KINGFISHERS LOVE THE 40D!

Well done..

Annika1980 wrote:

They're small, they're fast, and they're flighty as hell, but even
from the safety of across a pond the diminutive Kingfisher cannot
escape the 40D, the Forgotten 400 w/the 1.4x TC, and the window clamp
ballhead mounted on the new Altima.

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91462097/original

On Jan 9, 7:37*pm, Annika1980 wrote:
They're small, they're fast, and they're flighty as hell, but even
from the safety of across a pond the diminutive Kingfisher cannot
escape the 40D, the Forgotten 400 w/the 1.4x TC, and the window clamp
ballhead mounted on the new Altima.

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91462097/original

Very good quality image of the Kingfisher. I placed it next to Rita's
on screen and yours has a deeper, richer color saturation than does
Rita's. Both are very sharp and given the focal lenths involved the
backgrounds arenot very busy at all.
Rita's does have a better angle of the light. But Bret's has a
better saturation of color. Both are very good.


Draco

"Neil Ellwood" a écrit dans le message de
news: ...
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 20:45:50 -0500, Rita Berkowitz wrote:

"Scott W" wrote in message

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91462097/original
Wonderful photo.
Rita, take note that the sticks in the background are not showing up
double, this is how a photo should look. Great capture Bret.

LOL!

Sure, if it came straight out of the camera that way. We all know that
it didn't. The kingfisher is so over Photoshoped that it lacks any
detail and is lucky to have 16-colors. I'll stick with top notch images
straight out of the camera and let the trickery up to the people that
can't take a decent picture and need to draw them in Photoshop.





Rita

Sorry Rita, Your voice is muffled, could you open up the gap in your hat
a little please.

Feet in mouth do that too.

Jean

"Rita Berkowitz" a écrit dans le message de news:
...
"Scott W" wrote in message

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91462097/original
Wonderful photo.
Rita, take note that the sticks in the background are not showing up
double, this is how a photo should look.
Great capture Bret.

LOL!

Sure, if it came straight out of the camera that way. We all know that it
didn't. The kingfisher is so over Photoshoped that it lacks any detail
and
is lucky to have 16-colors. I'll stick with top notch images straight out
of the camera and let the trickery up to the people that can't take a
decent
picture and need to draw them in Photoshop.


So phtoshop yours to see if it is better than Bret's!

Jean

On Jan 10, 1:13*am, Bob AZ wrote:

Where does one find Kingfishers?


Over creeks and ponds. You'll need a long lens because they are
flighty buggers.

"Annika1980" a écrit dans le message de news:
...
They're small, they're fast, and they're flighty as hell, but even
from the safety of across a pond the diminutive Kingfisher cannot
escape the 40D, the Forgotten 400 w/the 1.4x TC, and the window clamp
ballhead mounted on the new Altima.

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91462097/original


EXIF data shows only the 400, was the TC on too? (not a Canon TC??)

Jean

On 1/9/08 7:45 PM, in article , "Rita
Berkowitz" wrote:

"Scott W" wrote in message

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91462097/original
Wonderful photo.
Rita, take note that the sticks in the background are not showing up
double, this is how a photo should look.
Great capture Bret.

LOL!

Sure, if it came straight out of the camera that way. We all know that it
didn't. The kingfisher is so over Photoshoped that it lacks any detail and
is lucky to have 16-colors. I'll stick with top notch images straight out
of the camera and let the trickery up to the people that can't take a decent
picture and need to draw them in Photoshop.
At least it is interesting. Sorry the same can't be said about your work...

On 1/10/08 6:20 AM, in article ,
"Neil Ellwood" wrote:

On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 20:45:50 -0500, Rita Berkowitz wrote:

"Scott W" wrote in message

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91462097/original
Wonderful photo.
Rita, take note that the sticks in the background are not showing up
double, this is how a photo should look. Great capture Bret.

LOL!

Sure, if it came straight out of the camera that way. We all know that
it didn't. The kingfisher is so over Photoshoped that it lacks any
detail and is lucky to have 16-colors. I'll stick with top notch images
straight out of the camera and let the trickery up to the people that
can't take a decent picture and need to draw them in Photoshop.





Rita

Sorry Rita, Your voice is muffled, could you open up the gap in your hat
a little please.
That's not 'her' hat. It's 'her' pants that are muffiling where 'she's'
speaking from.

On Jan 10, 10:37*am, "jean" wrote:

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91462097/original

EXIF data shows only the 400, was the TC on too? (not a Canon TC??)


Yes, the 1.4x was on. The camera does not 'see" the TC since the pins
are taped to retain auto-focus.

On Jan 10, 5:43*am, "Rita Berkowitz" wrote:
jean wrote:
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/91462097/original

EXIF data shows only the 400, was the TC on too? (not a Canon TC??)

Like we are going to believe Bret's EXIF data! *Yeah, right.


At times you show the same level of intelligence as D-Mac.

Scott