Critique Blue tit

Stuart Philpott

Stuart Philpott

Messages
4,306
Name
Stu
Edit My Images
Yes
Another from that set up that the recent nutty came from 1/1000 f6.3 iso 3200 tis about 11am grey old day, light direction stick bkg choosen birds are being fed.

Good fun good practice learnt much very different for me from the norm would probably have gone narrower on the f's if I had more light ,but they are fast little guys so opted to keep shutter here with f6.3 . No hide they are proper bold or hungry? bless they weren't at days end;)

Processed in dpp4 thought about a crop to clear two bottom sticky up thangs and oofbranch rhs,didn't like the crop bird becomes too big in frame for me,oh i'm at 420mm 300f2.8is 1Div 1.4extiii this is FF. So I guess basically when I can I'd probably be inclined to crop those out

cheers for the previous thoughts help etc
_70F4804 by Stuart Philpott, on Flickr

stu
 
Definitely a lot better than the nuthatch Stu :)

To be picky it is a little soft still around the head/beak when viewed full size on flickr? I no experience of canon 300 + TC but my nikon equivalent was almost as good as without the TC, so I would have expected yours will be the same? The ISO obviously not ideal and may go some way to explain it? You will have to try a rare sunny day and see if the results are much different?
 
Hey Mick cheers, for the reply mate,I actually thought I was good here buddy,but also have huge respect for your eyes and judgment mate: you are seeing something that's for sure:). I'll have a good look later Mick and come back to you

,tryng to get me act together to go out,but am so shattered,mind only back in the house from graft a few mins

speak soon buddy thanks again for the valued thoughts,should be pretty much the same as the Nik version mate,there might be a question mark over the 2X but the 1.4 should be good,obviously i'm in the same boat other way round ,with no experience of Nikon gear,but the 300 is renowned for sharpness ,so maybe it's me. I always look in the mirror first Mick,i've got to be the weak link

take care

Stu
 
Stuart Philpott said:
Hey Mick cheers, for the reply mate,I actually thought I was good here buddy,but also have huge respect for your eyes and judgment mate: you are seeing something that's for sure:). I'll have a good look later Mick and come back to you

,tryng to get me act together to go out,but am so shattered,mind only back in the house from graft a few mins

speak soon buddy thanks again for the valued thoughts,should be pretty much the same as the Nik version mate,there might be a question mark over the 2X but the 1.4 should be good,obviously i'm in the same boat other way round ,with no experience of Nikon gear,but the 300 is renowned for sharpness ,so maybe it's me. I always look in the mirror first Mick,i've got to be the weak link

take care

Stu
Click to expand...


I think the high ISO is doing you no favours in the sharpness department but only if you a bit of a pixel peeper like me? It a fine shot as is perhaps a sprinkle of sharpness on it would do no harm. It much sharper than the nuthatch so you doing something right :)

I forget sometimes that I am used to 36mp which obviously allows a much more detailed image when zoomed in 100% If you look at yours as intended full screen there nothing wrong at all but would like to see one in better light if we get some soon to see if the ISO is indeed playing a part?
 
Buddy I know you are pulling at details here,but that is cool Mick:), it is exactly what i'm after. No one will ever hurt me with crit,I need to dig at details all over to be better mate Some good points made,I understand you completely now. Mick IQ in my pics has always haunted me well that and sharpness so I'm always taking a step back and being very critical of my stuff with this is mind I appreciate details in your reply.
lol
I'm deliberately pushing iso here buddy I shot no lower than 3200 all day,wanted to learn more on that front and of course it's effect on IQ. Your camera and mine are resolving fine detail very differently,your shooting with 20mill pixels more mate (leastways I think i'm a basket case now)..

Mick I don't know much about Nikon ,so wasn't aware of this ,but have noted the incredible detail in your images many times, I think i'm aware of these newer high density sensors and what they can resolve at high mag..

I'm being schooled to use the high iso mate,but beyond that we have to go out when we can, not when the light is wonderful,sadly. Simply I need to learn what is possible with my gear in horrible light

. Mick I think/feel getting the exposure pushed right might be part of this as that helps with noise at these higher iso,so detail is resovlved better???. I don't really feel that I can/should crop them much that also clobbers IQ.

I maybe can't show what a higher density sensor can but as you have said it's fine when viewed as I feel it should be essentailly full frame. Tis hard with little guys like this,not a lot of reach,the biggest thing i'm having drummed into me is how close we have to be interplayed with that my other love shutter, noise,lmao . Each and ever time I post something that I feel is on the way IQ wise I took it damn close. the other thing of course is one wants to often freeze motion (subject/s') and Hh camera shake (moi),so i'm shooting always with as high a shutter as poss. I don't feel my techs are there yet mate still very much exploring , Good fun though bro ha got another nutty for you,also, bless coal tits,man they are soooo small,hard little b^ggers everyone picks on them. I like coal tits

Good stuff Mick me old mate,I have much to learn. A question could the type of feather in a nuthatch and a blue tit be different, and that follow to how our camera sensors resolve their respective feather details .? We had dunnock nutty coal tit blue and great willow or marsh robin chaffinch blackbird all taken many times. The chaffinch drew me to that Q mate. they look sharper,but I did basically the same thing all day

rock 'n' roll my hares are here

cheers

Stu

mufftrix said:
I think the high ISO is doing you no favours in the sharpness department but only if you a bit of a pixel peeper like me? It a fine shot as is perhaps a sprinkle of sharpness on it would do no harm. It much sharper than the nuthatch so you doing something right :)

I forget sometimes that I am used to 36mp which obviously allows a much more detailed image when zoomed in 100% If you look at yours as intended full screen there nothing wrong at all but would like to see one in better light if we get some soon to see if the ISO is indeed playing a part?
Click to expand...
 
Nice one Stu, I cannot see the softness in thispost. I would remove OOF branch on RHS, I think it woudl improve signiicantly.

TFS
 
nc_killie said:
I would remove OOF branch on RHS, I think it woudl improve signiicantly.
Click to expand...

…something like this, you mean?

70F4804%20by%20Stuart%20Philpott.jpg
 
Good shot Stu - I have seen a big improvement in your shots during the last couple of months

Well done
 
nc_killie said:
Nice one Stu, I cannot see the softness in thispost. I would remove OOF branch on RHS, I think it woudl improve signiicantly.

TFS
Click to expand...

To all: sorry slow guys cheers for the kind words/
john I think Mick's referring to the pixel peaping details rather than softness persay.:) Hehe me I dunno mate:D, I just want them to be sharp buddy,ha, what ever that means. But while I can't process me own stuff properly ie apply selective stuff etc, it makes assessing things difficult for me. NR / smootthing the bkg and working selectively on the subject sharpness wise is going to add to what's viewed here as we can see from the edits.
I also fee,l like with crit, we all have opinions on sharp,i'm cool with having different opinions ,it's what I want. It gives me more to dig at. I'm happy enough bro got some ok pics from a good practice type session learnt much john had a ball with the birdz
So different so what we oft do much easier in many ways which I feel is reflected in IQ

Daniel yup just like that, only both sticky up thangs (little spike at the base) has to go too, if one was to go the cloning route thanks for the edit mate

Charles,what have you done differently to Daniel bar said spike, ha you read all of my waffle didn't you mate lmao.

and last but not least I hope Bill,thanks buddy,I dunno kiddo I think I'll post forwards steps and back for a goodly while,but little steps forwards is all I can realistically expect. But I love doing it Bill,so it matters not how fast improvement comes,until I mess the next cool chance up of course.

and most obviously any improvements have to be given due credit to the help of many like your good self. Whom have given me honest words to ponder and their time like here
cheers lads(y)

stu
 
Got rid of the white tree growth at the back of the left leg Stu, :sneaky: and the little green spike :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top