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.


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


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

[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


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?

[]


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


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!


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


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

[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 []


brendan

[wickerprints]

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

1. Correct white balance.
2. I don't know exactly how you achieved it, but the lighting is freaking gorgeous. The position and softness are absolutely perfect.
3. You vastly improved the setup and composition.
4. 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?