Acceptable results ?? HELP (16)

Moderated by: guardian

Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell
FM Forum Rules
Rules: One new topic per day

FM Forums | Nature & Wildlife | Join Image Upload
end

anthony whitmo
Online
Image Upload: On

p.1 #1 · Acceptable results ?? HELP (16)

I have been away for awhile and haven't been posting much due to
a small vacation and moving. I just haven't had much time lately to
do what I enjoy doing >> Photographing Wildlife <<

I was extremely excited that I was going out Saturday to do some photography.
Found lots of wildlife but unable to get very close to anything. Just
seemed like everything was skitish or to far away.

Have you ever went out > Taken photos thinking you had some really good
captures < Only to get home and scratch your head trying to figure out
what went wrong......... hmmmm ISO 800 or less >> Shutter speed 1000 or
faster >> Stopped down one for added benefits >> hmmmmm but nothing looks
right............

OK > maybe it was the light?? Started at 3:30 PM sun low and good light
for a fast shutter speed. But it was very hazy. HAZY HAZY.. So the light
was filtered through haze and put off kind of a redish/grey glow to it.

All of the photos look flat to me with no brilliance or sharpness to them.

So I'm looking for your input on these photos >>

Would you find these acceptable?
Have you had similar experiences with haze and light?
Am I just being over critical?

Camera = Mark III (Got the call and going for "The Fix" Monday)
Lens - 500 IS
Ext - 1.4x
AV - f/5.6
TV = 1000 +

1)

10)

11)

12)

13)

14)

15)

16)

Jan 20, 2008 at 12:48 PM

phili1
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #2 · Acceptable results ?? HELP (16)

Anthony, there is nothing wrong with your shots, Exposure ,Lighting and composition is first class. The only thing I( would change is your F stop. F 5.6 is to shallow for widlife. With the markIII you have better noise reduction at high iso's, so I would jump my ISO and use F8. The other change and only in some cases is your cropping. Example the Egret, let him fly into more space.

I hope your enjoying the new Mark III.

Jan 20, 2008 at 01:07 PM

Dave In La
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #3 · Acceptable results ?? HELP (16)

ditto above.....and the light in these is what most of us wish for.
The tonal quality of especially 1 and 3 is wonderful.

You have seen the light Anthony, these are quite nice

Jan 20, 2008 at 01:28 PM

Frank Kearney
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #4 · Acceptable results ?? HELP (16)

The tone is exceptional on these, Anthony, and #3 in particular. from my own experience with the same setup, I believe if you had stopped down a little they might have had more pop. I also use a flash on everything, with a better beamer extender, and raised above the lens to prevent eye glare, and that seems to bring out the highlights you are looking for.

Jan 20, 2008 at 03:57 PM

cbright
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #5 · Acceptable results ?? HELP (16)

These look fine, Anthony. A couple might be a little soft, but that adds to there beauty and feel. Tack sharp isn't always better, composition, subject matter, and action all count and you've definately accomplished this. Got my MKIII back, and it is working much better, good luck.

Jan 20, 2008 at 04:31 PM

Laura Hughes
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #6 · Acceptable results ?? HELP (16)

Nothing wrong with these shots, to compensate for the haze (and "flatness") you could bump contrast a tad. Love the second shot with those birds in tandem flight positions. Nice work on this series.

Jan 20, 2008 at 06:48 PM

Doug Bentlage
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #7 · Acceptable results ?? HELP (16)

Hi Anthony, I think overall you've got some wonderful shots in this series. The poses, action and detail are all great. I agree that a couple could use a little 'pop'. I took the liberty of reworking #3 a little bit, basically just bringing the colors to be more in line with #2, and reflect the late afternoon sun. If this is not ok with you, please let me know and I'll remove it.

Doug

Jan 20, 2008 at 10:35 PM

anthony whitmo
Online
Image Upload: On

p.1 #8 · Acceptable results ?? HELP (16)

Phili1,

Anthony, there is nothing wrong with your shots, Exposure ,Lighting and composition is first class. The only thing I( would change is your F stop. F 5.6 is to shallow for widlife. With the markIII you have better noise reduction at high iso's, so I would jump my ISO and use F8. The other change and only in some cases is your cropping. Example the Egret, let him fly into more space.

I think you may have nailed in on the F/stop. I checked the DOF calculator. Estimating my distance with 700mm fl and f/5.6 I have a depth of less than ONE FOOT.

Given the length of the Canadian Geese in flight > Turning the other way > I had to focus on the body to keep my focal point/AIServo tracking. The neck alone is longer than 12".

I would have to say that explains the lack of sharpness I was seeing in some of the shots. Looks like the feet and body are in good focus but lacking good eye detail.

Thanks for the critical eye!!! Wish I would have thought of that

But if you look at 7,9,10,11,13 ( I don't know what type of duck this is ) they look flat to me >> I'm guessing this is either Light or the type of duck and it's feathers just don't leave much for a lot of detail?? Any thoughts?

thanks for your comments

Jan 21, 2008 at 03:04 AM

anthony whitmo
Online
Image Upload: On

p.1 #9 · Acceptable results ?? HELP (16)

Dave in LA,

Nice to hear from you Sir McSparrow Master

ditto above.....and the light in these is what most of us wish for.
You have seen the light Anthony, these are quite nice

Yes my Brutha from a Different Mutha

I have seen the light.
I guess they shots are missing that critical eye detail that you get in all of
your Crop Shots and your McSparrow shots Dave........ I need to find the
light that you have found

Just couldn't find it this day....... But I was lookin fer it

Jan 21, 2008 at 03:11 AM

anthony whitmo
Online
Image Upload: On

p.1 #10 · Acceptable results ?? HELP (16)

Frank,

The tone is exceptional on these, Anthony, and #3 in particular. from my own experience with the same setup, I believe if you had stopped down a little they might have had more pop. I also use a flash on everything, with a better beamer extender, and raised above the lens to prevent eye glare, and that seems to bring out the highlights you are looking for.

Thanks Frank and after looking at the DOF Calculator I think that may have been the
problem on the Canadian shots.

If you get a chance send me an email or pm explaining your Flash technique. I purchased a 580ex vs I. Have tried it a few times with very little to no success. I've never used flash before so I'm learning from scratch... Manual mode?? For fill flash -1? That's what I've tried and really have not liked the results.

thanks for your comments and glad you liked #3.

Jan 21, 2008 at 03:15 AM


FM Forums \| Nature & Wildlife \| Join Image Upload end