Your usual disgustingly magnificent array of pics, Conrad .
The image of the reddish egret is hilarious!
And the Steller's jay... I always thought they stored the whole nut, but broke through the outer shell to eat the actual seed. I guess not always.
Charlie
You do fine work either way.
I am a big fan of the Reddish shots, love that bird. Ibis is incredible, that is one sweet exposure! I think the WB is a bit off in #1......browns look off to me??
Great shots on great BG's with just a 'bare' 500 now you can go back to 700
Karl Witt wrote:
Conrad.............tell Tim to shoot @ 500
You do fine work either way.
I am a big fan of the Reddish shots, love that bird. Ibis is incredible, that is one sweet exposure! I think the WB is a bit off in #1......browns look off to me??
Great shots on great BG's with just a 'bare' 500 now you can go back to 700
Karl
Sure thing, I did for well over a year buddy and the results were better than at 700 to the critical eye. I guess your detailed crits for dof don't matter for birds as much as for florals Or is it that details are lost, dof is halved and barrel distortion is complimentary for avian subjects?
, why is it that you are a slow learner my dear friend? It is not all about FL, that's why you need to buy the 800 like Tim did. Some good one in here brother well done. No sunshine down here, freaking rain canceled our anzo trip this weekend DAMN IT!!!
I agree with Tim. There is a point at which the magnification of longer focal length becomes less than the detail rendered with shorter shooting distance. This is why, for example, I like flora better at 80-135mm than at 300 or more. The shots are more challenging because the framing becomes much more difficult - but you sure nailed all the angles here.
Tim Kuhn wrote:
Sure thing, I did for well over a year buddy and the results were better than at 700 to the critical eye. I guess your detailed crits for dof don't matter for birds as much as for florals Or is it that details are lost, dof is halved and barrel distortion is complimentary for avian subjects?
Tim
I kinda look at all shots as more of an overall impression, details can make a shot but they can't always 'make a shot a better shot' if that makes sense. I respect details when they flourish as a benefit but I'll take ambiance as high mark too I give a different eye to different people for different reasons as an understanding of their goals and likes
I hope you did not misconstrue the intent of my comments buddy
Karl
.
Or is it that details are lost, dof is halved and barrel distortion is complimentary for avian subjects?