Re shake reduction, I find that if one rushes to take the photo before it has settled, it can ruin the sharpness. With some photos, timing is everything and the stabilisation (or lack of readiness of it) can let you down.

I managed for many years without it with my ME etc. so personally I wouldn't miss it if it hadn't been invented. One's better off using a tripod for optimum results.

With a wide angle lens it adds very little, if anything. I agree it can help with some telephoto shots, but what a faff turning it on and off!

John

As Davis says, lovely colour but seriously lacking depth of field.

I note you've used aperture priority mode and the exposure was 1/800. That means the lens would have been wide open at f1.7.

Another time, try setting the camera to M (manual) mode. Stop the lens down to give an acceptable depth of field (depends on the subject) and meter by pressing the green button.

Say you'd set the lens aperture to f5.6 in your example (3½ stops smaller,) the exposure time would have come out at about 1/80 sec. which is still perfectly hand holdable.

Av is fine for subjects where you want the lens wide open, otherwise use M with the green button.

John

We never missed not having shake reduction with film camera SLR's. The K110D didn't have it either and saved a good few grams (75g to be precise) off the weight of the K100D. More than 13% lighter. I wouldn't mind not having it and have always suspected it's more of a marketing gimmick.

John

A full micro four-thirds frame!!

John

I think it's a bit misleading naming it in the OM series when it isn't compatible with their legacy glass in the way Pentax have.

Now if Pentax uncripple the K mount on digital bodies one would effectively have what the OP desired as far as I can see.

John

Yes, that's partly why I wasn't sure, but the tuft can hide itself on occasion so wasn't too concerned about the lack of it. One would think it was such an easy task to identify a bird like that.

I don't think it is a Pochard as they appear to have a white V on their black bill and there is no evidence of that here.

So despite the lack of an obvious tuft, I still think that is the most likely for them and I've entered it now as a Tufty for the letter T so I'd have to try and convince any doubters

Thanks for the suggestion anyhow.

John

Thanks Barrie. I've looked at another book and that does show some white around the face on some female Tufteds. Easy to get the two confused though.

John

Last August I took this photograph at the Mere in Scarborough.




At the time I thought it was a Tufted duck and thought it would make my entry for this weeks 'T' competition. However, now I'm not so sure!

The white face would indicate it might be a Scaup. However, Scaups are considered amongst the rarest of breeding birds in the UK and this one clearly has some youngsters. Have I taken a photo of a rare event or is it a 'Tufty' after all?

Can anyone help with identification please? Thanks.

John

For Firefox users there is a plug-in names FxIF.

Once this is installed, find the original jpeg image and open it in Firefox direcly (Right click > Open with.. > Firefox

The jpeg (hopefully) opens in a Firefox window as if a web page.

Then right click the image and select FxIF Data.

A window with the EXIF data appears that has a copy button.
Click that copy button and paste the result (CTRL-V) after the link to the photograph in the forum.

Sounds a lot of work but less copying and typing than doing it line by line!

John

Isn't that partly why EXIF data is requested? Or is that not required now?

John