Show your Bird Portraits

[tron]

Goldfinch 5DIV + 400 DO II + 2x TC, f/8 1/4000, 1/3200, iso 16000, a little earlier today.

Alan I prefer the first one (due to sharpness) But I saw iso 16000 and I thought: whatttttt? I have to get back my 5DIV asap. I downloaded it though to check the details (couldn't believe it) and I saw ISO 1600

Nothing to detract from this photo but I was hoping I was seeing a super nice ISO 16000 photo ;D
OK there is always year 2025 ;D
P.S It is good that my heart is OK ;D
P.S2 In a recent trip I left the 5DIV packed since it was meant to be picked up by UPS. I used 7D2+400DOII+1.4XIII.
The set was focusing nice and it was not too heavy but most of the birds were far away and it was not shiny. Not the best combination since I had to crop heavily (at 100% most of the time). Plus ISO was around 1600 all the time. Not the best for 7D2 at 100%. This was the first excursion with a bird interest group (not photographers). I had great fun, I shot some birds I hadn't (like a kingfisher and robin for example) but my best shots come from when I was going on a trip alone (7D2 + 500 f/4II from the comfort of my car.... )

 

[AlanF]

Tron
Twitchers and photographers don't mix. They just want to glimpse a bird 100m away, tick it off in a notebook, while we want to sneak up close. Professional guides don't like mixing the two.
Sorry it wasn't 16000. To catch one of those goldfinches in flight is a bit of a miracle so a tad softness is not too bad.

 

[AlanF]

A few photo's taken with my new Canon 5D MkIV and 100-400 Mk2

Did you take these in the wild?

 

[Orangutan]

Twitchers and photographers don't mix.

I find this is not true with my local bird group, mostly because I adjust my expectations. Sometimes I'll lag back to get a closer shot, or sneak away for a minute or two. The group seems more than tolerant, and they like to see nice photos of the birds they saw. Every now and then we're able to ID a bird based solely on my photo.

I can always go off alone, but with the group I to learn more about bird behavior and interesting bird spots.

 

[Valvebounce]

Hi David.
Lovely portraits of great subjects.

Cheers, Graham.

A few photo's taken with my new Canon 5D MkIV and 100-400 Mk2

 

[Click]

A few photo's taken with my new Canon 5D MkIV and 100-400 Mk2

Very nice shots, David.

 

[tron]

Tron
Twitchers and photographers don't mix. They just want to glimpse a bird 100m away, tick it off in a notebook, while we want to sneak up close. Professional guides don't like mixing the two.
Sorry it wasn't 16000. To catch one of those goldfinches in flight is a bit of a miracle so a tad softness is not too bad.

I didn't say it was bad or not a success. I would like to have photographed half as many birds as you I just like sharpness. And I have something similar only worse (smaller, hugely smaller): A flying kingfisher coming straight to me. But as I said it was so far away so tiny that sharpness was irrelevant!

Now as per the excursion it was not bad in the sense of meeting other people and learning a few birds. Also I wouldn't decide to go there (= needed a push). I saw the place and then I can visit it by myself. To their defence most of the birds were so far away so I wouldn't accomplish much more (apart from the last place, if we were earlier in day) and the same birds passed I would have photographed them with less than 6400 iso.
Here is as the whole frame looked like.
EDIT: On the positive side I shot some nice butterfly and landscape shots...

 

[rpt]

Where did you shoot these flamingos tron? I am planning a birding trip in the following week and hope to shoot them amongst other water birds.

 

[TheJock]

Hi Alan.
Nice shots, not a bad divorce lawyer either! ;D

Hi Stewart.
Just proves he wanted to leave an hour earlier but was waiting for you to look away! : ;D

Hi Alben.
Very nice shots.

Cheers, Graham.

Thanks Graham, it was still a pleasure to spend some time with her before she took off, would have been nice to grab that take off shot right enough :'(
How are you getting on with the new 100-400????

 

[tron]

Where did you shoot these flamingos tron? I am planning a birding trip in the following week and hope to shoot them amongst other water birds.

https://www.google.gr/maps/place/38%C2%B020'28.0%22N+21%C2%B025'28.3%22E/@38.341111,21.4223473,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d38.341111!4d21.424536

plus minus a few meters...

 

[AlanF]

Twitchers and photographers don't mix.

I find this is not true with my local bird group, mostly because I adjust my expectations. Sometimes I'll lag back to get a closer shot, or sneak away for a minute or two. The group seems more than tolerant, and they like to see nice photos of the birds they saw. Every now and then we're able to ID a bird based solely on my photo.

I can always go off alone, but with the group I to learn more about bird behavior and interesting bird spots.

They don't mix in the sense that they have different requirements and bird tours and bird guides do not like mixing the two groups on a tour. Going out with bird watchers can, of course, be informative, and there are people who like both bird spotting and listening. But, if your prime interest is photography, then you want to get good photos. There are also photographers who are an absolute pain, who occupy hides, their large tripods taking up 3 seats, and sit their all day preventing others from watching.

 

[AlanF]

I didn't say it was bad or not a success. I would like to have photographed half as many birds as you I just like sharpness. And I have something similar only worse (smaller, hugely smaller): A flying kingfisher coming straight to me. But as I said it was so far away so tiny that sharpness was irrelevant!

You would never capture a kingfisher coming towards you unless it was by sheer luck or having a specialised set up as they go like a rocket. You just see a flash of blue as they go past. Most of the photos you see of them in flight is just after they have left a perch. I got some sharp shots a few years ago when I was photographing one in the distance on a perch and I saw it prepare to fly. I was using a 7D at high speed continuous and a 300mm f/2.8 II + 2xTC. By good luck, he flew perpendicular to me and I got two sharp shots about 100ms apart, at 1/4000s and 1/5000s, iso 1600. These shots are the full frame,

 

[tron]

I didn't say it was bad or not a success. I would like to have photographed half as many birds as you I just like sharpness. And I have something similar only worse (smaller, hugely smaller): A flying kingfisher coming straight to me. But as I said it was so far away so tiny that sharpness was irrelevant!

You would never capture a kingfisher coming towards you unless it was by sheer luck or having a specialised set up as they go like a rocket. You just see a flash of blue as they go past. Most of the photos you see of them in flight is just after they have left a perch. I got some sharp shots a few years ago when I was photographing one in the distance on a perch and I saw it prepare to fly. I was using a 7D at high speed continuous and a 300mm f/2.8 II + 2xTC. By good luck, he flew perpendicular to me and I got two sharp shots about 100ms apart, at 1/4000s and 1/5000s, iso 1600. These shots are the full frame,

They are awesome! Mine is much much smaller in frame. It looks like than only after cropping to 1920X1280! So you can imagine how far it was, hence the flight towards me for a couple of seconds... So yes it was by sheer luck!

 

[Mikehit]

Yup. I've got so many shots of the little blighters on the very edge of the frame but that was after days of trying because they had nested in an easily observed place so there was a lot of traffic that year.

 

[tron]

As I said far away...

(These were photoshop screenshots at 66%)

OK I got better (closer) kingfishers but this was the only flying...

 

[Valvebounce]

Hi Stewart.
I'm really enjoying getting out and shooting with the 100-400, so far for wildlife it usually has a 1.4x on it but that is due to the limitations of locations and / or my ability to get closer, all part of the compromises we make for multiple interests. I can't wait to get back to Goodwood to try some motorsport with it where I anticipate it will be bare 100-400 for the most part.
We went looking to see a Kingfisher on Sunday, one of our party, (we started as three and grew to 5 as more photographers turned up) saw it, and reported the blue blur. I hope to catch it perched as apparently it is often there.
I did get some shots which are headed here as soon as I have processed them.

Cheers, Graham.

Hi Alan.
Nice shots, not a bad divorce lawyer either! ;D

Hi Stewart.
Just proves he wanted to leave an hour earlier but was waiting for you to look away! : ;D

Hi Alben.
Very nice shots.

Cheers, Graham.

Thanks Graham, it was still a pleasure to spend some time with her before she took off, would have been nice to grab that take off shot right enough :'(
How are you getting on with the new 100-400????

 

[Adrianf]

Hi guys,
I've never posted here before but I'd just like to show you my Kingfisher effort (7D2, 500mm F4 L, Sigma 1.4X). I was amazed with the way I could extract something from the darkness from the 7D2 raw file. It was taken on a dismal day at ISO400. I've attached a "before" shot too for reference.

Kingfisher by Adrian Foster, on Flickr

 

[Click]

Beautiful shot. 8) Well done, Adrian.

 

[Valvebounce]

Hi Adrian.
Very nice shot. Well done.

Cheers, Graham.

Hi guys,
I've never posted here before but I'd just like to show you my Kingfisher effort (7D2, 500mm F4 L, Sigma 1.4X). I was amazed with the way I could extract something from the darkness from the 7D2 raw file. It was taken on a dismal day at ISO400. I've attached a "before" shot too for reference.

 

[Mikehit]

Nice shot, Adrian.
I think the 7D2 gets a lot of unwarranted bad press regards its noise performance.