I shot some of these guys (and/or gals) at Bodega Bay a couple of days ago. Was about to post one for ID, as it had more gray around the eye, but not enough to look like a Western.
The clear water and wave are a nice touch, with the foot visible under water and a touch of reflection. The eye jumps out beautifully, but it would be nice if it were looking a little more toward you. I imagine the bird was bouncing around in the waves a bit, and it looks like maybe the focus point missed the head just a little. At a wide aperture I always have less DOF than the calculations show, and with a TC I usually feel I get things a little sharper stopped down just a little. But then I'm sacrificing SS or going to a noisier ISO. Frustrating.
Thanks for commenting, Diane. I had a couple with a bit better head angle, but the feet are what made this interesting and this is the only one I had like that. I am not a birder, per se, but was out with my oldest friend who, with her husband, are rabid birders and they assured me that this is a Clark's and not a Western. The Western, if I understand correctly, surrounds the eye in black.
Ian, interesting subject in a difficult situation. All of that movement makes it a real challenge to nail focus consistently. As Diane noted, critical focus fell slightly behind the subject here. Because of the variables involved, any number of reasons could be the culprit, including bad luck (AF is getting better all the time, but even in a controlled environment it's still not 100%). If you haven't already, calibrating each lens to the body (or bodies) it's used with is highly recommended. The only other minor critique, (I'm not sure how to remedy it) would be that the water is starting to take on a plasticized appearance here. While I'm not a fan of spray and pray, I have learned with tricky situations to take more frames when possible to help tip the odds a bit.
Hmmm ... thinking about the focus (BTW, Randall, lens/body are microadjusted). I keep looking at the sharp dot in the eye and have a hard time believing it is a focus issue. Are you sure?
How much of a crop is it? Even if not much, grain and noise can degrade image sharpness, as can software treatment.
And with that much magnification from the lens and crop factor of the camera, you would have been some distance from the bird. Atmospheric factors such as moisture and heat waves can degrade sharpness.
As a certified pixel-peeper, I'd be interested to see a 100% view of the head. Guess at a crop and look at the pixel dimensions of the area (I haven't figured out how to specify a crop directly in pixels). When you get it below the 1200 x 900 required here, export a JPEG with no resizing and NO sharpening.
Last edited by Diane Miller; 02-05-2014 at 07:54 PM.
The eye dot does look sharp to me as well, however- the entire body of the Grebe feels soft, or "smeared"- it could just be that the wave action was enough to cause this given all of the magnification factors in play. (again, I wonder if this is one of the issues we 7D users are up against)-yet when I look at the water area behnd the bird, it seems tack sharp in that region which is why I thought it to be backfocused. It could also be a light angle situation combined with the oily surface of the feathers. And as Diane noted, processing. A lot of variables, at least microadjusting took one of them out of the equation.
Ian, I have learned something from all comments above, but I do like the composition and action you captured. I am learning, when in doubt, jack the ISO to 800, at least, to get faster speeds and sharpness, with full light. This often gets me closer to 1/4000 with my 7D and 100-400 L lens. Nice bird!
Clark's Grebe
Posting Permissions
