Note: I decided to try something a little different this trip. I have the 42mm drop in circular polarizer and I used it on every image I shot. Of course that polarizer needs to be adjusted to the light and scene on a image by image basis which when you are shooting BIF is not even remotely possible (especially with a protective cover on the 600mm in place). I was interested to see if it made any difference on the final images. Couple observations... on the Scaup... typically getting the iridescent green/purple to show up has been a challenge. Filter seemed to assist on that. Filtering out glare... an obvious advantage and it seemed to help on that. Sharpness from contrast... at the correct angle it seemed to make the eyes "pop" a little more. Probably some other things I am missing. Would I do it again... sure.
Beautiful water level shots! I will try to go there on Thursday afternoon. The weather forecast indicates it will be a fairly calm day. Hope I will find the snowie that many folks saw near Oakley.
Douglas L wrote:
Beautiful water level shots! I will try to go there on Thursday afternoon. The weather forecast indicates it will be a fairly calm day. Hope I will find the snowie that many folks saw near Oakley.
Thanks Douglas. It was windy, "choppy" and cold for the most part on Saturday. Not ideal for those perfectly still water shots but I managed OK. I drove around looking for the snowie but no luck at all. Apparently it was around because next day there were a lot of posts to it's presence. I added a note above. Everything here was shot with the polarizer in really just as an experiment but it worked out. There is one Redhead around just as there was last year and the year before... etc. Most people showing up wanted an image of him. I next want to head down in the midst of a snow event. I think those images could really be special though not crazy about driving down there in bad road conditions. Maybe stay at the Fairfield in Easton to mitigate all the driving
Note: I decided to try something a little different this trip. I have the 42mm drop in circular polarizer and I used it on every image I shot. Of course that polarizer needs to be adjusted to the light and scene on a image by image basis which when you are shooting BIF is not even remotely possible (especially with a protective cover on the 600mm in place). I was interested to see if it made any difference on the final images. Couple observations... on the Scaup... typically getting the iridescent green/purple to show up has been a challenge. Filter seemed to assist on that. Filtering out glare... an obvious advantage and it seemed to help on that. Sharpness from contrast... at the correct angle it seemed to make the eyes "pop" a little more. Probably some other things I am missing. Would I do it again... sure. ...Show more →
Nice experiment with polarizer! The photos definitely have a "pop" and the ducks colors and textures look outstanding. I tried it a few times on a different lens, but eventually gave up since I was always forgetting to adjust it Maybe I should try again.
What kind of protective cover do you have on your lens? I had a LensCoat on my RF600, but never liked it. Decided to go with a 3M skin for the Sony. It looks much "cleaner", and all buttons are exposed. Should protect from scratches just as well.
docusync wrote:
Nice experiment with polarizer! The photos definitely have a "pop" and the ducks colors and textures look outstanding. I tried it a few times on a different lens, but eventually gave up since I was always forgetting to adjust it Maybe I should try again.
What kind of protective cover do you have on your lens? I had a LensCoat on my RF600, but never liked it. Decided to go with a 3M skin for the Sony. It looks much "cleaner", and all buttons are exposed. Should protect from scratches just as well.
I had the Lenscoat for my 600 GM, a bit too bulky, I replaced it with RolandPro. I have skin for my 200-600. I am hesitant to use skin for the 600 GM, too thin for me.
docusync wrote:
Nice experiment with polarizer! The photos definitely have a "pop" and the ducks colors and textures look outstanding. I tried it a few times on a different lens, but eventually gave up since I was always forgetting to adjust it Maybe I should try again.
What kind of protective cover do you have on your lens? I had a LensCoat on my RF600, but never liked it. Decided to go with a 3M skin for the Sony. It looks much "cleaner", and all buttons are exposed. Should protect from scratches just as well.
I have the RolandPro. I find it fits how I shoot and it's camo which I think helps for the subjects I photograph. I've only removed it once - last winter when I was shooting snow geese from a blind where I was photographing with some waterfowl hunters. They said that we'd scare less snow geese if we removed the cover and just went plain white.
On the polarizer... as I said I didn't adjust at all. I figured some images might look great and others not so much. There were thousands of tack sharp BIF shots I tossed because it probably wasn't adjusted for the angle of the sun and was working against me. But the ones where it was aligned were terrific and different as you said.
Douglas L wrote:
I had the Lenscoat for my 600 GM, a bit too bulky, I replaced it with RolandPro. I have skin for my 200-600. I am hesitant to use skin for the 600 GM, too thin for me.
---------------------------------------------
149113 wrote:
I have the RolandPro. I find it fits how I shoot and it's camo which I think helps for the subjects I photograph. I've only removed it once - last winter when I was shooting snow geese from a blind where I was photographing with some waterfowl hunters. They said that we'd scare less snow geese if we removed the cover and just went plain white.
On the polarizer... as I said I didn't adjust at all. I figured some images might look great and others not so much. There were thousands of tack sharp BIF shots I tossed because it probably wasn't adjusted for the angle of the sun and was working against me. But the ones where it was aligned were terrific and different as you said....Show more →
It seems like this RolanPro cover is a popular choice for the 600/4!
I googled it - looks great. It's not made out of neoprene like LensCoat. I'm going to check it out.
I'm not sure if the "camo effect" make any difference on birds. They see and hear us very well. It could be just an annoyance factor. I.e. some species could be more annoyed by certain colors or color combinations. As far as I know they could react differently on shapes and sizes. Fun fact: chickadees are much more scared to see a pygmy owl than a hawk https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7570-chirpy-chickadees-signal-deadliness-of-predators/
I have the Roland Pro for the 200-600 and I am not a fan. The bigger sections work great but the smaller sections are supposed to hold with Velcro and they just don't stay in place so my 200-600 is "naked" on the last 3rd of it which defeats the purpose really. Maybe it works better on the 600 f:4 but not happy with it on the 200-600
It seems like this RolanPro cover is a popular choice for the 600/4!
I googled it - looks great. It's not made out of neoprene like LensCoat. I'm going to check it out.
I'm not sure if the "camo effect" make any difference on birds. They see and hear us very well. It could be just an annoyance factor. I.e. some species could be more annoyed by certain colors or color combinations. As far as I know they could react differently on shapes and sizes. Fun fact: chickadees are much more scared to see a pygmy owl than a hawk https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7570-chirpy-chickadees-signal-deadliness-of-predators/
I'm heavily invested in Sitka gear so there's probably some confirmation bias at work That said, having photographed wood ducks and warblers each spring for 30+ years from a concealed position with gille netting and camo, it definitely gives me more opportunities as opposed to just walking around trying to find situations where I can get images in normal clothing. And that is without baiting the birds or setting up "canned" perches like a lot of others do (no judgement intended)
149113 wrote:
from a concealed position with gille netting and camo
This ^
I'm relatively new to birding, but I noticed as long as the birds can't recognize a human shape - they will be ok. Somewhat concerned, but won't fly away.
For small birds this thing worked best for me so far
Note: I decided to try something a little different this trip. I have the 42mm drop in circular polarizer and I used it on every image I shot. Of course that polarizer needs to be adjusted to the light and scene on a image by image basis which when you are shooting BIF is not even remotely possible (especially with a protective cover on the 600mm in place). I was interested to see if it made any difference on the final images. Couple observations... on the Scaup... typically getting the iridescent green/purple to show up has been a challenge. Filter seemed to assist on that. Filtering out glare... an obvious advantage and it seemed to help on that. Sharpness from contrast... at the correct angle it seemed to make the eyes "pop" a little more. Probably some other things I am missing. Would I do it again... sure....Show more →
Beautiful birds, brought a smile to my face. Incredible skills you have there and some nice glass.
I'm relatively new to birding, but I noticed as long as the birds can't recognize a human shape - they will be ok. Somewhat concerned, but won't fly away.
For small birds this thing worked best for me so far
You may have to do a breakdown of that equipment. Remote setup? Pretty cool
snapquacky wrote:
Beautiful birds, brought a smile to my face. Incredible skills you have there and some nice glass.
Thank you snapquacky. We're all living in an age where the equipment makes this a whole lot easier. I can remember the days of taking 3 rolls of Kodachrome out and hoping to get one keeper that was a fraction as good as any of these
Douglas L wrote:
What a beauty, Joshua! You captured it so well.
Thank you very much, Doug! The male can flash a bright green section on the forehead and throat to intimidate other male competitors. It visible at a certain angle and they do it briefly. I did get a few but I haven't gotten to them yet...
__________________________________________
Here is a not so colorful bird but the feathers are clearly defined. Plus, it chirps nicely and fairly loudly for such a small bird. I mounted a 2X TC to capture this as it seemed to be content on that branch...
Enjoying my 30 min's of internet this morning.
Love all the images on this page of course. Stellar work from everyone!
Geoff used to say I had a pet hawk. That was Harry, when I lived an hour away and
2000 feet lower in town.
Up here in the 'tundra' zone (currently 12F and 10 inches of snow on the ground) we don't have Red-tailed hawks, but meet Sally my reclusive neighbor.
docusync wrote:
Nice experiment with polarizer! The photos definitely have a "pop" and the ducks colors and textures look outstanding. I tried it a few times on a different lens, but eventually gave up since I was always forgetting to adjust it Maybe I should try again.
What kind of protective cover do you have on your lens? I had a LensCoat on my RF600, but never liked it. Decided to go with a 3M skin for the Sony. It looks much "cleaner", and all buttons are exposed. Should protect from scratches just as well.
Which foot is on your 600? And Is that a a QD socket on it?
Maybe I should try again.
