|
TomR posted:I forgot about the bird thread! 
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 06:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 06:33 |
|
|
I've got those AND these in my yard. 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2011 05:01
|
|
|
^ Yeah, I have a TON of scrubjays in my backyard. Today a couple of Mourning Doves moved into my yard. They're very affectionate towards each other and they aren't scared by my camera! Heart by Jenseales, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2011 05:57
|
|
|
 IMG_1301 by like okay cool dude, on Flickr  IMG_1353 by like okay cool dude, on Flickr I almost got it diving into the water, but the fucker was fast and I'm pretty bad.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2011 18:13
|
|
|
 A red winged blackbird puffs up and yells at me. I was shooting from a kayak in Gallup Pond, Ann Arbor.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2011 16:49
|
|
|
TomR posted:I forgot about the bird thread! Nice catch! I was told that even at 1\4000 their wing remain blurry.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2011 17:44
|
|
|
I didn't know there was a bird thread!!! My P&S does 10x optical zoom, 38-380mm so I can get some good zoom action going. The sad part is that it takes the camera at least 3 seconds to focus on anything so I can only ever get in-flight shots of the birds as they're about to land, with the camera pre-focused. Also I like birds so it's a good combo, and basically 90% of my shots are of the random birds that live in our yard. This is a cockatoo at sunset. No post done on this image, it's straight out of the camera. (It needs a bit of cropping) 
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2011 14:29
|
|
|
Went for a hike today, the eagles came out to play: eagle by Brian.M.K, on Flickr  eagle by Brian.M.K, on Flickr  eagle by Brian.M.K, on Flickr  eagle by Brian.M.K, on Flickr  eagles by Brian.M.K, on Flickr I shot all those trying not to fall off a cliff while I'm swinging around chasing the action through my camera. Boring backgrounds but I didn't really have much of a choice.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 06:25
|
|
|
It's been a while since I was able to go shooting.   Cowbird...first for me 
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2011 03:39
|
|
|
I wish I could have gotten closer. Guard Duty by Chad Larson Photography, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2011 14:36
|
|
|
A few more from the same day, different park. I encountered a pair of nesting red-winged blackbirds. They were not happy to see me. I got dive-bombed twice before they settled in the tree. Nesting Red-Winged Blackbirds by Chad Larson Photography, on Flickr Really like this one.  Nesting Red-Winged Blackbirds by Chad Larson Photography, on Flickr  Nesting Red-Winged Blackbirds by Chad Larson Photography, on Flickr Now I'm done.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2011 01:20
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2011 07:15
|
|
|
MrOpus posted:Really like this one. This one's incredible! It looks like a birding guide illustration.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2011 15:56
|
|
|
Been a little while since I've actually been able to contribute, here's a couple baby northern mockingbirds in my backyard:   There's a red-bellied woodpecker nest back there too, I've seen both the male and female constantly going in and out of the opening but it seems like when the weather cooperates and I set up my gear, they disappear for awhile. Argh! I'll have to wait them out one day so I can get some close up shots.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2011 16:40
|
|
|
3 options to choose from: 100-400 f4-5.6 IS 400mm 5.6 EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II with a 2x extender I want to primarily use the lens for birding with a T2I and am trying to figure out if I am better off dropping the extra cash on the 70-200 with extender for birding or if the quality will drop off considerably compared to the other two options. I figure you guys would be best to ask since you are the bird guys. The way I see it the 100-400 will give me some range for zoom at least but I am under the impression that the quality of the image is slightly worse than the 400 prime. The 70-200 with an extender would be great because I would be getting a fast 70-200 but also could hit 400mm at 5.6. My concern though is that it might be slow in focusing etc. Could I get better bang for my buck with a non-canon lens?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2011 19:35
|
|
|
 From our backyard.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2011 19:51
|
|
|
demonachizer posted:3 options to choose from: Do you already have a tripod? You'd need that for the 400mm- although it would still probably make it the cheapest option. I'd guess the 100-400 would be best if you are planning to mainly do hand-held, since it would still have IS and would be a lot lighter than the 70-200 2.8. I think they are coming out with a new 200-400, but if I remember it was going to be a bit pricier... the 70-300L is pretty great but not quite as long as you are looking for. I just ordered a 1.4x kenko extension tube for it. I know it will be pretty slow but will hopefully give me some extra range when I can handle the slowness.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2011 20:05
|
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:Do you already have a tripod? You'd need that for the 400mm- although it would still probably make it the cheapest option. I'd guess the 100-400 would be best if you are planning to mainly do hand-held, since it would still have IS and would be a lot lighter than the 70-200 2.8. I think they are coming out with a new 200-400, but if I remember it was going to be a bit pricier... Is the quality on the 70-200 with 2x going to be lacking compared to the 100-400? I can pick up a tripod outside of this budget (self budgeted but still).
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2011 20:07
|
|
|
demonachizer posted:My concern though is that it might be slow in focusing etc. While you will take a hit on focus speed, I didn't notice the hit being too horrible on my Canon 200/2.8L. I paired it with a 2X Kenko Teleplus 300 DG Pro. I heard the official Canon TCs are made to slow the AF down some to make it more reliable/accurate but I know of no such limitation with the Kenko. Not sure how it'll play with the 70-200, I switched to Nikon a little while ago and just ordered the same 2X Kenko for Nikon and I'll be trying to pair it with the 80-200/2.8, so we'll see how that works out when it gets here Monday/Tuesday. edit: also another thing about TC shooting, you'll have to step down a bit to get a sharp image, with the 200/2X Kenko the sweet spot was f/8 which did hamper my ability to shoot some in overcast or shaded areas under the tree unless light was good. The 400 f5.6 delivers good quality wide open, so you're getting a bit of an advantage there. PREYING MANTITS fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Jun 17, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2011 20:16
|
|
|
I don't know- don't have those unfortunately! My guess is you would end up fairly close? But if the 70-200 2.8 is at all an option, I'd seriously consider that since you'd have it for all kinds of other shots as well. I also wonder about the 300/4 + a 1.4x ?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2011 20:18
|
|
|
 P6166179 by HelloWorldEp1, on Flickr In Norway, near trondheim  P6166352 by HelloWorldEp1, on Flickr first attempts at panning air shots.  P6166286 by HelloWorldEp1, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2011 22:02
|
|
|
Been a while. Nice shots, everyone! Also, sorry for posting like a giant douche and bailing on the entire forum a while back.    
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2011 22:06
|
|
|
Good god, those are all awesome Clayton Bigsby. You may have been MIA but you were obviously busy getting some sweet photos so it's forgivable. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2011 22:12
|
|
|
Yeah- those are fantastic shots. (as were yours, PM) For what it's worth, my Kenko 1.4x extension tube arrived yesterday. Unfortunately didn't get home until after 8 so had very little light to play with it. I tried it with my 60D and 70-300L. I'll try to get some better shots to post, and try to do some controlled comparison- cropping the 70-300 alone vs. the 70-300+1.4. My initial observations were that the teleconverter "works" fine- AF, IS, camera knew it had a max f8.0 with the lens. I took some hand-held shots at ISO 1600 and 1/15 or 1/30 and the IS on the lens is good enough to come away with decent pics. I'm not one of those super-steady hands guys so this kind of surprised me. AF was noticeably slower, and seemed to hunt around a lot more. It reminded me of the AF on my old 70-300IS nonL. I haven't downloaded the pics yet so I can't really comment on sharpness, but my sense was that there was a drop in sharpness too, although I'm not sure my 5 min of shooting at an ISO I rarely use provides a good comparison. So far my suspicions are confirmed- that the 1.4x will be pretty useful for slow moving birds that I'm likely to be shooting in good light but can't get super-close to (raptors, waterbirds), but certainly not something I'll leave attached to my lens all the time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2011 18:12
|
|
|
You can probably regain some sharpness by stopping down a hair, though then obviously you will have to fiddle further with sacrificing ISO and shutter speeds to get enough light to the sensor. How do you like the 70-300L overall? Thought it was a curious lens for Canon to put out, but it IS a nice focal length and I could see it being really useful for moderate size wildlife (though a tad short for birding, but no lens is ever long enough for that is it?). And, is the 1.4x the 300 Pro version? Considering picking one up for stacking with my Canon 1.4x II on the 500/4 for when I need a loooooot of reach. I gather the 7D will do a decent job autofocusing that combo since only one TC is detected. Definitely tripod territory though! (980/8, yikes...) Here's a "Oh hay guys are you taking pictures here sorry" Ibis moment. I love those birds... 
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2011 20:20
|
|
|
I did get the Pro version of the Kenko 1.4. For whatever reason the lens is not physically compatible with the Canon tc's. I REALLY like the 70-300L, although this is my only L glass so I don't have much to compare it to. I got it bundled with the 60D this spring when I had a convenient buyer for my T2i + 70-300 IS nonL. It is worlds better than the non-L: super sharp, fast AF and pretty quiet. It is light and easy to hand-hold, also relatively small. Basically a nice walk-around zoom with a bit more reach than the 70-200's and a bit smaller and sharper than the 100-400 (from what I've read). To be honest I might have gotten the 100-400 but they were not included in the deals I was looking at. My main criticisms are that it doesn't come with a tripod mount (and I haven't been able to find one), and, obviously, it is a relatively slow lens. That and the incompatibility with Canon TC's to give it more reach probably rule it out as a moneymaking lens for someone who needs to earn a living with wildlife photos.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2011 20:53
|
|
|
I received my Nikon version of the 2X Kenko 300 Pro, of course it's storming out right now and that's not at all good for TC shooting so I haven't had a real good chance at trying it out yet. It did noticeably slow down the focusing on my 80-200 2.8 but it's far from unusable. As for shooting though, it's pretty useless to try in this weather. I'll post samples next time I get a chance to shoot in sunlight. Hopefully that won't be too long. Here's a red-bellied woodpecker flying over me the other day. Pretty happy with the D7000's ability to keep focus in the 6:30am light! 
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2011 22:58
|
|
|
Tried out the 2X Kenko 300 Pro on my Nikon AF-D 80-200/2.8. The results aren't too bad but very dependent on a few things. The focus speed does take quite a hit, it had trouble tracking a hawk in flight which made me pretty mad at it haha. It also needs light, a lot of light. It does work fairly well on birds that are just kind of chilling in trees/on the ground and it also seems to get better the closer to the subject you are. The shot below I was probably ~30-40 yards away so it's a bit soft. Tolerable for web resolution, anyways.  I think TCs are best used on primes, as I had much better results when pairing the Kenko 2X with the Canon 200 2.8L. I'll still use it when the conditions are right, though since it is nice to have in a pinch. edit: Today's morning wood, also taken with the TC: 
PREYING MANTITS fucked around with this message at 13:15 on Jun 24, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2011 18:10
|
|
|
Wish I had a woodpecker nest in my yard This is from my first evening of testing (finally had time to download).  Not a great photo, but given that it was at ISO 1600, hand-held at 1/30sec and who knows what the AF actually grabbed (and cropped), I'm not too unhappy with it. I also shot some (non-bird) tests today to compare the 70-300L with and without the TC. I can't rule-out that this is something unrelated to the TC and just due to metering a slightly different scene, but it seems like my camera overcompensates for the loss of light, and slightly overexposes when the TC is on compared to the lens only. Not bird pics, but this is one of the tests- a flower on the right side of the frame with AF using the right focus point on my 60D. I then cropped them to be roughly equivalent. With the Kenko Pro 300 1.4x TC (200ISO f8 1/640sec 420mm) uncropped  cropped  No TC just 70-300L (100ISO f5.6 1/1250sec 300mm) uncropped  cropped 
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2011 22:23
|
|
|
 SD 063 18 Cliff Swallows flock by Execudork, on Flickr The cliff swallows that I suspect are nesting under a small bridge on a low-traffic rural highway fly way too quickly and never seem to land. They were probably eating mosquitoes, though, so I can't get mad at them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2011 03:50
|
|
|
I've taken my first bird shots with my new camera. Unfortunately it was getting dark so I couldn't get past 1/400s. I'm also just learning how to get the shots in focus... AI Servo is the setting I should be using to take birds, right? These were all taken with a 50mm prime lens. Can't wait until my 55-250 gets here and I can get some better shots. This is a kookaburra. It is afraid of people, which is sad because we are nice and try to give it food.  This is a butcher bird. This bird flies in the house and sits on the back of my husband's computer chair chirping at him until we feed it if we leave the door open.  Another butcher bird, catching food in midair 
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2011 08:27
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2011 16:39
|
|
|
was camping in southern Yukon and the local Bald Eagle population seemed to taunt me for just having a Nikkor 70-300 Bald Eagle Nest by tylerhuestis, on Flickr  Bald Eagle with chick by tylerhuestis, on Flickr  Bald Eagle by tylerhuestis, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2011 05:11
|
|
|
We bought a weight bench today and brought it from the shed down to the door in the truck to make it easier to carry. Then, on the way back to the shed my husband spotted this little guy. He's a marbled frogmouth, which is actually a really rare bird found in our region of the Queensland/NSW border in Australia. So my husband stopped the truck, I ran out and sprinted back to the house to get the camera and snapped this shot: I so desperately wish I didn't only have a 50mm prime (especially since I forgot to check the mail and my 55-250 might be there), but I'm happy with this shot. HookShot fucked around with this message at 12:33 on Jul 4, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2011 12:28
|
|
|
 This kookaburra was hanging out in the tree. This is it at full size, I thought it looked good with the setting sun and didn't crop it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2011 07:59
|
|
|
 Small Bird Small Nest2 by torgeaux, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2011 11:33
|
|
|
I love that shot. The cactuses going all over the place are a really, really unique frame.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2011 14:17
|
|
|
Finally got out with my big lens in the kayak.       
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2011 17:34
|
|
|
Dread Head posted:I am so ridiculously jealous of this image. This is the best I've ever been able to capture from a hummingbird:  San Diego Zoo 302 by Abnegātus, on Flickr Totally botched on my end  Speaking of botched:  San Diego Zoo 174 by Abnegātus, on Flickr Someone spooked it away as I began to focus, and I for some reason kept desperately trying to shoot it.  San Diego Zoo 163 by Abnegātus, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2011 08:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 06:33 |
|
|
All excited to try out my new 7D with its 8 frames per second and 19-point autofocus — turns out, neither of which are worth jack if you can't frame the drat photo properly.     Whatever happened to that thread where you post your missed shots so that everyone else can feel sorry for you?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2011 01:54
|
|
