Well, Nipper!
When all most of us have seen is a flash of electric blue going off into the distance, these are wonderful! The lighting, definition, composition are absolutely first rate.(We have Someone else to thank for the colours!)
And not a little envy-inducing.

All together now:

"I wish I'd taken those!"

Thanks for letting us see.

Roger.

That's just one less reson not to, then!

Very best wishes to you both!

Roger.

Thanks, Gwyn.

I am very & ever aware of the priveleges I enjoy, with all the beauties that surround us.
The pictures displayed on PU more the adaquately display the respect with which Creation is held, I believe.

As for the Daily Mail link, this was posted some time ago & I referred to it in one of my (many!) previous "bat-posts"!

& thanks for the rabies advice!

Roger.

Thanks for your insight, Bret.
I take your story on board.
Good point, well made!

Roger.

You make a good case for your strategy, Don

As soon as you've set it up, let's see those images!



Roger.

(I'll be out again tonight, in about an hour!)

As with Gareth's pebble-throwing,Don, I'm not sure about "interfering" with their lives/activities that much.
Take that to its logical conclusion for a "sharper" photo, & we might as well put them in a glass tank.
Let them go free, do what they will &, if we don't /can't get a good shot, then so be it!
Bret, thanks for your thoughts.
Should a stronger flash be used, we would still be left with the problem of ... how far away will they be at the point 0of exposure?
Will extra power bring extra
exposure latitude?

The advantage that perhaps that power would bring is shorter flash duration = faster "shutter" speed...?

This is great... thinking on one's feet bowling along in mutual inspiration with fellow AMATEUR photograhers!

Have a go!
Let's all see those bat shots!
Our images are not limited by our equipment, only by our imaginations!!!!!!!!

Roger.

Good afternoon, everyone!
just got in from work & realised what I've been missing since about 8.00 a.m.!!!

sorry to have omitted tech. info., but it's the same as B4, didn't want to raise the boredom quotient too high!

so...

K7, 18-55 "kit" lens, @ 18.
F5, ISO 400, 1/50th. sec.
Built-in flash.
Manual focus.

I set the focal length to wide since, although it renders the bat smaller in the frame, it does at least increase the chance of getting an image in the frame. Crop later (in PSE9).

The bats initial presence is indicated by a bat detector. In the remaining light, at 9.45 - 10.30 p.m., it is quite easy(!) to see them flying around against the sky. The latest ploy, rather than just "point-&-shoot" is , as the flash is "up" I've been using the cut-out in the flash housing as a rapid viewfinder, which makes following the bats easier, if you keep both eyes open.
In our garden which is bounded by 2 walls at right angles, they tend to swoop round & round before flying off over the rest of the garden. This circling adds a certain predictability to their flightpaths.

If nothing else it is very good, but challenging, panning practise!

Again, apologies in delaying my joining the discussion but any further info I can provide, please post!

I would really like to see others' results & any fine tuning / use of different lenses, etc. that you could suggest

Thanks for all the encouragement.

Roger.

Tonight's after dark expedition.

1.

[IMG]http://i1021.photobucket.com/albums/af340/rogerhlane/SunBat013cropadj.jpg[/IMG]



2.

[IMG]http://i1021.photobucket.com/albums/af340/rogerhlane/SunBat011cropadj.jpg[/IMG]



3.

[IMG]http://i1021.photobucket.com/albums/af340/rogerhlane/SunBat010cropadj.jpg[/IMG]




Any comments, criticism or advice would be much appreciated.

Roger.

Have to agree with Smeggy & Thoramay, above.

Thomas's is like a technical illustration, Mike's has a touch of art about it &, I think, is more natural.

Roger.

Thanks, everyone.
The standard of critique here has, to my mind, never been in question!

Roger.