A few Boreal,Black- capped and Redpolls from the Bog

[Jim Almquist]

It was a snowy day in the bog but that never stops our feathered friends from coming around. If you can help make me a better photographer please C & C. I am trying to get sharper shots from my 100-400 so today was shot at F8 because it is suppose to be around its sharpest aperture.

A few Boreals to start.

Now a few Black-capped

A few Redpolls

[Paul Izyk - toi]

Once again ....... Great pic's..WTG.. I like the last pic the best..

[Steve Foss]

Jim, I think the perch, pose and waterfall-like background make that final shot the best of them all. Very nice work.

[Dbl]

3,4 and the last shot are nice shots!

[MARINERMAGNUM]

All nice shots!

As for C&C, I think you are doing everything right with the camera/lens-which is by far the most important aspect. Post processing is an art form unto itself. I've seen people transform a so-so image into something spectacular by just using software! In no way did it faithfully represent what they actually saw with their eyes,but some folks like that.

My opinion is this: if your eyes see a spectacular image,and you capture it as your eyes saw it,it won't need much work-maybe a little sharpening or crop,but it will remain faithful to what you created:a photograph..-not an artistic rendition of what you saw.

All equipment has limitations-the human eye works much better. I think this is why I've been shooting alot of HDR's lately. An HDR represents the dynamic range that your eyes see-a camera cannot see it with one exposure.

Ugh! enough of this rant!

Jim,I did dozens of tests with my 100-400L and could never see a difference in sharpness wide open or stopped down. Without upping your ISO,F8 will give you a slower shutter speed which may induce motion blur negating any sharpness advantage of stopping down.

There's always a tradeoff.

[Steve Foss]

Jim, while my experience in relative sharpness wide open vs stopping down on the 100-400 copies I've shot differs from MMs, the difference in sharpness I've seen is not crucial, and I'll definitely second his point that stopping down isn't always the right thing to do because of that slower shutter speed inducing motion blur. While I typically shot the 100-400 at f8 to get max sharpness out of the lens, I had no hesitation to bump iso and open the aperture to the max to get enough shutter speed to do the job in bad light.

In all these images except the first one, sharpness looks good to me.

My further opinion is that photography is an art, and one should express his or her art as his or her inspiration directs. There are no rights or wrongs in the world of art, merely interpretation. That's just my, uh, interpretation, and isn't worth anything more than a passing thought.

[Jim Almquist]

Quote:

Without upping your ISO,F8 will give you a slower shutter speed which may induce motion blur negating any sharpness advantage of stopping down.

This is exactly what I found today-more bad shots because of blur but I did feel that on some of the shots that I did get had better detail. This is the part that I don't get is the detail better because of shooting at F8 or shooting a lower ISO or was I just more steady even though all shots were shot off a tripod or is the reason I have soft shots is because my lens is soft. When I see other peoples shots and the detail is awesome I would like to think that my lens is capable of producing those type of shots but what do I do next ?

[Jim Almquist]

Sorry Steve I type so slow I can't respond fast enough. Thanks for the info.

[Steve Foss]

Jim, there are so many factors that go into sharp images that all we could do is shoot with a scattergun and hope to hit the target at this point. We just don't have enough info to diagnose possible sharpness deficiencies. I can tell you that based on the images you've posted, your copy of the lens appears sharp, so I don't think that's an issue.

Can you post an image you feel is soft in this thread, as well as any tripod info? Also, you should be turning the IS off on the 100-400 when shooting off a tripod. It doesn't have auto-detect for tripods like many of the other IS lenses, and sometimes can whack out with IS left on using a tripod.

I pulled exif data on the first image, which appears soft to me, and see you were at f8 and 1/100 sec of shutter speed. Even from a tripod, when birds move quickly that often is not enough shutter speed to freeze action, and if you punched the shutter button instead of depressing it gently, that also introduces camera shake. Shake from pushing the shutter can be reduced by triggering a burst long enough to fill the buffer of your 30D (if shooting RAW) or at least six to 10 images if shooting jpeg. That's because camera shake is reduced during the middle of a burst because the camera settles minutely after you trigger the burst and before you let your finger off the shutter.

Also, there are limits to what can be accomplished in an online forum. If we can figure a time to meet again at Ribs2 and I can pay attention to your technique and settings, I'll be able to pinpoint these issues with a precision not possible in cyberspace.

[Jim Almquist]

Steve the first image at the top is missing the sharp detail that I am looking for around the head area so is it because I focused on the wrong spot ? Here is the exif

# Exposure Time (1 / Shutter Speed) = 1/100 second = 0.01 second

# Lens F-Number/F-Stop = 8/1 = F8

# Exposure Program = aperture priority (3)

# ISO Speed Ratings = 400

[MARINERMAGNUM]

Quote:

My further opinion is that photography is an art, and one should express his or her art as his or her inspiration directs.

You're right. I always assume there is a hard line between what I consider an "artsy" photo [like something you'd see in a New York city loft] and a photo documenting wildlife.

One could let the artist's unrestrained imagination run wild with vibrant colors and contrast to forge the vision set in motion by the bird itself.....however,I would never convince you guys that the Chickadee was Lavender with blue feet and a pink cap.

You made a good point Steve-I'll take it.

[Steve Foss]

Jim, you'll see I added a bunch of perspective to my last post while you were typing yours.

I think head motion was the culprit in the first image. The legs/moss appear sharp, and the head appears to be either within the prime focus plane or so close to it that it should still be sharp, so I think 1/100 was just too slow in this case to capture the moment. Opening up to f5.6 and 1/200 may have been enough to fix things. However, if I'm wrong in what I'm interpreting, the culprit likely is that you focused on the wings and the bird was angled away strongly enough that even the partial head turn wasn't enough to bring the bird's face back into the focal plane. Depending on your distance to the subject, depth of focus with that lens could be as shallow as half an inch or so.

It's rare that, even from a rock solid tripod, a person can get really sharp images at 400mm of quick birds at close range at 1/100. Using burst mode to the utmost can help, because in a long burst, odds are that some images will capture the bird when it's pausing and will be sharper than those capturing minute fast movements, but the flipside of a long burst is that the bird can move enough to exit the focal plane.

Six of one, half dozen of the other, buddy.

[Steve Foss]

Quote:

My further opinion is that photography is an art, and one should express his or her art as his or her inspiration directs.

You're right. I always assume there is a hard line between what I consider an "artsy" photo [like something you'd see in a New York city loft] and a photo documenting wildlife.

One could let the artist's unrestrained imagination run wild with vibrant colors and contrast to forge the vision set in motion by the bird itself.....however,I would never convince you guys that the Chickadee was Lavender with blue feet and a pink cap.

You made a good point Steve-I'll take it.

MM, I'm far more in your camp than not when it comes to realism vs impressionism in wildlife photography, as personal preference goes.

[Jim Almquist]

Thank a lot Steve you have given me some things to try and or at least think about. I have always been a single shot type of shooter and I suppose that comes from shooting film so I will have to give burst mode a try and be a little more attentive to what the fingers are doing before I pull the trigger. I really love my 100-400 and I don't want to get it in my head that My shots are soft because of the lens when I know darn well I am the cause of most of my issues.

[MN Shutterbug]

Jim, you have come a long way since you first started posting. The sharpness has really improved. You are certainly doing something right. Also, you can't expect all your photos to be tack sharp. Everyone has throwaways at the end of the day, if they did plenty of shooting. Keep up the good work.

[finnbay]

Jim,

For whatever reason, I found the 100-400 to have the most difficult learning curve of all the lenses I've shot. I was very frustrated for several weeks after I'd gotten it because I couldn't get the same results from my shots that I'd seen with other photographers using the same lens. Once I got the hang of it, my shots really improved - althought all it takes is some slippage on my technique and it goes right back to the "soft" images again. "How do you get to Carnegie Hall?" Hang in there buddy and keep pulling the trigger, your shots are good and WILL get better!

[MARINERMAGNUM]

Ken speaks the truth for sure.

It's just like shooting trap. After you've done it long enough,it's just 2nd nature to hit it every time-because you'll do it right everytime. And more often than not,the guys out shooting most often-whether guns or cameras- are usually the best shooters. And it looks like you guys have been shooting alot!

The 100-400 will really shine if you use it well.

They don't paint 'em white for nothing!

[Steve Foss]

I have always been a single shot type of shooter

That says a lot right there. It's very, very difficult to time a moment down to a microsecond and trip the shutter on fast-moving birds without introducing camera shake, tripod or not.

High-speed burst mode is your friend, Jim. Give it a full day's try, depressing the shutter for at least six shots in a burst each time and concentrating on technique.

Then check them out in your browser. It's not just a sharpness issue. When I shot action sports, which is the ultimate in fast-moving subjects and fast-developing situations, I could trigger a long burst, and while all or almost all the image were sharp, in a burst of, say, 15 images, there were always one or two that were head and shoulders above the rest because of the rapidly changing positions/poses of the athletes. Those things move so fast there's no way I could have seen the "perfect" moment developing and captured it with a single image.

For me, birds aren't any different in that way.

[Jim Almquist]

Thank again to everybody for the help. Even the wife has commented on how things are improving. If it wasn't for everybody's shots I never would have never even considered shooting wildlife but seeing all the great shots on here and because it dose get you out with nature has pushed me towards the birds and critters. When I first started watching it was stfcatfish,Buzzsaw and Swimmer plus one other guy and I was always amazed at there pictures and thought that this was something that I would really love to try and my only regret was why did I wait so long.

P.S. Special Thank to Jonny and Jay for getting me to be a bog rat

[buzzsaw]

I recognize those shots! Good job Jim, I'll see you up there again sooner than later.

[Steve Foss]

my only regret was why did I wait so long.

Water under the bridge, friend, with decades of fun still ahead.

[buzzsaw]

The one thing Steve and I didn't mention... this is an illness! Welcome aboard!

[Jim Almquist]

The one thing Steve and I didn't mention... this is an illness! Welcome aboard!

Here I am at work and the sun is shining and where do you think that I would rather be

[buzzsaw]

DITTO brotha! DITTO!

[Steve Foss]

Hmmm, I'm about to head out to do some photography. Ha ha! Well, for me that's going to work, not play.