Juv spoonbill landing

[Sid Garige]

Another one from last weekend.

D300, 200-400mm VR

1/800 F 5.6

[Axel Hildebrandt]

Pose and BG are great. I would prefer a little less wing blur. What ISO did you use?

[carole wiley]

Well, there you go. The wing blur on this is something I find quite appealing. It shows motion and I like that (well, without blurring the bird). He does have a sheepish look on his face. I can't wait till I see one of these guys, some day.

[Arthur Morris]

Very sharp, and EXP right on. Another who likes the wing blur. WIng and feet postion good. (I really needed the rest that morning; James wore me out the afternoon before...)

[WIlliam Maroldo]

Just thought I'd throw my opinion in about the wing blur. To me, the fact that both wings are not blurred equally indicates that this is due to inadequate depth of field. Indeed, blurred wings do give a sense of motion and sometimes are an asset to a photograph. Unfortunately I said " blurred wings" and not "wing", and although this is otherwise a good photograph the depth of field error is quite detrimental. Just my opinion~onlybill

[Sid Garige]

Pose and BG are great. I would prefer a little less wing blur. What ISO did you use?
Axel,

I tried wing blur with 200.

[Sid Garige]

Just thought I'd throw my opinion in about the wing blur. To me, the fact that both wings are not blurred equally indicates that this is due to inadequate depth of field. Indeed, blurred wings do give a sense of motion and sometimes are an asset to a photograph. Unfortunately I said " blurred wings" and not "wing", and although this is otherwise a good photograph the depth of field error is quite detrimental. Just my opinion~onlybill

Very interesting point Bill.

[Maxis Gamez]

Hi Sid,

Another fan of blurry wings. Excellent timing!

[Doug Brown]

I like the wings blurred. Not every flight shot needs to be totally sharp. Blur is to wings in a flight shot what subtle environment is to BG.