BIRD IN FLIGHT ONLY -- share your BIF photos here
- Thread starter Dylan777
- Start date
Upvote
0
Happy New Year everyone!
To start the year out right, I fed the herons and took some photos. Again, 175 shots and 25 keepers
Here is one of the shots I like best.
BCN Heron BIF by Eric Johnson, on Flickr
If interested, click on my name in red and you can see my other Flickr shots.
Cheers,
Eric
To start the year out right, I fed the herons and took some photos. Again, 175 shots and 25 keepers
Here is one of the shots I like best.BCN Heron BIF by Eric Johnson, on FlickrIf interested, click on my name in red and you can see my other Flickr shots.
Cheers,
Eric
Upvote
0
Hi Eric.
Very nice, the problem with shots like this may be that they raise your (our) personal expectations and with them the threshold at which a keeper becomes a deleter, previous camera and lens combinations may have never given us shots like this so we kept the best that they provided! Just a thought.
Cheers, Graham.
Very nice, the problem with shots like this may be that they raise your (our) personal expectations and with them the threshold at which a keeper becomes a deleter, previous camera and lens combinations may have never given us shots like this so we kept the best that they provided! Just a thought.
Cheers, Graham.
serendipidy said:Happy New Year everyone!
To start the year out right, I fed the herons and took some photos. Again, 175 shots and 25 keepers
If interested, click on my name in red and you can see my other Flickr shots.
Cheers,
Eric
Upvote
0
serendipidy said:Happy New Year everyone!
To start the year out right, I fed the herons and took some photos. Again, 175 shots and 25 keepers
If interested, click on my name in red and you can see my other Flickr shots.
Cheers,
Eric
Hi Eric,
I looked at your shots om Flickr and loved the pictures. I did notice that you were shooting a lot with fairly high ISO values and slow shutter speeds. You did not say what was wrong with the non-keepers, but for testing purposes I would try raising the shutter speed to around 1/2000 or higher.
Brian
Upvote
0
Hi Graham,Valvebounce said:Hi Eric.
Very nice, the problem with shots like this may be that they raise your (our) personal expectations and with them the threshold at which a keeper becomes a deleter, previous camera and lens combinations may have never given us shots like this so we kept the best that they provided! Just a thought.
Cheers, Graham.
serendipidy said:Happy New Year everyone!
To start the year out right, I fed the herons and took some photos. Again, 175 shots and 25 keepers
If interested, click on my name in red and you can see my other Flickr shots.
Cheers,
Eric
You're absolutely correct. My first digital camera was a free P&S with an office supply purchase. I think it was 1.3 MP and I thought it was fantastic ;D The better technology does raise our expectations.
Cheers,
Eric
Upvote
0
Hi Brian,hbr said:serendipidy said:Happy New Year everyone!
To start the year out right, I fed the herons and took some photos. Again, 175 shots and 25 keepers
If interested, click on my name in red and you can see my other Flickr shots.
Cheers,
Eric
Hi Eric,
I looked at your shots om Flickr and loved the pictures. I did notice that you were shooting a lot with fairly high ISO values and slow shutter speeds. You did not say what was wrong with the non-keepers, but for testing purposes I would try raising the shutter speed to around 1/2000 or higher.
Brian
Thanks for looking at my Flickr shots and your kind comments. My non-keepers are basically unacceptably OOF or terrible compositions (like I missed the subject completely or only got the tip of a wing or foot, etc.) or just very boring plain blah photos. I need to practice to increase my keeper rate.
I am always fighting the exposure triad of shutter speed+aperture+ISO. I would love to always shoot BIF at a ss of 1/2000s with an aperture of F 8-11 (for greater depth of field) and ISO 100-400. But due to frequently overcast low light conditions here, I have to compromise. I am finding I don't like high ISO due to the noise (which I am not good at reducing in post processing) and so I don't like to use an ISO over 800-1600 max. With the 100-400mm @ 400mm, I am limited to a widest aperture of 5.6. So I have to either wait for sunnier conditions or limit my shutter speed to lower than what I would prefer or shoot high ISO and get more noise and less IQ. Life is all about compromise
Eric
Upvote
0
serendipidy said:Hi Brian,hbr said:serendipidy said:Happy New Year everyone!
To start the year out right, I fed the herons and took some photos. Again, 175 shots and 25 keepers
If interested, click on my name in red and you can see my other Flickr shots.
Cheers,
Eric
Hi Eric,
I looked at your shots om Flickr and loved the pictures. I did notice that you were shooting a lot with fairly high ISO values and slow shutter speeds. You did not say what was wrong with the non-keepers, but for testing purposes I would try raising the shutter speed to around 1/2000 or higher.
Brian
Thanks for looking at my Flickr shots and your kind comments. My non-keepers are basically unacceptably OOF or terrible compositions (like I missed the subject completely or only got the tip of a wing or foot, etc.) or just very boring plain blah photos. I need to practice to increase my keeper rate.
I am always fighting the exposure triad of shutter speed+aperture+ISO. I would love to always shoot BIF at a ss of 1/2000s with an aperture of F 8-11 (for greater depth of field) and ISO 100-400. But due to frequently overcast low light conditions here, I have to compromise. I am finding I don't like high ISO due to the noise (which I am not good at reducing in post processing) and so I don't like to use an ISO over 800-1600 max. With the 100-400mm @ 400mm, I am limited to a widest aperture of 5.6. So I have to either wait for sunnier conditions or limit my shutter speed to lower than what I would prefer or shoot high ISO and get more noise and less IQ. Life is all about compromise
Eric
I totally understand. The 7D II really is best in strong light. I mostly shoot seagulls, (plentiful here in the winter), in flight with my 400mm f5.6. If I can get closer my 70-200mm f/2.8 does a much better job. I am searching my files for a couple of shots that I like to post here.
Brian
Upvote
0
serendipidy said:
I find comments like this interesting because I was watching Andy Rouse's review of the 1Dx2 where he took a shot of an otter at 50,000 ISO and said it was sellable. That is a professional talking. Someone who relies on image quality to make a living. And the 1Dx2 has maybe 2 stops benefit over a camera like the 7D2.
Many comments about 'ISO above 1600 being too noisy' are often from amateurs - I am not disparaging the standards that such people may set (it is, after all, a personal opinion), but I sometimes wonder if the ability to zoom in at 100% and criticise any noise that they see means that people are losing sight of the important thing. That is, the image. You only need to look at the comments on what are often quite apalling shots (oof, poorly composed etc) to realise that the vast majority of people out there do not give a monkey's fart about image noise.
I have many images that I have that I would rather get again with lower noise, but that does not mean they will be discarded as 'failures'.
Upvote
0
You make some very good points, Mikehit. I agree with you completely.Mikehit said:
On a more personal note and as an amateur, when I recently started shooting with my new 7D2, I took a lot of photos in low light with high shutter speed and the ISO was sometimes 6400. I noticed, while processing in DPP (the only program I use) and at normal viewing size (not 100% pixel peeping), photos taken at ISO 6400, had noise that I personally didn't like and made the IQ less for my taste. I tried to reduce the noise in DPP, but this degraded the image sharpness and resolution to my eye. I have heard of other software that does a better job of noise reduction but I have never tried them.
I agree with you that a high ISO photo (of something unusual or that is only available once and then is gone) is better than no photo at all. But I have several hundreds of mediocre heron shots and could right now walk 10 steps out my front door and take another hundred heron shots within the next hour. Therefore I am trying to get the best quality IQ I can. Now if I saw sasquatch in my viewfinder, I would rather have a photo at ISO 50,000 than no photo at all ;D
Sellable is a funny thing. I think it was Vincent van Gogh who never sold a single painting in his lifetime and was considered a failure as an artist. Just try to buy one of his paintings today.
Cheers,
Eric
EDIT: I just had another thought. The reason the ISO was 6400 was I was shooting in low light. Most of those photos seemed quite soft (? OOF) and perhaps that is the main reason I didn't like them. I think the 7D2 shoots better in brighter lighting.
Upvote
0
Hi Eric.
I saw a program a little while ago and it said that the little tidbit of info that you used about Van Gogh seems to be a bit 'urban legend' and a bit 'depends on the definition' of sell.
Have a look here for more info on this, I think they should know! ;D
https://www.vangoghmuseum.nl/en/125-questions/questions-and-answers/question-54-of-125
Cheers, Graham.
I saw a program a little while ago and it said that the little tidbit of info that you used about Van Gogh seems to be a bit 'urban legend' and a bit 'depends on the definition' of sell.
Have a look here for more info on this, I think they should know! ;D
https://www.vangoghmuseum.nl/en/125-questions/questions-and-answers/question-54-of-125
Cheers, Graham.
Upvote
0
