Printable View
This is an uncropped image of an adult Red-Tailed Hawk photographed last weekend in Half Moon Bay, CA. It passed within 30 ft after launching from its perch... The rest of the series was OOF or with cutoff tail/head...:(
Thanks in advance. JR
Canon 7D, 500F4IS, 1/1600s, F6.3, ISO 400, Manual Exposure, Gitzo w/ Mongoose 3.5a
Lovely light, HA, and BG. Tack sharp too. I might crop a tad off the bottom here.
Nice name :)
Nice "too close" shot JR! Great eye contact. This might be too close but it's a keeper in my book!
Excellent IQ here, with perfect exposure too. Too bad the wings were cut, but at least they are cut in a good spot. Since you were already so close, cropping off about half the space at bottom, and believe it or not cropping at right too (some may disagree about also cutting the tail), will make the comp stronger despite being "too close"...a problem I'd love to have with these guys!!
P.S. I really felt that cutting the tail after cropping at the bottom gave a stronger and better balanced comp in this case.
I am amazed that I actually like Dan's cut tail repost better than the ORIG post.
Joerg, I am curious. Was this:
The rest of the series was OOF or with cutoff tail/head...:(
due to operator error or a lousy camera or both?
Arthur,Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Morris
I'd never go so far to describe the 7D or any other camera as lousy. I rented a 7D for a weekend and thought there are many positives but also noticed some (potential) problems in my(!) hands.
As for the series of images preceding or coming after the one above, I think we both know that cutting off heads or tails is not the fault of the camera but of the operator not keeping the bird centered in the frame. Which is difficult if one is so close as I was and with the speed those hawks fly when they hunt. So, I don't blame Canon for such missed frames.
That being said I was focused on the hawk on its perch and as it launched the AF missed the action. It didn't jump to the background or similar but just didn't catch up with the hawk moving. I don't know if the 40D would have done better but I had hoped that the 7D could deal with such situations.
I was actually stunned (and very happy :)) that I caught up again with the hawk and captured at least one frame with acceptable composition and sharpness.
Best, Joerg
Daniel,
Very interesting crop and suggestion. Thanks for taking the time to edit the image. The suggested crop also takes care of the OOF elements along the left edge and the LRC. Definitely has this "in-your-face" quality.
Thanks! JR
I like the angle, BG, eye contact and wing position and like Daniel's crop suggestion.
Daniel's crop really strengthens this image. No such thing as "too close" (unless it is closer than the minimum focal distance of the lens).
Axel & Dieter,
Going out on a limb here but: Danke fuer den Kommentar. ;)
Joerg
Howdy JR (that covers both....)
re:
I'd never go so far to describe the 7D or any other camera as lousy. I rented a 7D for a weekend and thought there are many positives but also noticed some (potential) problems in my(!) hands.
I am gonna try and borrow one for Bosque.
As for the series of images preceding or coming after the one above, I think we both know that cutting off heads or tails is not the fault of the camera but of the operator not keeping the bird centered in the frame.
You are of course correct.
Which is difficult if one is so close as I was and with the speed those hawks fly when they hunt. So, I don't blame Canon for such missed frames.
That is good but many folks might :)
That being said I was focused on the hawk on its perch and as it launched the AF missed the action. It didn't jump to the background or similar but just didn't catch up with the hawk moving.
There are many different situations possible here and a good many of them include some sort of operator error. That said there were times with my MIII bodies when I was positive that I nailed the focus and it was not even close....
I don't know if the 40D would have done better but I had hoped that the 7D could deal with such situations.
Me too. I guess what I am trying to say is that in Jim Neiger's hands it might have. When I had my pre-production MIII Robert O'Toole used the camera for a bit and made all sharp flight images with 45 point. I could almost never make a sharp flight photo with AAFPS. So I am guessing that not all photographers are created equal :)
I was actually stunned (and very happy :)) that I caught up again with the hawk and captured at least one frame with acceptable composition and sharpness.
Not that I am trying to bust you here but you said that the camera could not catch up with the bird but that you were glad that you caught up with the bird and got a sharp tight image.
Your choice of words seem to indicate when the camera failed it was the camera's fault but when it worked, it was because you were able to keep up with the bird....
Respectfully.
You're reading too much into my - perhaps poorly chosen - words. I have no problem admitting that the image posted was a lucky shot. :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Arthur Morris
JR
Hey, I have gotten more than my share of lucky ones too.
What about a pano crop? That way the tail is maintained. JR
I liked last repost most , killer eye here
TFS
Joerg, Beautifully sharp with lots of detail. I like where your going with the pano idea but I would cut the top right above his left and below his right elbows maybe. Congrats
I agree with pano crop, even tighter, why were you so close :D ?
BTW I went to HMB again today, horrible traffic on 92 took me 1.5 hours to get there almost running out of gas! Spotted a male and a female NH both with prey! amazing they let me got close, got some shots but what a disappointment when I looked at the images on my screen at home :(. Any ways, you are not at fault at all.
