If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
On 4/10/05 6:11 PM, in article ,
"Kate" wrote: For the hide in the garden I have now bought a camping toilet tent and have draped the frame with the camouflage net we already have. As it is free-standing now, I have been able to move it closer to the bird feeders, but the wretched birds haven`t been back since so I haven`t been able to see if my images will be better. It takes a little while for them to get accustomed to a new object near their feeders. You might not need the camouflage net. They will get use to almost anything. Plus you need to make sure the netting doesn't flap in the breeze. As movement like that can scare the birds. Do you know the trick of putting a small branch or twig within a foot or two of feet of the feeder. Many birds will fly to and from this branch to go to and then leave the feeder. Take the pictures when they land and fly off this branch. This also makes the bird portraits look a lot more natural and not so obvious that it was shot at a feeder. Plus you can change the branch every so often for different looks. Put it into the best position for great bird portraits. I have started using RAW mode, although it is agonisingly slow through the buffer. It may be that I have been losing some sharpness by the way in which I was processing the images, but until I can get some more shots from this new hide, I cannot tell for sure. There is no getting away from the fact that a better lens would make a lot of difference, but if I can improve my technique with the lens I have at the moment, it should stand me in good stead for the future. Make sure that incamera settings are set correctly. It could be that your camera is set for "No Sharpening." Good lenses are very important. -- PWW (Paul Wayne Wilson) Over 1,000 Photographs Online at, http://PhotoStockFile.com |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
"PWW" wrote in message ... On 4/10/05 6:11 PM, in article , "Kate" wrote: For the hide in the garden I have now bought a camping toilet tent and have draped the frame with the camouflage net we already have. As it is free-standing now, I have been able to move it closer to the bird feeders, but the wretched birds haven`t been back since so I haven`t been able to see if my images will be better. It takes a little while for them to get accustomed to a new object near their feeders. You might not need the camouflage net. They will get use to almost anything. Plus you need to make sure the netting doesn't flap in the breeze. As movement like that can scare the birds. Do you know the trick of putting a small branch or twig within a foot or two of feet of the feeder. Many birds will fly to and from this branch to go to and then leave the feeder. Take the pictures when they land and fly off this branch. This also makes the bird portraits look a lot more natural and not so obvious that it was shot at a feeder. Plus you can change the branch every so often for different looks. Put it into the best position for great bird portraits. I have started using RAW mode, although it is agonisingly slow through the buffer. It may be that I have been losing some sharpness by the way in which I was processing the images, but until I can get some more shots from this new hide, I cannot tell for sure. There is no getting away from the fact that a better lens would make a lot of difference, but if I can improve my technique with the lens I have at the moment, it should stand me in good stead for the future. Make sure that incamera settings are set correctly. It could be that your camera is set for "No Sharpening." Good lenses are very important. -- PWW (Paul Wayne Wilson) Over 1,000 Photographs Online at, http://PhotoStockFile.com The hide has been in the garden for several weeks, and it is only recently that we have built a portable one. Previously it had been fixed to the fence, but was too far away from the feeders for sharp pictures. I have pinned the camouflage net down with tent pegs to stop it flapping. The idea of using a twig for the birds to perch on prior to visiting the feeders is a good one. However, what seems to happen is that the birds fly into the garden from the trees at the back and straight on to the feeder perches, then back the way they came. Today I was able to get some better shots of a greenfinch, and some even better ones of a robin. The greenfinch was about 10 feet away but the robin only about 6 ft. It does seem as though at 6ft, objects are _much_ sharper, but as the distance increases, sharpness drops off. This is all at 300mm BTW. The in-camera sharpness setting was plus 1, so I have pushed it up to plus 2 and hope noise isn`t increased. My tripod, although a heavy one, _is_ a bit unstable, particularly as it is standing on loose gravel, and I did take two identical shots, one with IS enabled and one without, both with the camera on the tripod. The light was good and I was able to shoot at 1/200th f/8. There was very little difference, with maybe just a little more sharpness with IS turned on. I did read the manual grin regarding turning IS off if the camera is tripod-mounted, but surely wobbly is wobbly, whether hand-generated or tripod-generated. I haven`t yet tried with the camera resting on a solid object, but will do so shortly. I expect when I go out in the field, I shall have to use a monopod, as carrying a tripod as well as camera and lens(es) will be difficult, as will hand-holding the camera for any length of time because of the arthritis in my hands. Regarding shutter speed and f stops, I have read that, as birds move so quickly, even when feeding, anything less than 1/160th will not do. Elsewhere I also read that the "sweet spot" for sharpness is f8. Also, that to increase DOF, an f stop of between 11 and 13 is necessary. I do try to shoot at above 1/160th and at around f8, but sharpness always seems to come down to how far away I am from the - admittedly - small subject. As I mentioned above, 6ft seems ideal with this lens at maximum zoom. Roger : does the minimum focussing distance of the 300mm prime remain the same, then, whether a TC is attached or not, please? As I always seem to be shooting at 300mm, it does seem rather pointless to have a zoom after all. Also, will AF still work with this lens and a 1.4x TC attached to a Canon EOS 300D do you know? My husband is getting a bit grumpy with me because I want a new lens, a new tripod, a new this, a new that, and I`ve only had this camera and lens since Christmas! Thank you for your help. Kate |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Kate wrote:
The in-camera sharpness setting was plus 1, so I have pushed it up to plus 2 and hope noise isn`t increased. I suggest no in camera sharpening. Do it post processing where you have more control. My tripod, although a heavy one, _is_ a bit unstable, particularly as it is standing on loose gravel, Hang a bucket from the tripod and fill it with rocks, dirt or something else heavy. That will improve stability. I expect when I go out in the field, I shall have to use a monopod, as carrying a tripod as well as camera and lens(es) will be difficult, as will hand-holding the camera for any length of time because of the arthritis in my hands. That is an advantage of carbon fiber tripods as they are much lighter as well as sturdier and dampen vibrations. Regarding shutter speed and f stops, I have read that, as birds move so quickly, even when feeding, anything less than 1/160th will not do. Elsewhere I also read that the "sweet spot" for sharpness is f8. Also, that to increase DOF, an f stop of between 11 and 13 is necessary. I do try to shoot at above 1/160th and at around f8, but sharpness always seems to come down to how far away I am from the - admittedly - small subject. As I mentioned above, 6ft seems ideal with this lens at maximum zoom. While the sweet spot for sharpness for many lenses is f/8, the telephoto pro primes by canon, nikon and others often are as sharp wide open as at f/8. For Canon, this is the L series lenses (which technically does not mean pro, but means low dispersion glass is used in a more exotic design which tends to give better image quality). My experience with birds, unless they are completely still, is that shutter speed is paramount. The percentage of soft images I get goes up rapidly as shutter speed drops below 1/500 second. Try imaging at f/5.6 or f/4 (if you can). Boost ISO until you get 1/500 second or faster. For movement (and small birds move really fast, 1/1500 or faster is needed. Second, change the autofocus sensors to use only one sensor, and keep that sensor on the bird's eye(s). A sharp bird photo will usually show feather detail, and that is quite small. A sharp lens and fast shutter is critical to freezing any movement. Check the shutter speeds on my website: http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird Last week in Australia, I found a fair number of Cockatoo images are not sharp due to movement; I was imaging in shade and not watching my shutter speeds. Now I find I was only at 1/200 to 1/400 second. I should have boosted the ISO (I was at 100). Roger : does the minimum focussing distance of the 300mm prime remain the same, then, whether a TC is attached or not, please? As I always seem to be shooting at 300mm, it does seem rather pointless to have a zoom after all. Also, will AF still work with this lens and a 1.4x TC attached to a Canon EOS 300D do you know? I do believe the minimum distance is the same (seemed like it was last week when I was in Australia). I do not have it with me, but can check it in a couple of days. The 300D, like all canon consumer SLR bodies, needs f/5.6 or faster to autofocus well (some 3rd party TCs will still autofocus at f/8, but often the camera does not do well, hunting and missing focus). I use Kenko pro 300 TCs which are very sharp and a little cheaper than the canon TCs. So the 300 f/4 will autofocus with a 1.4x TC giving f/5.6 at 420 mm. My husband is getting a bit grumpy with me because I want a new lens, a new tripod, a new this, a new that, and I`ve only had this camera and lens since Christmas! Good luck! Roger |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
"Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" wrote in message ... I suggest no in camera sharpening. Do it post processing where you have more control. I`ll give it a try, or go back to the default of plus 1. Hang a bucket from the tripod and fill it with rocks, dirt or something else heavy. That will improve stability. I`ll try that, too, although it wouldn`t be very practical away from the garden! That is an advantage of carbon fiber tripods as they are much lighter as well as sturdier and dampen vibrations. I would like a carbon fibre monopod, but don`t think my husband would spring for a tripod, unfortunately. My experience with birds, unless they are completely still, is that shutter speed is paramount. The percentage of soft images I get goes up rapidly as shutter speed drops below 1/500 second. Try imaging at f/5.6 or f/4 (if you can). Boost ISO until you get 1/500 second or faster. For movement (and small birds move really fast, 1/1500 or faster is needed. I try to increase shutter speed as much as possible, although I do find at f/5.6, say, the DOF is so shallow that the beak of the bird will be sharp, but the feet won`t, or vice versa. I have tried increasing ISO but don`t like all the noise that appears. When the background is blurry it shows. I have tried some demo versions of plug-ins and stand-alone programs that remove noise, but find they can make things "blocky". Second, change the autofocus sensors to use only one sensor, and keep that sensor on the bird's eye(s). I have already selected the centre spot for autofocus - did that very soon after getting the camera - and focus on the bird`s head. If the bird is sideways on, everything is OK, but face on and the feet are out of focus (see above). A sharp bird photo will usually show feather detail, and that is quite small. A sharp lens and fast shutter is critical to freezing any movement. Check the shutter speeds on my website: http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird I have managed to get some images which show the feather detail, even the little wispy bits, but that has been when I was only 6 ft away. The 300D, like all canon consumer SLR bodies, needs f/5.6 or faster to autofocus well (some 3rd party TCs will still autofocus at f/8, but often the camera does not do well, hunting and missing focus). If I find that autofocus is having difficulties, I try to find another object the same distance away, focus on that and then re-focus on the original subject and the camera seems to find it more easily. Doesn`t always work though, because sometimes the subject has flown away by the time I am ready! My husband is getting a bit grumpy with me because I want a new lens, a new tripod, a new this, a new that, and I`ve only had this camera and lens since Christmas! Good luck! I`m working on it...grin Kate |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
"Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" wrote in message ... A sharp bird photo will usually show feather detail, and that is quite small. A sharp lens and fast shutter is critical to freezing any movement. Check the shutter speeds on my website: http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird Just had a look at your photos. They are quite beautiful. I did notice, though, that they were taken with longer telephotos than the 300mm that I aspire to. I know you said that you took only the 300mm with TCs on your latest trip to Australia, so look forward to seeing the results. Would you post on this thread when they are ready to view, please, Roger? Many thanks Kate |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Kate wrote:
Hang a bucket from the tripod and fill it with rocks, dirt or something else heavy. That will improve stability. I`ll try that, too, although it wouldn`t be very practical away from the garden! If you hang your camera bag, or similar, from the tripod that'll help stabilise it. Roger |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Kate wrote:
"Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" wrote in message ... A sharp bird photo will usually show feather detail, and that is quite small. A sharp lens and fast shutter is critical to freezing any movement. Check the shutter speeds on my website: http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird Just had a look at your photos. They are quite beautiful. I did notice, though, that they were taken with longer telephotos than the 300mm that I aspire to. I know you said that you took only the 300mm with TCs on your latest trip to Australia, so look forward to seeing the results. Would you post on this thread when they are ready to view, please, Roger? Kate, I have gotten a first peak at my trip photos. I did process one image and included full resolution sections so you can see the sharpness. It is an image of a Rainbow Lorikeet (parrot) with the 300 mm f/4 L IS + 1.4x TC (Kenko pro 300) on a tripod with IS on: http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries...962.b-700.html There are edges in the image where intensities change by a factor of 10 within 2 pixels and where adjacent pixels have factors of 3 to 4 change in intensity (an indicator of very good sharpness). Roger |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 14:08:30 -0600, "Roger N. Clark (change username
to rnclark)" wrote: Kate wrote: This will be my third year photographing odonata, but the first using a digital SLR with zoom. I have been using a Coolpix 4500 which is very good for close-ups, but it was because I had to stalk them in order to get close that I decided to get a camera to which I could attach a long lens. I did get lucky several times - one dragonfly even landed on my knee so I got some good `portrait` shots, and a pair of Anax Imperators `in cop` were so engrossed I could have shoved the lens up the male`s nose, if it had one! I have not taken any shots of dragonflies in flight, or even attempted it, although I might try this year. I do get somewhat despondent if I am out for hours and don`t get anything, but the sense of achievement when I do is very satisfying. That is why I prefer to take my photos in the wild. If I went to an aviary or butterfly house, or photographed captive dragonflies, I wouldn`t get that feeling of accomplishment. I have only just started photographing birds, and we do have feeders in the garden, but the species of birds visiting is quite limited. I intend to get out and about to find more species, so a long lens will be important unless I am very lucky indeed. I have never had such an expensive hobby (obsession?) before, so I have to think very hard before buying extra equipment. I can understand the need to always want something better or different to get that elusive shot. However, I have always said that in order to do the job properly, you have to have the right tools, otherwise you usually end up bodging it, which is what I feel I am doing at the moment. I have been on a very steep learning curve for the past few weeks and all the responses to my original query have given me plenty to think about. Improving my technique should be my first priority, I suspect, but I still feel that better glass will give me sharper shots, regardless of which length I eventually decide to go for. Maybe then, if I do have to crop, there won`t be so many imperfections to exaggerate by having to sharpen so much. with thanks and best wishes to all Kate Hi Kate. I like to do bugs and birds. I have previously used a sony f707 for bugs because of the really short focus distance. On my 20d i have a 75x300 is ef lens. It doesn't make it - particularly with birds - they are a bit more sentient. The people i see getting nice macros use a 300 and up with generally a 1.4 teleconverter. The faster the lens, the better. Ususally they manually focus because the auto takes too long and isn't as consistent.. Sooo..more than 300 and fast...better than f4 if you can afford it . I suspect a tripod when possible is the way yo go. Alot of patience..and perhaps bait. I agree with your conclusion on glass. If you can kill a particular bug...a really great technique is to pin it down and take 6 or 20 shots with varying focus lengths. Then composit them to get really super dof. That's part of it right there. Good luck and if in your search you have any suggestions, would be glad to hear them. rgds Ken |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:48:14 +0100, "Kate"
wrote: "Ken Ellis" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 14:08:30 -0600, "Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" wrote: Hi Kate. I like to do bugs and birds. I have previously used a sony f707 for bugs because of the really short focus distance. On my 20d i have a 75x300 is ef lens. It doesn't make it - particularly with birds - they are a bit more sentient. The people i see getting nice macros use a 300 and up with generally a 1.4 teleconverter. The faster the lens, the better. Ususally they manually focus because the auto takes too long and isn't as consistent.. Sooo..more than 300 and fast...better than f4 if you can afford it . I suspect a tripod when possible is the way yo go. Alot of patience..and perhaps bait. I agree with your conclusion on glass. If you can kill a particular bug...a really great technique is to pin it down and take 6 or 20 shots with varying focus lengths. Then composit them to get really super dof. That's part of it right there. Good luck and if in your search you have any suggestions, would be glad to hear them. rgds Ken Firstly, to Roger : thank you for letting me see the images of the lorikeet. They look super so I think that the 300mm L prime with TC could be the way for me to go, although I shall probably keep the 75-300 IS USM for use at the lower end, where it is supposed to be sharper. Thank you for all your help. Ken : last year I was using a Nikon Coolpix 4500 for the dragonflies and got some good, sharp images - whenever I could get close enough. For macro work, the Nikon is very good, I think, and it will focus at 2cm from the subject. I shall probably only use it for that now. I caught a hovering Southern Hawker dragonfly last year (fastest hand in the west - of England!) and held it in the prescribed manner in one hand, while taking shots with the Coolpix with the other. I couldn`t have done that with the Canon. Nor could I haved killed it; also, most dragonflies lose their colours very rapidly after death. One of the difficulties I have is the unreliability of the English summer weather, but, although I would not say that I am a particularly patient person, I am very tenacious and won`t give up until I`ve got the shot I want. I am hoping that with a telephoto I won`t have to wait so long... best wishes Kate Sounds like you'll be happy with a good telephoto of sufficient length. Alas...i think this year will see me using the f707 yet againt (nice color though). Actually...forgive me.. i like d-flys too much to kill them. Thinking more of beetles and bees. The great thing about a good tele will be you probably can take your time and focus really nice..and then i know one of the first things i would like to try would be a composit foto and try to amplify the dof. Like i said..i've seen it done by a fellow out in washington with pinned bees. Fab shots. Well good luck, let us know what lens works for you. Dump a pic or two to alt.binaries.photos.original if you've no site and would like to share them. rgds - Ta Ken |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS: Schneider Large-Format Lens TRADE!!! | Bill Gillooly | General Equipment For Sale | 2 | February 20th 05 07:43 AM |
FS: Schneider Large-Format Lens TRADE!!! | Bill Gillooly | Large Format Equipment For Sale | 2 | February 20th 05 07:43 AM |
Nikon D70 + Auto Mode | Anirudh | Digital SLR Cameras | 10 | February 1st 05 08:32 PM |
Focal plane vs. leaf shutters in MF SLRs | KM | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 724 | December 7th 04 10:58 AM |
Copy/Macro Lens for this camera | Mr. Bill | Large Format Equipment For Sale | 0 | February 16th 04 08:18 PM |