That doesn't just look like a blue 'tint' to me, that just looks like a completely blue photo (and not in a good way ).

You've got your white balance set manually, so unless you changed it between the shots that were blue and those that were okay, then that's not the problem, and even tungsten white balance doesn't normally look this blue.

My bet (I'm sorry to say) is on a faulty sensor/processor (certainly not a faulty lens). Keep an eye on it. If it does it again, check the white balance by all means, but assuming that isn't on some bizarre setting, I think it may require a trip to SRS.

Dan

Bit awkward for manual focusing though.

Dan

Rain? Best time for toadstools - get out there!

Not wanting to hijack the thread, but here's an example of the difference a polariser can make to a toadstool.




Not the best shot in the world, but just to illustrate a point.

Dan

I often use my 300mm on a tripod, but that's because I shoot flowers and things with it.

And I don't have a monopod, so any shots I take with it are either handheld, or on the tripod with the ball head loosened off, or on the tripod with the head tight, depending on the subject.

That's understandable!

Dan

Absolutely!

Dan

Yep, first one's better for me too, but not so sure about the brown leaves on the right hand side. If you've got a polariser filter, try using that when you next shoot toadstools, it can make a massive difference to the whole scene.

Dan

I use Microquiz (or at least have done) in the past, and was very pleased with the results, using slide film. I've only got a film projector, and at the time no laptop, so it was a cheaper way to get photos for presentation than a digital projector and laptop.

And they fool many people, who think they were originated on film.

Dan

Jeanette, I think you may have got the wrong end of the stick regarding my post. All I was saying is that because a bat is tiny, and flies very fast in the dark, no camera is going to be able to reliably lock on to one using autofocus.

Just about all the decent shots of flying bats that you will see are, like John suggested, taken using infra-red triggers and flash.

And with wild birds it's patience and knowledge that will ultimately get the best shot. And a hide comes in useful too. For instance, with your Roller, for the best photo you would have had to spend time observing their habits, gradually move into position, preferably in a hide, and then you might have got a close up shot, with the best chance of success. And by 'time' I mean days (or weeks), rather than hours.

It doesn't matter how technically capable a photographer is, if they're trying to get decent bird photos from 50 feet away, they're almost certainly going to be disappointed.

It's why I rarely take bird photos - I just haven't got the patience to put the time in to get decent shots. A friend of mine is happy to spend 9 hours a day in his private, bespoke hide waiting for 'his' Kingfishers to turn up. He's got some amazing photos as a result, but that sort of photography is not for me.

Dan

I would be astounded if any camera would be able to lock on and track a bat in flight. Bear in mind that the most likely one you'll see in Britain is a pipistrelle, which is about 40mm long and flies at 5 metres per second. At dusk.

I have got a shot of a bat in flight, using a long exposure (about 1 second I think, just to get a bit of colour in the sky) and flash, with a 50mm lens and prefocusing on the height I expected the bats to be. It's heavily cropped.




Scott's pics are lovely and sharp, but remember (with no disrespect to Scott) these are captive birds, and will have been flying from perch to glove or something similar. They're going to be a lot more predictable than wild birds. Having said that, the Kestrel is obviously doing something more aerobatic than that, so hats off to Scott.

Even my Red Kite shots were most successful when I could predict where they were going to be flying, and there's no getting away from the fact that knowledge of your wildlife subject is the best way to get a good shot - you'll probably find out they're not as unpredictable as they first appear. Just watch them for a while, if it's birds in your garden, they'll most likely have a preferred route to your feeders. The Kites I shot had a fairly regular 'holding pattern' that they flew before swooping in for food, and a fairly predictable route out again with the meat.

Dan

Dan