What colors! It's almost hard to imagine any bird with more striking colors than this!
Thanks! Among ducks, wood duck and Harlequins are the most colorful ones. I am lucky that both show up in Calgary for mating and raising the young.Beautiful bird. Very nice picture.
Thanks AlanHe certainly is! We don’t have these beautiful birds in the UK.
Thank you, Click & macrunning.Just love the color of the Cardinals. Great Shots usern4cr
There seem to be two approaches - enhancing colours vs natural colouring. I always try to have the colours as lifelike as I can remember. Here are some of my Northern Cardinals I took on one of my USA trips (all with the 100-400mm II + 5DSR) - had my second Pfizer today so with luck there will be more trips across the pond soon.Thank you, Click & macrunning.
I'm getting better at using PL4 as time goes on. These aren't my latest "post" efforts, and I think my latest are getting more "natural" looking while still bringing out a nice color and brightness - but I'm trying not to overdo it as I did sometimes not too long ago. So many of the photos I take have dark (to silhouette) subjects on bright or bokeh-wise noisy backgrounds that it's really hard to pull a "pretty photo" out of them.
Beautiful photos, Alan.There seem to be two approaches - enhancing colours vs natural colouring. I always try to have the colours as lifelike as I can remember. Here are some of my Northern Cardinals I took on one of my USA trips (all with the 100-400mm II + 5DSR) - had my second Pfizer today so with luck there will be more trips across the pond soon.
View attachment 196778 View attachment 196779 View attachment 196780 View attachment 196781
For the likes of us, the 100-500mm is perfect - light enough to carry on long hikes, sharp and can take close ups and zoom out. Mind you, the 100-400mm II is in the same league, and I am hanging on to my old lens to go with the 5DSR as my second camera and my wife finds it easy to use.Beautiful photos, Alan.
The male Northern cardinals I have here are almost too saturated to start with, as they're almost a bright red ball in the photo without any processing - so solid bright red that it's often hard to see the feather contrast. The females aren't as bright, but have a great variety of different colors (not wood-duck colors but still about as colorful as I'll get around here). The Carolina wren is really colorful inherently, as are the male House finches that have a very deep red head & neck area. But there are a lot of other birds that look like, ... , well ordinary birds. That's not a bad thing, but my birds in view are usually in the shaded part of the tree which makes them not nearly as pretty or colorful as they could be - which is where I try to pull out their color even if they're dark with a brighter background further off.
Yesterday my wife and I went out for the first time (this year) on a long nature hike and I took some "birding" photos of a large bird at the top of a tree really high up, and another was of a woodpecker up high & very far away (with no access to get closer). The RF 100-500L also excels at taking close up photos of the small wild flowers (with big background blur) that were all around, which is one of the amazing thing about that lens and the biggest reason I bought it - it's so versatile.
Interesting! I have to check this - at least for a birds that I have no idea what they are! On other hand - I have seen plenty of misidentified photos on the Internet and you easily can get in trouble... Sometimes the differences are so small and the info in the photo is just not enough.Bing has a handy website tool to look up varieties of birds. Just add your image and Bing will attempt to local similar images. This generally has links to websites with the type of bird. This is what I typically do when trying to find out the name of a bird. https://www.bing.com/visualsearch