Raptors

[Ronald Zigler]

I hope this is decent enough for this forum, and that I managed to post it to the raptor theme (first time I did not post to "eager to learn").108679

[arash_hazeghi]

nice portrait, good eye contact but the IQ is not great and the image lacks sharpness/feather details, it's also a bit tight in the frame and the square crop is not ideal.

was this a captive bird?

[Ronald Zigler]

No Arash, it was not a captive bird! I was at a public bird blind behind a local nature center when this hawk landed on a branch over the bird feeders. He was so close I could not fit him in the view finder until I was able to slowly turn the camera vertical. Consequently, I did crop this image since the feet were cut off in the original. I too was disappointed by the lack of feather detail, and I do not know quite what to make of the fact that the ISO here was 640, the eye is crisp and sharp but the head feathers are not. It was HH at 1/250 (Canon 300mm f4 + 1.4x).

[arash_hazeghi]

No Arash, it was not a captive bird! I was at a public bird blind behind a local nature center when this hawk landed on a branch over the bird feeders. He was so close I could not fit him in the view finder until I was able to slowly turn the camera vertical. Consequently, I did crop this image since the feet were cut off in the original. I too was disappointed by the lack of feather detail, and I do not know quite what to make of the fact that the ISO here was 640, the eye is crisp and sharp but the head feathers are not. It was HH at 1/250 (Canon 300mm f4 + 1.4x).

Thanks Roland, the eye actually looks quite soft too, how much did you crop this image? Where did you put the focus point? Can you post a 100% crop of the head area? this might help debug your problem.

[Ronald Zigler]

Here is the full framed image. I don't know if the exif data will show, but the AF point is on the upper breast of the bird. Sorry about this. I stick with eager to learn in the future. Thanks for taking the time. ( Just noticed you requested a "100% crop of the head". I am not sure what that would involve.
108683

[Ronald Zigler]

Like this?108685

[Bill Dix]

Ronald, you got a very nice look from him. I'm not a big fan of square crops either, but I can understand why you might have wanted to try it here. I've sharpened up your Sharpie a bit, using a slight bit of the Deblur slider in Topaz Denoise, and a little USM in CS5. I also removed the light spot in the URC. Hope you don't mind. I might be sharper yet if I had taken a little care, and if it hadn't gone through several rounds of jpeg compression. You don't mention the EXIF - the aperture in particular - but DOF can drop off dramatically when you're this close to the bird, and that may have resulted in some of the lack of detail in places. I would have been very happy to get this close to this handsome raptor.

[arash_hazeghi]

So you haven't cropped by much...

100% crop means that blow your image to 100% view (1:1 on the screen) then crop a small area, save and upload. your attachment above was not uploaded.

[arash_hazeghi]

Ronald, you got a very nice look from him. I'm not a big fan of square crops either, but I can understand why you might have wanted to try it here. I've sharpened up your Sharpie a bit, using a slight bit of the Deblur slider in Topaz Denoise, and a little USM in CS5. I also removed the light spot in the URC. Hope you don't mind. I might be sharper yet if I had taken a little care, and if it hadn't gone through several rounds of jpeg compression. You don't mention the EXIF - the aperture in particular - but DOF can drop off dramatically when you're this close to the bird, and that may have resulted in some of the lack of detail in places. I would have been very happy to get this close to this handsome raptor.

Bill, the image is still quite lacking in detail for something that has been taken from such a close distance. I am not sure it is a matter of processing.

here is what a sharp head shot looks like

108686

EOS 20D 300f/4 + TC f/7.1

[Bill Dix]

Arash, I didn't mean to suggest that the image could be made razor-sharp; only that a little tweaking in PP could bring out a little more sharpness than the OP.

[arash_hazeghi]

Arash, I didn't mean to suggest that the image could be made razor-sharp; only that a little tweaking in PP could bring out a little more sharpness than the OP.


Of course but let's find out why Roland's photo came out soft at first place. It's best to get the photo sharp in the camera as opposed to trying to sharpen a soft file in post :S3: IT will be easy to tell when he posts a 100% crop.

[Ronald Zigler]

The original exif data for this was (Canon 60D), 300mm f4 + 1.4x, @ 1/250, f7.1, ISO 640. The camera was hand held, and even though IS was on, perhaps I was not quite up to the task of steadying the camera with a 1/250 shutter speed (after all, such a closer encounter was rather exciting). I did send my camera and lenses to Canon in December for adjustments (even though all equipment was new). The lens was fine, but the body needed some "electrical adjustments" in the AF assembly; but that was in December. The image was taken in January after Canon returned my equipment. Many thanks for taking the time for the feedback. I too have been puzzled by what I perceive as my inability to get consistently sharp images. But, I am still learning. (I posted a closer cropped head shot above; still not sure what Arash has in mind by a "100% crop).

[arash_hazeghi]

The original exif data for this was (Canon 60D), 300mm f4 + 1.4x, @ 1/250, f7.1, ISO 640. The camera was hand held, and even though IS was on, perhaps I was not quite up to the task of steadying the camera with a 1/250 shutter speed (after all, such a closer encounter was rather exciting). I did send my camera and lenses to Canon in December for adjustments (even though all equipment was new). The lens was fine, but the body needed some "electrical adjustments" in the AF assembly; but that was in December. The image was taken in January after Canon returned my equipment. Many thanks for taking the time for the feedback. I too have been puzzled by what I perceive as my inability to get consistently sharp images. But, I am still learning. (I posted a closer cropped head shot above; still not sure what Arash has in mind by a "100% crop).


Where did you post the closer crop Roland? I don't see it.

I think it is user error rather than equipment issues.

[arash_hazeghi]

here is what a 100% crop means and how to make one.

http://www.pbase.com/wlhuber/100_crop_

[Ronald Zigler]

How's this?108692

[arash_hazeghi]

Thanks Roland, I think the main issue is focus as opposed to motion blur from rather slow SS

The focus was on the chest feathers so the head is not in sharp focus. For close distance shots like this you need to put the focus point on the head.

[Ronald Zigler]

Thanks Arash. It certainly does illustrate how narrow the margin for error is with a telephoto lens. However, I am still trying to figure out why some of my images of this hawk were taken at 1/250, f7.1, ISO 640, others at 1/640 f8, ISO 2000 and the image quality is pretty much identical. An aperture of f8 provided no better depth of field.

[arash_hazeghi]

Thanks Arash. It certainly does illustrate how narrow the margin for error is with a telephoto lens. However, I am still trying to figure out why some of my images of this hawk were taken at 1/250, f7.1, ISO 640, others at 1/640 f8, ISO 2000 and the image quality is pretty much identical. An aperture of f8 provided no better depth of field.

Roland there is no significant difference in DOF between f/7.1 and f/8. It makes no difference. In this case (low light) I would actually open the aperture for more SS and put the focus point on the head. W/O accurate focus you are not going to make a sharp photo irregardless of other parameters.

Hope this helps

[Arthur Morris]

Ron, What camera body???

[Arthur Morris]

ps: Bill's repost is a large improvement.

[Dan Brown]

Ron, What camera body???Artie, I see Ron used a 60D. How is that body handling noise at the higher iso's? I was going to suggest a higher iso/wider aperture to allow a faster SS as Arash has suggested. 250th hand held, vertical can be unforgiving!