Show your Bird Portraits

Aug 16, 2012
4,587
982
Here are a couple of shots taken today with the 5DSR and 100-400mm II at iso 6400 because it was so dark with no direct light on the great tit and marsh tit. These are crops that have not been reduced in size and show that the 5DSR is quite usable in low light and high iso. Without direct light they never look that sharp or contrasty, but the noise is very well controlled by DxO PRIME.
greattit_3Q7A1943-DxO_6400_ls.jpg
marshtit_3Q7A1962-DxO_6400-ls.jpg
 
Jul 7, 2013
54
23
I notice that the images that I just posted have a totally different colour cast than what I see when I open them on my monitor individually, the same monitor. Yes, I've calibrated my monitor. What's up with that?? I've posted these same files on other sites with no coloraturas changes in viewing them.
 
Jul 7, 2013
54
23
Monte - No clue but nice shots never the less, especially the first.

Alan the high ISO shot are nice but just not quite how we'd prefer them to look. Hard to beat good lighting - maybe some fill flash??

Jack
I think I’ve figured a way around it. I posted some cat images using imgur url’s and they worked and looked right.
 

ISv

"The equipment that matters, is you"
Apr 30, 2017
616
333
Really great shots Vern (and your ID looks spot on for me)!
What program did you use for mapping (you are not the only one that likes it:))!
 

Durf

Picture Taker - Image Maker
I notice that the images that I just posted have a totally different colour cast than what I see when I open them on my monitor individually, the same monitor. Yes, I've calibrated my monitor. What's up with that?? I've posted these same files on other sites with no coloraturas changes in viewing them.
I've noticed the same thing with some of my pics I've posted recently to this forum, huge color difference. They are fine posted on other sites, but here, they look totally different.....
 

ISv

"The equipment that matters, is you"
Apr 30, 2017
616
333
Alan the high ISO shot are nice but just not quite how we'd prefer them to look. Hard to beat good lighting - maybe some fill flash??

Jack
Jack, I'm almost 100% agree with your opinion. Instead of "Hard to beat good lighting..." I may write "Impossible to..." mostly because I'm not sure the fill flash will get you to the same results (well, at least I'm not very good in this, I always see some differences that I personally don't like).

On other hand there are situations when if you don't shoot you just go home with nothing! And I think there are some folks around who need to get that shot, no matter how fine it will look as a picture (by one or other reason). Alan is Alan and he loves to show what his equipment is able to do (and stretching the boundaries time to time...). Is that useful here in the forum? I think so (well, I'm sure so): despite the photos are hardly competing with photos taken in proper light, they are still photos taken home and for some purposes they are 100% good enough. All this is an info that may help the guys who are after the object at any price. I'm not sure Alan is doing this exactly by the same reasons :) but it works there well enough...
I'm not very sure if I succeed to express myself good enough (in English) and it's just my opinion. Could be interesting to see what others are thinking about that anyway?
 
Likes: Jack Douglas