And one more: nice!One more.View attachment 187301
Upvote
0
And one more: nice!One more.View attachment 187301
The 70-300 is a very good and sharp lens and I have been thinking of getting one. You will see the difference in sharpness only when you crop hard.1/1200s yeah i gues if it pecked there can be movement.
Those little birds are always on movement and depht of sharpess is very shallow on 300mm 5,6 2meter.
Yes alan test i been reading says 85 out from 100 sharpness when 100-400 can do 92. on F8 they are more close
Translate from Nikonese to Canonese: "continuous shooting with 9 focus points focus tracking" depends on whether you are using mirrorless or DSLR. For mirrorless, which I think Pape uses, it will be continuous AF with tracking. For Canon DSLR it will be AI Servo with central 9-point zone focus. For for small birds in foliage or perched, I use with a DSLR the centre point or just centre with Canon as it is highly selective of what it is focussed on and very precise and rapid to focus. For birds in flight I use the centre 9 points as it is easier to keep track of the bird while panning. I don't use mirrorless for birds (though I love the M5 and 90D in liveview for portraits).Pape, this are good shots but if you want to know how to make them better (not exactly these but in the in the next attempt) you have to upload more data:
With 1/1200s you shouldn't have serious problems with the movement of the birds, even handhold. Yes - if you go to at least f6.3 it should help...
I would like to know what kind of AF settings you were using - I usually use (Alan, please help me with the translation to Canon language) continuous shooting with 9 focus points focus tracking, VR(IS) on, even on tripod - but depend on where the tripod is standing and if the ballhead is locked on (with such a birds it's never locked and usually not on stable ground)!
And as Alan already said - it could be the lens... (I would like to add - it could be your technique of hand-holding too).
Pape, this are good shots but if you want to know how to make them better (not exactly these but in the in the next attempt) you have to upload more data:
With 1/1200s you shouldn't have serious problems with the movement of the birds, even handhold. Yes - if you go to at least f6.3 it should help...
I would like to know what kind of AF settings you were using - I usually use (Alan, please help me with the translation to Canon language) continuous shooting with 9 focus points focus tracking, VR(IS) on, even on tripod - but depend on where the tripod is standing and if the ballhead is locked on (with such a birds it's never locked and usually not on stable ground)!
And as Alan already said - it could be the lens... (I would like to add - it could be your technique of hand-holding too).
In my experience, I would much prefer to shoot 1/600 and faster for small birds. These critters are really twitchy and if there is anything more than a light breeze 1/200 will blur everything, especially if you are cropping.
"Translate from Nikonese to Canonese" - Thanks Alan! And with this part of your post you made my day - I was laughing pretty long . Thanks again!Translate from Nikonese to Canonese: "continuous shooting with 9 focus points focus tracking" depends on whether you are using mirrorless or DSLR. For mirrorless, which I think Pape uses, it will be continuous AF with tracking. For Canon DSLR it will be AI Servo with central 9-point zone focus. For for small birds in foliage or perched, I use with a DSLR the centre point or just centre with Canon as it is highly selective of what it is focussed on and very precise and rapid to focus. For birds in flight I use the centre 9 points as it is easier to keep track of the bird while panning. I don't use mirrorless for birds (though I love the M5 and 90D in liveview for portraits).
! Thanks Graham - I was going to ignore that post but: sometimes people (for me it's usually before the morning coffee) don't see some digits...Hi Mike.
Paper says he was at 1 / 1200 so double your suggested threshold, your not wrong about twitchy!
Cheers, Graham.
"yeah i think i am just hoping imposible sharpnesses ,its hard get good pictures from lively little birds like smaller tits." - Me thinks: you will! - one way or another (better equipment - like longer lens, or better skills... I don't really think 300mm are good enough for such a small birds but you could eventually improve your skills to sneak closer to them !).yeah i think i am just hoping imposible sharpnesses ,its hard get good pictures from lively little birds like smaller tits.
I been using bigger one spot with servo ,trying to get it head but hard to get eye sharp whit nonexistent dof
Bird eye focus would be nice imporvement
! Thanks Graham - I was going to ignore that post but: sometimes people (for me it's usually before the morning coffee) don't see some digits...
On other hand by some reasons (could be the same) another people are adding letters to the real(?) name! I use to do the same mistakes, so it is just... let say fun!?
Anyway - I hope no bad feelings anyone?
"...in my case it comes down to the idiot doing the proof reading and seeing what I thought I wrote..." - Graham you could be everything but definitely not an "idiot"!Hi ISv.
Thanks, no hard feelings and I try not to point out mistakes unless I think it changes the context of the post! I’m also aware that many here do not have English as a first language , as I can’t speak more than a couple of words in any other language I am in awe of them!
I could blame the spell correction algorithms, however in my case it comes down to the idiot doing the proof reading and seeing what I thought I wrote and not what spell check changed it to!
Damn spell check just changed to into too!
People in glasshouses shouldn’t throw stones!
My apologies to Pape for miss spelling your name.
Cheers, Graham.
Hi Mike.
Paper says he was at 1 / 1200 so double your suggested threshold, your not wrong about twitchy!
Cheers, Graham.
Thank you for the correction ! I did not see the leading '1'