Show your Bird Portraits

[Keith_Reeder]

I agree, let's keep it more light-hearted and less competitive and mainly about birds.

It was never meant to be "competitive" - my comments were unequivocally about what works for me - and why.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Pretty sad - and frankly, bloody tedious - that we can't even discuss why one approach works better for an individual photographer than another, without some people becoming disruptively defensive about their expensive toys...

I'll also add this: in terms of the benefit to other - perhaps new - bird photographers, it's likely that there's more value in a post about how to get really very worthwhile results from relatively budget gear than there is in one purporting to demonstrate that if you're serious about the genre, you "need" a Canon supertele, and preferably the biggest and most expensive one out there.

Frankly, posts like that help nobody - they just massage the ego of the person posting.

 

[Keith_Reeder]

Are you guys really having the 'skill trumps kit' and 'X kit doesn't provide 10x better images than Y so isn't worth 10x as much'?

Errr.. no, of course we're not - as is obvious from what we've actually written.

We're saying that "for the most part, the differences in end-result between very good gear and "the best" aren't as big as the price premium might imply, and that we're extremely satisfied with the results we get without top-of-the-range Canon kit".

Simple enough. The point has been subverted into something else, of course, but that's what we're saying...

Whether Canon gear is "worth" 10x (or whatever) as much, is an entirely personal judgement, and frankly I couldn't care less how other people spend their money, nor have I any inclination to pass judgement on how other people use their hard-earned.

But I choose not to use a Canon supertele - not because I can't afford one, but because it would not suit my shooting style, nor would it improve my results to the extent that it would need to, for the purchase to be worthwhile to me.

Diminishing returns, pure and simple. And, last time I checked, I was still allowed to have a personal opinion about that...

 

[Sporgon]

Mr Bean, would you mind letting me know what ISO that image was taken at?

I am going to hazard a guess - Me thinks >= ISO 8000

From a cropping perspective, this is the original, image. I would have used the 1.4x TC but the light was low as it was (1/125 @ f4.5 ISO 400 - using a tripod as a monopod, one leg extended, as I was moving around and no time for the tripod setup).

What a wonderful picture ! I would only crop it to change the composition slightly. Love the bokeh produced by the 300 @ f4.5. Would make a lovely large print on canvas.

 

[scyrene]

Thanks for the feedback jrista and scyrene. For most of the morning I did have the 1.4x TC on the 300mm. But I was walking out of a canyon area (late in the afternoon), where I'd been photographing a waterfall, as a long'ish exposure, hence the tripod (I normally use a monpod for birding). As I walked out, I fitted the 300mm, just in case I saw anything interesting. I did think at the time, I should put the 1.4x on. Oh well, next time

Was that on the 5D3? ISO 400 seems low to me. I'd recommend ETTR by using a higher ISO then darkening in post, which can actually help reduce (the appearance of) noise overall. A lovely capture anyhow

As it is, I tend to use ETTR by exposing 1/3 to 1/2 a stop over. One of my custom settings (for birding) is set to a center focus point, spot metering, with an ISO of 400 (for me, when using the 300mm it's a balance between using a higher ISO and cropping, if that makes sense). In the case of a quick bird shot, I can turn the dial to the custom setting (it's C3, meaning, I can turn the dial without looking, knowing what the setup is). That's the reason for the ISO 400. It was a rather quick reaction

Ah ok. Goes with the territory

 

[scyrene]

Are you guys really having the 'skill trumps kit' and 'X kit doesn't provide 10x better images than Y so isn't worth 10x as much'?

Errr.. no, of course we're not - as is obvious from what we've actually written.

We're saying that "for the most part, the differences in end-result between very good gear and "the best" aren't as big as the price premium might imply, and that we're extremely satisfied with the results we get without top-of-the-range Canon kit".

Simple enough. The point has been subverted into something else, of course, but that's what we're saying...

Whether Canon gear is "worth" 10x (or whatever) as much, is an entirely personal judgement, and frankly I couldn't care less how other people spend their money, nor have I any inclination to pass judgement on how other people use their hard-earned.

But I choose not to use a Canon supertele - not because I can't afford one, but because it would not suit my shooting style, nor would it improve my results to the extent that it would need to, for the purchase to be worthwhile to me.

Diminishing returns, pure and simple. And, last time I checked, I was still allowed to have a personal opinion about that...

Sure you are. Sheesh, no need to get so worked up about it!

 

[Mr Bean]

Mr Bean, would you mind letting me know what ISO that image was taken at?

I am going to hazard a guess - Me thinks >= ISO 8000

From a cropping perspective, this is the original, image. I would have used the 1.4x TC but the light was low as it was (1/125 @ f4.5 ISO 400 - using a tripod as a monopod, one leg extended, as I was moving around and no time for the tripod setup).

What a wonderful picture ! I would only crop it to change the composition slightly. Love the bokeh produced by the 300 @ f4.5. Would make a lovely large print on canvas.

Thanks Sporgon, I hadn't thought about the image as a lesser cropped version (with more of the foliage)

 

[Sporgon]

Mr Bean, would you mind letting me know what ISO that image was taken at?

I am going to hazard a guess - Me thinks >= ISO 8000

From a cropping perspective, this is the original, image. I would have used the 1.4x TC but the light was low as it was (1/125 @ f4.5 ISO 400 - using a tripod as a monopod, one leg extended, as I was moving around and no time for the tripod setup).

What a wonderful picture ! I would only crop it to change the composition slightly. Love the bokeh produced by the 300 @ f4.5. Would make a lovely large print on canvas.

Thanks Sporgon, I hadn't thought about the image as a lesser cropped version (with more of the foliage)

Sometimes we don't see the wood for the trees. Or in this case don't see the bokeh for the bird ;D

 

[dpc]

I came across this hawk outside town this afternoon. I drove by on a grid road, saw it across the road and ditch, stopped, reversed until I was parallel with it (I was careful, there was noone else on the road anywhere in sight) and snapped this picture out the window across the passenger side of the vehicle. I was using my 7D with a 300mm f/4 plus a 1.4x teleconverter. The IS in the lens is an old version, of course, and I had to shoot the picture off the cuff for fear of losing the shot, so the picture could be a tad bit sharper. Excuses, excuses, but………… I believe this is a Swainson's Hawk, but I stand to be corrected on that score. I used to watch birds assiduously but haven't been disciplined in it for years, so I likely have misidentified the raptor.

 

[Click]

Very nice shot dpc.

Sorry, I can't help you with the ID.

 

[dpc]

Very nice shot dpc.

Sorry, I can't help you with the ID.

Thanks! I have several bird identification books, but sometimes the illustrations and descriptions just don't help as much as one would wish.

 

[dpc]

Mourning doves

 

[dpc]

Green Heron (Butorides virescens) by Tony Varela Photography, on Flickr

A really nice picture!

 

[2n10]

Beautiful shots dpc. I agree it is a Swainson's Hawk.

 

[dpc]

Beautiful shots dpc. I agree it is a Swainson's Hawk.

Thanks.

 

[jrista]

Greater Yellowlegs

Haven't seen these guys in a year. Beautiful little birds, with a cute look. I was out scouting for dark sky sites for my astrophotography a couple weeks ago, and came across a small marsh and agricultural pond. At the time, the pond was PACKED with phalaropes, and I regretted not having my lens with me. I went back to the same spot the first chance I got, hoping the phalaropes would still be there. Alas, no, it looked completely deserted. However after hanging out for a minute, I noticed a few other species of shorebird, along with a lone heron that showed up a few minutes later.

In all, I picked out Killdeer, Spotted Sandpiper, a few Snipes, a Lesser Sandpiper, and the Heron in addition to the Yellowlegs in the end. No good photos of the snipes...they had already noticed me by the time I noticed them, and they skittered off into the corn fields before I could get any good shots. The Lesser Sandpiper seemed fearless for a while, I kept getting closer and closer...then the incessant warning call of a Killdeer kicked in, and the whole lot of them flew to the other end of the pond. Darn killdeer...

Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Canon EF 600mm f/4 L II
Canon EF 2x TC III
Gitzo GT3532LS + Jobu Pro 2 Gimbal

 

[Mr Bean]

Nice one jrista. Out of interest, what exposure settings did you use?

 

[Mr Bean]

Fan Tailed Cuckoo. A few of these are now appearing in the reserve behind my place. It's Spring Down Under, and these ones have an interesting way of nesting/breeding. They are a brood parasite, meaning, they lay their eggs in another birds nest, usually the much smaller scrub wren or thornbill, and let them go about raising/feeding, etc.

Anyway, a rather late in the day pic, with exposures being around the 1/25 sec @ f4.5, 800 ISO - 5D3 with 300mm lens, on a monopod. Not as sharp as I'd like, but, I'll try again tomorrow

 

[jrista]

Nice one jrista. Out of interest, what exposure settings did you use?

Thanks. Exposure was 1/640th f/8 ISO 1600. Was a little hot...the 5D III doesn't have the same kind of highlight headroom as the 7D, so I'm having to learn to not be as aggressive with ETTR.

 

[Click]

Greater Yellowlegs

Great shot Jon. Beautiful light.

 

[lglass12189]

My first entry on this forum.

Osprey landing on nest taken on blue cypress lake in florida.

1Dx, 200-400 @ 200mm, ISO 400, 1/1000, f/4.0