Royal Tern Flying

[Henry Domke]

This Royal Tern flew by at lose range as I walked along the beach here on Sanibel yesterday.
I'm continuing to see how Canon's 400mm f/2.8 II works hand held for birds in flight. It seems to work very well but I wonder if the 600mm f4 II would be a better choice. They weigh about the same.

Canon 5D3
Canon EF 400mm f/2.8 L IS II USM with 1.4 tele
ISO 1600
Aperture 9.0
Shutter Speed 1/2500
Manual Exposure
Hand Held

Minimal processing in Lightroom 4

[Randy Stout]

Henry:

I like the full down wing pose, birds angle in the frame, well exposed.

The shooting angle is fairly steep and the light angle gave you lots of shaded areas. If the sum was lower and over your right shoulder, lighting would have been more effective.

In regards to your question about 600-400 lens. Most bird photographers that I know, myself included, would go with the longer lens, unless you absolutely needed the larger aperture of the 400. I have a 500, but rarely shoot it since I got the 600, and I mainly shoot larger birds! Mammals are a different story, and a lot of folks would use the 400 and the faster aperture there.

Cheers

Randy

[Miguel Palaviccini]

Randy's comments are spot on. I think you can decrease the effect of the shooting angle by having a bit more canvas around the bird.

As far as 400 vs 500 vs 600 mm go, I think that for birding the 400 mm might be a little too wide (400 too wide?!) unless you are in a location without much light. I think that the 500 is a great compromise between reach and weight (and size for travelling), but like Randy mentioned, the 600 mm is probably the best bet if weight isn't an issue.

[John Cooper]

I like the flight pose here Henry with the wings in the fully down position. The prevailing light is a little harsh but still a pleasent image.