House sparrow (M) (Passer domesticus)

[Jonathan Ashton]

Another lockdown image from the back garden, I went for a faster shutter speed this time:w3
Thanks to all who commented on my previous posts.

Olympus : E-M1X
Lens : OLYMPUS M.40-150mm F2.8
Lens focal length : 150 mm
Focal Length (35 mm conversion) : 300.0mm
Metering mode : Pattern
Exposure mode : Manual exposure
ISO Sensitivity : 1250
Exposure compensation : +0.3 EV
Shutter speed : 1/20,000sec
Aperture : F2.8

ACR & PSCC

[Andreas Liedmann]

Hi Jon .... since you " changed " your BG the images does look way better !!
Very interesting what you are doing , pose might be not ideal for the majority of BIF specialists .... I do not care that much about that ! I bet it is difficult enough to create such images .

Just raising one technical question .... the image does not look sharper with that super fast SS . So as a conclusion I might stop down to get more DOF .
I quite like the overall tones and colors ....if this was mine I might also look for the noise in the OOF shadow areas of the subject .

Nicely done Jon

TFS Andreas

[arash_hazeghi]

this one isn't working for me Jon, the HA is not good and doesn't make a connection.

The image is not tack sharp as the other one, it seems you have tried to sharpen it quite a bit but that has caused too much noise at ISO-400 :O

The shutter speed was fast but the RAW was soft from bad focus. Were you using MF or AF? MF is pretty much a cr** shot and with AF unless the camera is really capable of tracking the subject 100% in real time this is going to be a very unproductive experience with one in a thousand sharp frames....you are lucky that you already have a couple good ones. rest are delete I am afraid

TFS and nice try

[Jonathan Ashton]

Lets's not get too serious about this, it was just a bit of fun nothing more. I have plenty of more photogenically acceptable images with the wings outspread but this is what is always expected...... I rather liked this pose, I felt it illustrates some of the contortions the birds go through. The shutter speed was just for the sake of it, I think 1/3200 to 1/4000 sec is fast enough but again it depends upon the pose and the position of the bird/wings at the time of shutter actuation. The aperture was 2.8 to keep the noise to a minimum, I suppose I could have gone to 4.5 and it just might have been that little bit sharper with the offered increase in DOF.

Focus is manual, no point in AF because the birds are totally unpredictable in terms of their approach, they come from left or right , I put perches nearby to encourage them to land prior to relaunch so I could predict action. This worked for a few passes but once the birds had gotten the hang of things they just flew straight in. It would be impossible to move the camera and keep focus on the birds' head so that is why I use manual. Yes there are lots of misses and many near misses, but it doesn't matter, time is on my side and there is no wear and tear on the camera, I am currently shooting in the region of 1400-2000 images per day, just having fun. It sounds a bit back to front but getting the nearly shots is just as stewarding as the ideal shot because it just keeps spurring me on. Yes there is an element of luck but there is a certain amount of skill in setting the scene and it is no more difficult or easy to get the perfect one or the nearly perfect one. I have quite a few more but I'll post something a little different next time.

If anyone wishes to know how to go about this in their back yard I will be pleased to let them know.

[John Mack]

Looks like someone is having fun with these. I like viewing these keep them coming.

[David Roach]

Loving this series. Yes narrow depth of field but quite sharp enough where it needs to be and I like the different pose. Keep them coming... TFS

[arash_hazeghi]

Lets's not get too serious about this, it was just a bit of fun nothing more. I have plenty of more photogenically acceptable images with the wings outspread but this is what is always expected...... I rather liked this pose, I felt it illustrates some of the contortions the birds go through. The shutter speed was just for the sake of it, I think 1/3200 to 1/4000 sec is fast enough but again it depends upon the pose and the position of the bird/wings at the time of shutter actuation. The aperture was 2.8 to keep the noise to a minimum, I suppose I could have gone to 4.5 and it just might have been that little bit sharper with the offered increase in DOF.

Focus is manual, no point in AF because the birds are totally unpredictable in terms of their approach, they come from left or right , I put perches nearby to encourage them to land prior to relaunch so I could predict action. This worked for a few passes but once the birds had gotten the hang of things they just flew straight in. It would be impossible to move the camera and keep focus on the birds' head so that is why I use manual. Yes there are lots of misses and many near misses, but it doesn't matter, time is on my side and there is no wear and tear on the camera, I am currently shooting in the region of 1400-2000 images per day, just having fun. It sounds a bit back to front but getting the nearly shots is just as stewarding as the ideal shot because it just keeps spurring me on. Yes there is an element of luck but there is a certain amount of skill in setting the scene and it is no more difficult or easy to get the perfect one or the nearly perfect one. I have quite a few more but I'll post something a little different next time.

If anyone wishes to know how to go about this in their back yard I will be pleased to let them know.

sure it must be fun if one has a lot of time in their hands which is the case right now....

here we obviously critique images as posted and fail to see the fun aspect of it. Might be a better fit for the sequence and story forum which needs some new life http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/forumdisplay.php/216-Story-Sequences

The most productive way of doing this is to use AF to track but I doubt the camera you are using is capable of doing it, maybe the Sony A9II.


cheers

[Jonathan Ashton]

Arash,
I have to totally disagree with you!! I do not think any camera or photographer would have significant success with AF, it would be entirely hit and miss. This would be for two reasons firstly the photographer would be far too slow, even the fastest gun in Texas would be too slow, secondly even if he was quick enough to see the bird he would not be quick enough to follow their twisting and contorting,..... and keep a single focus point on the eye ... no chance, you wouldn't even see the eye!

I said two reasons but thirdly Sony, Nikon, Canon, Fuji, Panasonic, Olympus - doesn't matter no chance the results would be hit and miss, more miss than hit and that is why I use manual focus..... and why I have so many in focus (I know you will differ on that point but I have many more that I have not posted) and admittedly so many out of focus.

I doubt your comment is reflecting everyone's opinion on the Avian forum, in fact quite a number of people have said they like these images and have requested that I keep posting them. If you personally don't like them I respect that, no problem at all we all have different preferences.

[arash_hazeghi]

Hi Jon

You misunderstood my comments. when using AF in this case, you do not pan with the bird-agree it is almost impossible- you do not put the single focus point on the eye-who does that anyway not me, that's the incorrect way of using AF for call cases:)
In order to use AF you pre- focus the perch and wait (for landing) for take off you just focus on the bird and wait. there is no panning needed. You need to use all focus points and real time subject tracking, some cameras will track the bird cross the frame. the success rate will not be anywhere close to 100% but will be definitely be more productive than leaving it to chance which will be 99.9% soft or OOF images

If you want to honest critique this image is an delete for me (sure same for Artie) given the HA even if it were sharp

stay safe

[Jonathan Ashton]

Hi Jon

You misunderstood my comments. when using AF in this case, you do not pan with the bird-agree it is almost impossible- you do not put the single focus point on the eye-who does that anyway not me, that's the incorrect way of using AF for call cases:)
In order to use AF you pre- focus the perch and wait (for landing) for take off you just focus on the bird and wait. there is no panning needed. You need to use all focus points and real time subject tracking, some cameras will track the bird cross the frame. the success rate will not be anywhere close to 100% but will be definitely be more productive than leaving it to chance which will be 99.9% soft or OOF images

If you want to honest critique this image is an delete for me (sure same for Artie) given the HA even if it were sharp

stay safe

Arash, I agree not the best image by far, I have many better I just liked the pose. You have misunderstood my technique the bird does not land at all, this is all mid flight capture, I also stand by my comments regarding AF regardless of camera make, the AF would not be quick enough and it would be entirely hit and miss where it did focus. Just imagine I am capturing 60fps, I decide how many images to capture, in any sequence as the bird comes into view and contorts I may get 5 or 6 frames with the bird in frame and out of those there may be one or two in focus, I think you will agree that any camera would not focus quick enough on the relevant place, which for me is the eye.

Staying safe

Jon

[arash_hazeghi]

Arash, I agree not the best image by far, I have many better I just liked the pose. You have misunderstood my technique the bird does not land at all, this is all mid flight capture, I also stand by my comments regarding AF regardless of camera make, the AF would not be quick enough and it would be entirely hit and miss where it did focus. Just imagine I am capturing 60fps, I decide how many images to capture, in any sequence as the bird comes into view and contorts I may get 5 or 6 frames with the bird in frame and out of those there may be one or two in focus, I think you will agree that any camera would not focus quick enough on the relevant place, which for me is the eye.

Staying safe

Jon

It will focus Jon. 5 year ago they could not but today they can. Not the one you are using but some can. Maybe I will setup a feeder and show how if I get a chance ;)

[Jonathan Ashton]

It will focus Jon. 5 year ago they could not but today they can. Not the one you are using but some can. Maybe I will setup a feeder and show how if I get a chance ;)

Arash - looking forwards to it, meantime if you have a mo pop over to Macro forum, bees in flight using AF, butterflies to follow.

[Steve Kaluski]

Hi Jon, a bit late to the party, yes the images does have flaws, the HA isn't great, there appears to be some grain in the tail feathers and I'm not loving the green colour in the underwing, but you are persevering and want to succeed in getting 'that shot' which in my book, is highly commendable.

Cameras are evolving at a rate of knots and if we look back only five years ago we have come on in leaps and bounds and this now allows us to achieve images in a different way, may be not ideal, but we achieve them. Therefore, in these evolving threads you have been posting, are you not only sharing your images, but also hope to inspire folk, push boundaries (not only personal, but with kit), but primarily to illustrate that it's about having fun and enjoy the whole process, including the failures too, in that way were can learn, understand and achieve our goal?

Good luck with the bees.

TFS
Steve