Robin
- Thread starter Fangman
- Start date
S
Sean_Mcr
Guest
Not very sharp i'm afraid, not that i think sharpness is the be all and end all. But for bird shots i think it's almost a must. I guess it's down to hand movement at such a long focal length, rather then a focus issue.
Or it could be that you've cropped it a fair bit.
Or it could be that you've cropped it a fair bit.
S
Sean_Mcr
Guest
Ahh its the crop, its too drastic.
S
Sean_Mcr
Guest
Fangman said:
Not too great a distance with the 300mm, what mm did you shoot it at?
S
Sean_Mcr
Guest
I actually don't think it's the shutter speed in this case, though F/9 is too much when you can only get 1/40 as a result. The hole shot is soft for F9, and that's because of the deep crop. I'd like to see the uncropped shot
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Noble attempt there Fangman. Twitchy little beggars aren't they. 
I get a whole load of 'not quite' shots like that for every sharp one I get. Between his twitching about and your own mad lunges at the shutter button there's plenty of potential for blurring and camera shake.
Good attempt - I think his head was the bit that was moving in this shot which happens a lot and 1/40 is pushing it a bit with a 300mm lens.
I get a whole load of 'not quite' shots like that for every sharp one I get. Between his twitching about and your own mad lunges at the shutter button there's plenty of potential for blurring and camera shake. Good attempt - I think his head was the bit that was moving in this shot which happens a lot and 1/40 is pushing it a bit with a 300mm lens.
S
Sean_Mcr
Guest
Ahh that's pretty much case solved there. There's nobody that could crop that much and leave a sharp image. I would have opened up the aperture, but other then that you have a much better image in the original
OP
- Messages
- 2,839
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Focusing on manual - perhaps I should let the lens get on with it. I prefocused on the mid point where it perched and then fired the remote "portrait style" standing away from the camera. It was exceedingly dull and looked as if it was going to drop sommat nasty - but so far escaped. Will bang up ISO tomorrow and try again. Much more fun than clearing out the garage!
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Move your feeder away from that pot (to the right) so you get a nice oof background which always looks better with bird shots. Since you'll be doing big crops, you don't want to up the ISO any more than you have to (noise) so work at full aperture and see how you go on. The only safe way to focus is on the eye or at least the beak. Have fun. 
- Messages
- 595
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
But most bird photography has to be cropped that much! See full size original and 100% crop of my shotSean_Mcr said:
Fangman, the focus seems to be on the front LHS of the feeder rather than the 'eye' of the bird. As CT says, you should try using the lens wide open and get the focus right by selecting a single zone and locking in on the eye/beak area. May be easier to practice off the tripod if you can get the shutter speed up sufficiently.
S
Sean_Mcr
Guest
I can't agree that level of cropping makes for a good image, the least you could hope for is to web share. Commercial wildlife photographers could not make a living making prints out of whats left from images that severely cropped.
Hours upon hours spent in the wind cold and rain, in the birds natural habit are what make for amazing shots, not excessive cropping.
Hours upon hours spent in the wind cold and rain, in the birds natural habit are what make for amazing shots, not excessive cropping.
OP
- Messages
- 2,839
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Followed CT's advice and moved feeder and also went back to the Sigma 18-200. Images seem much clearer and not as "milky" as with the 70-300 Sigma macro. Perhaps the difference is that this was designed for 35mm.
The sparrows are a bit sharper even with the shorted focal length
As for the feeder - the heavies took over!
The sparrows are a bit sharper even with the shorted focal length
As for the feeder - the heavies took over!
S
Sean_Mcr
Guest
I'm sorry Fang if i seemed a bit full on there, that wasn't my intention i'm sorry pal if that's how it came across
I dropped quick line with Jake Hegnauer http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/, who's a wildlife photographer and from another photo forum i use
his advice was, and i quote
Essentially I'd say that crops this extreme are of little use for anything other than web sized shots as they don't have enough resolution for printing etc.
The goal is of course to get as much detail as possible,. which means to fill the frame as much as possible.
That said,. I do have some older images that I did exactly that. When you can't get closer,. you can crop.
As one gets closer (and better and more experienced) you will tend to stop taking those shots though,.. knowing in advance that the results will be poor.
I'd say I do crop most of my images,. but the crop should be for composition.. you want the image taken to really fill the frame as much as possible. My "rule of thumb" would be good results need the subject to fill bare minimum 1/4 of the frame.
The example you have here is not even remotely close.
He does have some very impressive gear i have to say, and has been at it a while. I just thought the advice might come in handy
I dropped quick line with Jake Hegnauer http://cyberdynesystemsimaging.fotopic.net/, who's a wildlife photographer and from another photo forum i use
his advice was, and i quote
Essentially I'd say that crops this extreme are of little use for anything other than web sized shots as they don't have enough resolution for printing etc.
The goal is of course to get as much detail as possible,. which means to fill the frame as much as possible.
That said,. I do have some older images that I did exactly that. When you can't get closer,. you can crop.
As one gets closer (and better and more experienced) you will tend to stop taking those shots though,.. knowing in advance that the results will be poor.
I'd say I do crop most of my images,. but the crop should be for composition.. you want the image taken to really fill the frame as much as possible. My "rule of thumb" would be good results need the subject to fill bare minimum 1/4 of the frame.
The example you have here is not even remotely close.
He does have some very impressive gear i have to say, and has been at it a while. I just thought the advice might come in handy
OP
- Messages
- 2,839
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Hi Sean_Mcr.
Many thanks - I learn from comments on everyone's posts
That what I am here for. I have been bumbling along for over fifty years with a camera - from 1/4 plate through roll film and 35mm and now having the time to enjoy rather than record. I wanted to produce a quick series of instant postcards of the birds in my garden for a 92yr old uncle, so I knew I was doing the wrong things and far too cold to sit out for hours to get closer.
I was surprised however in the difference between the two lenses. I think I will keep the macro just for that and buy some camaflage netting to get closed with the 18-200.
Thanks for your time and effort - every day you learn something, but unfortunately there gets a time when you forget twice as much :hissyfit:
Many thanks - I learn from comments on everyone's posts
That what I am here for. I have been bumbling along for over fifty years with a camera - from 1/4 plate through roll film and 35mm and now having the time to enjoy rather than record. I wanted to produce a quick series of instant postcards of the birds in my garden for a 92yr old uncle, so I knew I was doing the wrong things and far too cold to sit out for hours to get closer.
I was surprised however in the difference between the two lenses. I think I will keep the macro just for that and buy some camaflage netting to get closed with the 18-200.
Thanks for your time and effort - every day you learn something, but unfortunately there gets a time when you forget twice as much :hissyfit: