Eye of the cameraUse this board to post your photos and to tell us about the scene you set out to capture. Don't forget that the best place for *critique* in order see how your photography might be improved, technically, remains the Image Insight Photo critique board.
I never normally post this sort of shot, its not generally the kind of thing I bother with. However there have been a few recently and I was out for a walk today at a local country park. To be honest there wasn't much to photograph except the ducks, coots etc. This shot was essentially a grab shot and one of a sequence of 6 shots I ran off following the bird in flight. I knew I was too far away really but did it anyway.
The camera was set on iso 400 at 2000th sec f.6.7 and the lens was my 70-200mm f2.8L plus a 1.4x extender giving 280mm.
The first shot is the full frame, whilst the second is simply a tight crop from the original.
The image was processed in Adobe Lightroom, PS was not used. Part of the object of the exercise was to use the images to gain more experience with Lightroom. It really is a brilliant program, I even took some shots of a swan ;( and got the usual blown highlights, but Lightroom was able to recover them all with just 1 slider control.
Nice shot Stephen,
I know what you mean about be a little far away, however, I think in cases like this, where you can see where he has left the water, its nicer to get a sense of his surroundings.
Surprised you haven't done some processing with the cropped version Stephen. It shows your heart wasn't in the photo and yet it looks good with the noise removed and toned up a bit in curves.
Maybe you should diversify a bit and try some more wildlife shots.
JMO but...with the skills you have maybe you should extend your subject matter and take full advantage of them.
Surprised you haven't done some processing with the cropped version Stephen. It shows your heart wasn't in the photo and yet it looks good with the noise removed and toned up a bit in curves.
Maybe you should diversify a bit and try some more wildlife shots.
JMO but...with the skills you have maybe you should extend your subject matter and take full advantage of them.
Haha thanks Pops, I actually felt it didn't need much doing to it, infact I applied some noise reduction in Lightroom before posting the cropped version.
To be honest I'm having some issues with lenses at the moment. I've suddenly realised that my long lens is not long enough for wildlife photography. I have a 70-200mm and even with a 1.4x extender and the 1.3xcrop factor of my camera I'm only getting 364mm equiv in 35mm terms which is just over 7x magnification.
Now I'm off to Alaska in the middle of May and I'm paranoid that I haven't enough reach for the potential shots I'll be taking. I reckon a 400mm would about do it, and there is a Canon 100-400mm L series lens, but I'm thinking I can't justify it. So I've a bit of a dilemma. The latest solution is to buy a S/H one on Ebay then sell it when I come back, but we are talking £800 ish
Surprised you haven't done some processing with the cropped version Stephen. It shows your heart wasn't in the photo and yet it looks good with the noise removed and toned up a bit in curves.
Maybe you should diversify a bit and try some more wildlife shots.
JMO but...with the skills you have maybe you should extend your subject matter and take full advantage of them.
Well said. My sentiments exactly ......... ROFLMAO_PMP
Haha thanks Pops, I actually felt it didn't need much doing to it, infact I applied some noise reduction in Lightroom before posting the cropped version.
To be honest I'm having some issues with lenses at the moment. I've suddenly realised that my long lens is not long enough for wildlife photography. I have a 70-200mm and even with a 1.4x extender and the 1.3xcrop factor of my camera I'm only getting 364mm equiv in 35mm terms which is just over 7x magnification.
Now I'm off to Alaska in the middle of May and I'm paranoid that I haven't enough reach for the potential shots I'll be taking. I reckon a 400mm would about do it, and there is a Canon 100-400mm L series lens, but I'm thinking I can't justify it. So I've a bit of a dilemma. The latest solution is to buy a S/H one on Ebay then sell it when I come back, but we are talking £800 ish
Anyone got one I can borrow for a couple of weeks
Can you hire them? Seems very expensive to me. I can't get my head round these prices.
I like the cropped version, where the duck has a space to fly into. I just feel it's a bit on the dark side.
I'd have let you borrow my 170-500mm if you'd had a decent camera.
Seriously though ........... 364mm isn't too bad if you have nowt else. Can't you hire a lens? If not - I reckon that's a good idea about buying one from ebay then reselling when you get back.
Another possibility might be to try out a 'Bigma' - ie the Sigma 50-500. A lot of peeps get good shots from them and it might be a cheaper, more easily available option.
I don't envy you carrying big bazooka lenses all that way though!
Haha thanks Pops, I actually felt it didn't need much doing to it, infact I applied some noise reduction in Lightroom before posting the cropped version.
To be honest I'm having some issues with lenses at the moment. I've suddenly realised that my long lens is not long enough for wildlife photography. I have a 70-200mm and even with a 1.4x extender and the 1.3xcrop factor of my camera I'm only getting 364mm equiv in 35mm terms which is just over 7x magnification.
Now I'm off to Alaska in the middle of May and I'm paranoid that I haven't enough reach for the potential shots I'll be taking. I reckon a 400mm would about do it, and there is a Canon 100-400mm L series lens, but I'm thinking I can't justify it. So I've a bit of a dilemma. The latest solution is to buy a S/H one on Ebay then sell it when I come back, but we are talking £800 ish
Anyone got one I can borrow for a couple of weeks
For another couple of hundred you can grab yaself a brand spanking new one with guarantee etc. The ones on Ebay all seem to be available from Eastern Countries which means you could get lumbered with import duty on top of everything else.
These 100-400mm lenses are £23.50 a day to hire. With a minimum of 15 days rental needed, that would be £352.50 It doesn't seem very cost effective when its not for a job where it can be offset with the fee charged. I can't help feeling that a S/H one that could be resold, probably at a similar price might be the logical solution. Unless anyone has a better idea
These 100-400mm lenses are £23.50 a day to hire. With a minimum of 15 days rental needed, that would be £352.50 It doesn't seem very cost effective when its not for a job where it can be offset with the fee charged. I can't help feeling that a S/H one that could be resold, probably at a similar price might be the logical solution. Unless anyone has a better idea
Well your set on the 100-400 so it's now a question how much.
Buying a 2nd hand and reselling after the trip seems the cheapest wayto go. You will lose something on the transaction but not as much as the hire cost.
Who knows....when you get back you may decide to keep it
Well your set on the 100-400 so it's now a question how much.
Buying a 2nd hand and reselling after the trip seems the cheapest wayto go. You will lose something on the transaction but not as much as the hire cost.
Who knows....when you get back you may decide to keep it
Spot on. I agree with Pops on all points.
It's a special trip, something you've been dreaming of and planning for ages so I say go all out to try to get the lens if you can possibly manage it. The sooner you get one, the more time you'll have to try it out.
Before you get into spending hundreds of pounds for lenses, it would be a good idea to rent one and experiment for a few days, to see if you are really interested into this type of photography.
On the other hand a long zoom lens it can never be waisted as it can be proved very useful and not only for wild life photography.
A 3rd solution would be, instead of buying a long lens, to get one of those superzoom SLR type cameras, that now cost half of the 100-400mm lens you are thinking of buying and have the camera as a complement to your DSLR, but more handy to carry for everyday usage and believe me, those cameras are not to be underestimated of their capabilities.
The choice is yours, as all depends on what you have in mind to do and how.
I'd have let you borrow my 170-500mm if you'd had a decent camera.
Seriously though ........... 364mm isn't too bad if you have nowt else. Can't you hire a lens? If not - I reckon that's a good idea about buying one from ebay then reselling when you get back.
Another possibility might be to try out a 'Bigma' - ie the Sigma 50-500. A lot of peeps get good shots from them and it might be a cheaper, more easily available option.
I don't envy you carrying big bazooka lenses all that way though!
Pol
How about another bazooka now under development by Sigma. 200-500mm/F2.8 and a tele-converter x2 is attaced. Then it is 400-1000mm/F5.6 which means AF is possible even with the tele converter. With the crop ratio of x1.3, it can cover up to 1300mm.
A real issue in this case would be if Stephen can postpone the envious trip to Alaska, though. - until unkown days.
A nice feature of EOS body is that it accepts most lenses of various manufacturers through an adapter, if you can forget about AF. So a Pentax old MF(manual focus) tele lens looks to me a choice worth considering. (or other brands - OM 600mm was quite cheap, when I saw it last week in a S/H shop) I myself got an adapter for "Pentax 645 lenses and EOS body" last month. - not used it yet though.
yoshi
p.s. The camera attached with the lens is SD14 - so you can guess how big the lens is - a nice walk-about lens in Alaska
p.s. The camera attached with the lens is SD14 - so you can guess how big the lens is - a nice walk-about lens in Alaska
Yes, and no doubt will cost as much as the trip
Seriously, thanks for all the thoughts everyone, its certainly offered some alternatives to the Canon. To be honest I'm a little uneasy about the 100-400 Canon as the zoom action is a push pull type. As a result there can be a lot of air displacement within the lens and consequently there is a potential dust issue.
The Sigma option, though not the 50-500, is certainly an option and there is a rather nice 80-400 with stabilisation, though it doesn't use USM and is slower than my 70-200. Also I'm not sure if its compatable with my Canon 1.4x extender, though it is with the Sigma version. Not sure if its too much of a compromise compared with the Canon
I've actually been looking at the superzoom digicam idea. They are certainly quite versatile and a good walkabout camera. There are 3 that look attractive the New Olympus SP 550UZ, the Panasonic FZ50, and the Canon S3. I worry though that its too much of a compromise, and although great in bright sunny conditions, I don't think any perform that well in low light or high ISO conditions. The 12x zoom in the Panny and Canon are really no advantage over a 400mm lens formy camera, esp as I have a 1.3x crop factor plus a 1.4x extender. The Oly has a fantastic 18x optical zoom, though DPReview were not too impressed with the optical quality.
So I'm still undecided. The prospect of a Photo safari type excursion, plus the prospect of seeing Whales, Bears, and other wildlife, make me want to take full advantage and at present I feel I'm under resourced so to speak.
I've actually been looking at the superzoom digicam idea. They are certainly quite versatile and a good walkabout camera. There are 3 that look attractive the New Olympus SP 550UZ, the Panasonic FZ50, and the Canon S3. I worry though that its too much of a compromise, and although great in bright sunny conditions, I don't think any perform that well in low light or high ISO conditions. The 12x zoom in the Panny and Canon are really no advantage over a 400mm lens formy camera, esp as I have a 1.3x crop factor plus a 1.4x extender. The Oly has a fantastic 18x optical zoom, though DPReview were not too impressed with the optical quality.
So I'm still undecided. The prospect of a Photo safari type excursion, plus the prospect of seeing Whales, Bears, and other wildlife, make me want to take full advantage and at present I feel I'm under resourced so to speak.
Stephen,
I know Pannys extremely well. I read reviews everyday and I'm about to start writting my own. If you finally decide to go for a compact superzoom go for a Panny. Though, because I like to be fair and not biased, I must tell you that I personally wouldn't touch the FZ50. I would very much touch as I currently do the FZ30.
Pannys also have the rings for manual zoom and manual focus, plus RAW and also the ability to choose between 4:3, 3:2, 16:9 image ratios. I can send you the FZ30s manual to read if you are interested plus sample photos that you would like to see.
The lenses on both the FZ30 and FZ50, are not telescopic. They are fixed and the camera powers up instantly. Also the fixed lens will keep much better the dust away from the sensor and you will not have to worry for such things or for moving mechanisms.
And finally, the 12X stabilized LEICA lens is a plus over the 18X retractable Oly lens and you also need to believe me on that.
On my first day out with the FZ30 I took around 210-220 shots on a full battery charge at the end of the day I was left at 2/3 charged!
Also there are some German batteries at 1/3 of the price of the originals that run on 850MAh power than the 710MAh originals (same voltage for both though) that give extra power to the camera.
Do not listen these "Highly Recommended" or just "Recommended" things on the camera reviews. You never know their motivations.
The Oly SP 550-UZ has some image quality issues and that is intense with the RAW files it takes. I have really no brand loyalty and I must say that the S3IS is good, but doesn't have the quality of the LEICA lens and the flexibility of a Panny, you have to believe me on that, or buy it first and then believe me.
Anyway, with both my FZ5 and the FZ30 now that I got, I'm really satisfied.
The FZ30 was a year and a half older model and I got it new 400 Euros (around 280 BP). I got it in the titanium color which is the original color as the black version is a titanium version painted and the finish is not so good as in the titanium (or champagne version).
Anyway,
If you want further assistance on Pannys, ask me anytime as I know them really very well.
and I was out for a walk today at a local country park. To be honest there wasn't much to photograph except the ducks, coots etc. This shot was essentially a grab shot and one of a sequence of 6 shots I ran off following the bird in flight. I knew I was too far away really but did it anyway.
- not used it yet though.
Linear Mode
