Birds Eye Delight

My DA* 300 lens is still far better than I am, but I think I'm making slow progress insofar as I'm beginning to know more about what I'm doing wrong! It's not just the lens, it's the camera settings too that I frequently don't get right. So, all comments welcomed and willingly read. I'll post about specific difficulties later, but would like to put a few shots up for criticism now. They're all about focusing on the eye, which I'm realising is crucial to all good shots. These are not all good, but one or two are acceptable, I think. Here goes!
1
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/The%20eyes%20have%20it/shagnestcrop.jpg[/IMG]
2
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/The%20eyes%20have%20it/puffin.jpg[/IMG]
3
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/The%20eyes%20have%20it/shag2.jpg[/IMG]
4
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/The%20eyes%20have%20it/gannetlooking.jpg[/IMG]
5
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/The%20eyes%20have%20it/gannetlooking2.jpg[/IMG]
6
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/The%20eyes%20have%20it/gannetflight1.jpg[/IMG]
7
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/The%20eyes%20have%20it/kittiwake.jpg[/IMG]
8
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/The%20eyes%20have%20it/flippinjackdaw.jpg[/IMG]
9
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/The%20eyes%20have%20it/cross-eyedgull.jpg[/IMG]
10
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/The%20eyes%20have%20it/sandmartinwire.jpg[/IMG]

A few more at http://s1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/The%20eyes%20have%20it/

Hello Vern

I'm not normally one for critique - I usually state that I like a photo or just don't comment but this set has got me puzzled.

I can't work out quite why some of these shots are not quite hitting the mark that you would hope for given the lens/ camera combo and also despite having a peek I can't find your exif info so guesswork is what it will have to be .

1. In terms of the overall look of this and the detail it may well have been that the lighting is quite strong from the side, however, the usual suspects of high iso/noise reduction in pp/ largest apeture (surely the DA* would be ok)or a heavy crop or slight focus error - maybe a combination but somehow it is just not a sharp as I would expect although I do not yet have this lens. I like the shot though despite this. I doubt that this is camera shake as the twigs around the bird show no signs of this.

2. Again just not as sharp as I would expect though it looks like a large crop/ high iso/ noise reduction maybe - nice pose though.

3. This is the best one for me but it still seems to have lost sharpness - guesses as above (high iso/ crop being most likely). Also Have you used a tripod whilst leaving the shake reduction on- I have heard that this can cause problems similar to this but not noticed it when I have made the same error.

4 and 5 seem to be again just short of the mark but if ths is a heavy crop then it is what you would expect - I love the pose and the fact that at least one eye is sharp - I have no photo's of gannet's so I can't comment on how well the plumage shows up on pixel peeping - some birds plumage shows more detail than others.

6. I like this one but again it seems like a heavy crop and a very limited depth of field - if it is a lrge crop and a high iso factoring in the bird in flight element this is very good.

7. Guesses as above but in particular I suspect that the plumage of this bird coupled with the lighting has also not helped with detail - but we can't change the lighting can we and lowering the exposure a little does not always help.

8. The movement of the head compared to the shutter speed could be viewed as a positive or a negative - a higher shutter speed would have solved this but of course other issues with noise/ wide apeture may then begin to nibble away at the detail - I love the caterpillar in flight though - the caterpillar was probably less pleased.

9. This looks like a narrow DOF/ wide apeture and a focus error - focus appears to be middle to rear of the bird - I guess it was moving towards you.

10. This has to be a heavy crop - not surprising given how rarely these fellas get within picture range but any of the guesses above may apply.

I like the subjects/ the poses etc and can see why you feel some of them are not quite there yet - many if not all of my photo's could have these criticisms levelled at them so I won't be gloating any time soon.

At a guess, given your subjects many were not very close to you and when that happens you have to work with it so whilst you may feel you have not got it right you may actually have done the best possible in the given situation but without more info my guesses may be way short of accurate

I don't have this lens and as mentioned can't find your exif info but most lenses improve by stopping down a little - given the very narrow DOF I suspect many of these may have been at the lenses largest/ widest aperture if so try stopping down a little and highering the iso, if no tripod was used this may also help but with no shutter speeds to use the guess may be wrong

Hope this helps.

Cheers


Stu

Thanks, Stu, I'm don't know how to get exif details for posted photos - that's how much of an amateur novice I am. Your comments were much appreciated and I'd like impose on your patience a bit more now you've got so far! Here's most of the info for the shots:
Shot 1 - f/6.3, 1/1250 sec, ISO 640, shutter priority
2 - f4, 1/1250 sec, 640, SP
3 - f5, 1/1250 sec, 640, SP
4 - f7.1, 1/1000 sec, 500, aperture priority
5 - f7.1, 1/1250 sec, 500, AP
6 - f5.6, 1/2000 sec, 800, SP
7 - f9, 1/1250 sec, 640, SP
8 - f4.5, 1/1000 sec, 400, SP
9 - f4, 1/1000 sec, 640, SP
10 - f5, 1/2000 sec, 500, SP

3, 7 and 8 are not cropped. Others all are to some extent, 6 and 10 most heavily.

The camera settings are largely experimental as I try to figure out what will work and what won't in different types of shots. If you or any other experienced guys can look at these details and suggest what I got wrong, I'd be really happy to read your thoughts.
One thing I'm repeatedly disappointed about is getting what I think are well focused shots of birds in flight which then are not at all sharp on the computer, even allowing for cropping.

I'm trying to pick out some reasonable flights shots which I would really love to master, so more to come soon I hope!

Thanks for showing interest!

I have to agree with Stu .. to be blunt they just aren't sharp and they should be with those settings.

Are you shooting handheld or with a tripod/monopod?

Hi Vern,

I think you've done quite a nice job with a number fo these - great 'expression' captured on #4 which had me laugh out loud and #2 is soooo close to a cracking shot - spoilt by being a little too soft, I'd hazard a guess this was shot from quite a distance and maybe the crop is a little too severe. There is no substitute in birding to 'getting close' !

I have the *300 and it is an absolutely stellar lense. Cut your throat sharp. So there should be no issue with soft shots from the lense.

Maybe it is your technique. How do you hold your camera / lense ? If I have no monopod attached (for me when birding it is a permanent fixture on the lense - far more flexible, and lighter, than a tripod and a definite improvement over hand-held) and I have to hand hold then I cradle the combination resting them on the cocked elbow of my left arm.

No problem with your shutter speeds - I shoot at 1/800 to 1/1600.
ISO good if you are using a K5.
f4 is a little softer, obviously, than when stopped down but I've found it is still very sharp on the *300 and definitely there is no reason not to use it - though I prefer f5.6 to f8 (mostly) when birding. f8 still gives you a lovely bokeh, because of the length of the lense, and can cover minor focusing errors.

I think your problem is in using Shutter Priority - maybe the lense has not finishing focusing properly when you drop the shutter. I use Focus Priority and AF-S for sitting or non active birds and AF-C for BIF and small very active birds and birds moving around a lot. I shoot almost exclusively in TAv.

Hi Vern

Frogfish may have got the answer but another thought has crossed my mind.

I don't have the K7 but believe that it's high ISO capabilities are up to using those ISO's - have you used too heavy an amount of noise reduction in post production ? - that is not my main idea that is as below.

Prior to buying any mf lenses I noticed with the K10 that trying to shoot birds was a little difficult unless I selected the af point myself as the af was constantly changing - could the issue be a wider issue of which af setting you are using :

For example, having read an article by Steve Bloom in which he advised that even with his 'cost enough to buy a new car' camera and lens combinations he would pre focus manually on a position through which he expected the bird to cross then took the shot as it did cross - I have tried this and my shots have improved (still room for improvement).

When focusing if I leave the camera to select the af point 'any' movement of the camera can throw the af out as the camera tries to compensate.

For my af lenses I try to manually select the eye and for all but birds in flight I use the afs setting - and of course afc for the birds in flight.

Another issue, forgive me if this is too basic but holding the shutter button down slightly to track the bird and allow the af to catch up with the action also works - you may already be doing this.

Also try switching to mf and take a few shots remembering to wait for the focus confirmation to light up before shooting - this may answer a few question, it may not

Regards


Stu

Thanks for all the above - much food for thought. All my shots here were hand-held (Farne Islands on "the wedding" day.)Some from a moving boat, too. I have a monopod but find it easier to track flight without it. That clearly brings movement blur into the equation.

I should mention that I have a Kenko UV filter in front of the lens - I've seen some comments that it softens focus, so maybe should try without it, though I do like the lens protection.

I always use afc, Stu, for flight shots, but even so, some of these birds are so fast that focus is hit and miss. What about the AF Point setting - centre or auto for shots like these?

May well be that my processing skills are not good enough too. You've given me lots to think about, for which I'm grateful.

The next batch are all uncropped and unprocessed and I would value your opinions again if these originals give you any better insight into what I'm doing. The composition isn't the best, but some of them seem reasonably sharp.
1
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/IMGP6864.jpg[/IMG]
2
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/IMGP7683.jpg[/IMG]
3
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/IMGP7691.jpg[/IMG]
4
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/IMGP7692.jpg[/IMG]
5
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/IMGP7693.jpg[/IMG]
6
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/IMGP7695.jpg[/IMG]
7
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/IMGP7697.jpg[/IMG]
8
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/IMGP7698.jpg[/IMG]
9
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/IMGP7699.jpg[/IMG]
10
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/IMGP7700.jpg[/IMG]
11
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/IMGP7708.jpg[/IMG]
12
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/IMGP7769.jpg[/IMG]

Remove the filter before anything else.

I have to agree - as sad as I am whilst trying to think where this issue had cropped up before, whilst having breakfast watching the resident sparrows feeding, I realisedthat when I bought mt 200mm f4 lens - straight out of the box (second hand) things looked pretty awful then I noticed the filter attached to the front - removed it and bingo it was like a different lens I only thought of this this morning but you seem to already be onto this - for proetction just keep the lens hood on

Thanks to you both for responding - I'll obviously do that, then see how things look.

Lots on controversy regarding filters but personally I only ever use a polarising filter and even then on only a wideangle lens.
Try some tests on a static target with and without the filter.

Vic.

Couldn't get back to the same birds for comparison, so went to Martin Mere for a bit of colour and got so carried away I totally messed up the settings on a lot of shots. Ended up with a lot of noise in shots that should have been fine - shutter too fast, ISO too low for the aperture. Did get some right though, having removed the filter. Most of these are straight from the camera and none are cropped at all. I think the difference without the filter is obvious - what do the experts think, please?
1
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/Martin%20Mere%2022-05-11/IMGP8613.jpg[/IMG]
2
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/Martin%20Mere%2022-05-11/IMGP8942.jpg[/IMG]
3
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/Martin%20Mere%2022-05-11/IMGP8947.jpg[/IMG]
4
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/Martin%20Mere%2022-05-11/IMGP8960a.jpg[/IMG]
5
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/Martin%20Mere%2022-05-11/IMGP9387.jpg[/IMG]
6
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/Martin%20Mere%2022-05-11/IMGP9425.jpg[/IMG]
7
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/Martin%20Mere%2022-05-11/IMGP9454.jpg[/IMG]
8
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/Martin%20Mere%2022-05-11/IMGP9521.jpg[/IMG]

and a couple of the noisy ones - I was so disappointed with these!

9
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/Martin%20Mere%2022-05-11/IMGP9078.jpg[/IMG]
10
[IMG]http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i479/jvs49/Martin%20Mere%2022-05-11/IMGP8680a.jpg[/IMG]

As a poor substitute for an experts opinion I will offer mine

I reckon the filter was defintiely part of the issue - these are much better.

With regard to camera settings my own way of working is usually to use av mode and alter the iso manually or occasionally let it wander on auto between 100 and 400 iso.

I will go above 400 iso but only when required.

I use the histogram for the exposure checks and with wildlife and an m42 lens attached I find that centre weighted metering works just fine on the K10D.

For birds in flight and an af lens I sometimes use spot metering and almost always afc for focus - and shutter priority mode for birds in flight

Regards


Stu

Much better, looks like the filters going in the bin ...

Vic.