seen in the image. (themore ambient light you allow the more the wings will blur) Altering the shutter speed has much less effect.





[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.32.28/343V9931.jpg[/img]
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

---

I know that you don't like very saturated colors, but I think that even in real life they are a bit more vivid.I would bumbup the saturaton anoch.Other than that it's a great photo.


BTW how do you like your 1D III over your 40D?


John.

John,


I did de-sat the reds a little in this shot becuase the bird's gorget was too hot, perhaps I went a bit far but on my monitor it looks good.


The MKIII (I purchased used from Adorama) just a few months ago .... it's taking some time to adjust to .... I had used the 40D exclusively for 2-3 years


The 1.3 crop factor is a big difference to me, I have to try to get a little closer for birds but for landscapes, portraits, sports or family snapshots it seems easier to frame a shot and include more in the image.


The improved weather sealing I wanted because I intend to attend some wrokshops in locations where the weather can be a big factor.


The MKIII shoots faster than the 40D in terms of frame rate and the shutter lag is less. The camera has good feel and handles well. Some of the features like extended ISO settings and more AF points are helpful. The menus and programming are significantly deeper and I have just scratched the surface.


When you get a well exposed sharp image I think MKIII pictures have a sort of depth to them that the 40D doesn't .....that's probably subjective.... overall it's a better camera.


Joel

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joel Eade

When you get a well exposed sharp image I think MKIII pictures have a sort of depth to them that the 40D doesn't .....that's probably subjective.... overall it's a better camera.

---

So I'm not crazy for thinking that full-frame and 1.3 had a "Look" to them that was differant to 1.6. Actually I dubed it the full-frame look.[:)]


John.

John,


No your probably not crazy....maybe it has to do with pixel size and processing...as the MKIII has bigger pixels than the 40D....this makes each pixel gather more photons. (the trade offis thatyou have less pixels actually on the subject so maybe a little less resolution and less ability to make big crops)


I believe that (all else being equal) the 1D series bodies willoutperform and produce better images than thexxD series....but then they should considering the price difference. (a used 1D III in excellent conditioncosts more than a new 7D)


Joel

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fast Glass

So I'm not crazy for thinking that full-frame and 1.3 had a "Look" to them that was differant to 1.6. Actually I dubed it the full-frame look.[img]/emoticons/emotion-1.gif[/img]


John.
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

---

I shoot mostly portraits. No matter what sensor I am using I am going to fill the frame with my subject. The larger the sensor, the closer I will be to my subject assuming I am using the same lense. With my FF since I am closer to my subject the perspective is different and the depth of field is less. This is what I miss about my medium format film camera. I do not think I'll ever ba able to afford a medium format digital.


Mark

7D,400mm5.6,f5.6,1/8000,ISO400,EV -1 2/3, thanks for viewing.http://a.imageshack.us/img248/537/dpp00041.jpg