-
BPN Member
-
The one on the right is saying this is the best spot around here. The one on the left is saying no we have to go more upstream thats the best spot. Looks great for the high ISO.
-
Macro and Flora Moderator
So who needs a 1DX Mk II?? This is super, very clean and great definition, the colours look absolutely spot on to me and the detail in the muzzle and nose is exceptionally good.
Joking apart do you really think the 1DX II would have done better????
-
Super cool action. Looks nice at this ISO as well. You guys over here are killing it with the high ISO shots. Us bird guys need to take notice! I think the out of focus bear tells the story as well. Crowded river and the men need to exert some aggression to get their spot. To me the shot is a bit flat and lacking in depth. Not enough darks in the shot for me. If the light was poor and there are shadows or dark areas I am fine with them lacking a bit in definition as that is natural. This looks to me like the dark areas were lifted too much.
-
Great to see a different view of the type of action which happens with the bears, other than fishing! Excellent details, I like the background.
-
Great expression. IQ and details are exceptional despite high ISO. I find water a bit distracting, but you did very well under the circumstances.
-
Wildlife Moderator
Good interaction here Andreas and being almost head on to the sensor you nailed the shot. No need for any extra DoF, looks bang on to me. The OOF bear in the BKG echoing the LH bear is a bit unfortunate, but that's life, it's wildlife. Personally I feel, shooting without the extender would have been better, as the framing would have improved by simply cropping rather than letting the camera dictating, but as you mentioned - it's all in the heat of the moment.
Excellent for 10k and well processed, illustrates what we have been saying for a long time - ISO is a thing of the past!
TFS
Steve
-
Wildlife Moderator
Joking apart do you really think the 1DX II would have done better????
Yes Jon, but I think the AF is a tad better in the original MKI. 
-
Story Sequences Moderator and Wildlife Moderator
Hallo Andreas,
This has the WOW factor for me, wonderful work Boetie!
Love the interaction and aggression you have captured from those two bears. Super techs, well exposed, sharp as it gets.
The snarl from the bear on the left side of the image, the upturned lip - superb timing!
Beautiful rich colours and tones. Aaaaargh, this just works! Congratulations Andreas
Kind regards,
-
BPN Member
-
BPN Member
-
Wildlife Moderator
Agree the plain 500 would have been the better choice ... but i left this combo during shooting together , to avoid changing the lenses . Always risky in rainy conditions .....
Ahh - rainy conditions was omitted, but why not invest in a rain cover, works well on the beach too, when the sand kicks up.
-
BPN Member
All the days I spend on Kamchatka had the chance of rainfall ...more or less , I do have and did use the rain cover almost always once settled somewhere . But changing the combo under rain cover is not so easy depending on the make of that cover , as you might know.So there is no fast way of doing it . So I decided to keep the chosen combo for most of the day, whether it was with TC or without !!! I do not like to change the the combo in general , as the risk of getting unwanted stuff on the sensor is higher when shooting outdoors depending on the weather conditions.
And on i.e. Helgoland .... that cover is on even in dry conditions
-
Wildlife Moderator
Sensible approach Andreas, but I thought you had two bodies. So if you had one on the 500 & 1.4, then the other with the 200-400 (great combo), then all you needed was to either pick it up or just loosen the quick plates and pop it on the tripod. Think I had better conditions in Katmai, but Gulls are everywhere.
BTW Prefer the OP, it will print better too, but the greens will be hard I think.
-
Repost looks much better to me and more realistic to me. Different people have different styles for sure. That is one of the great things about BPN. We do not all have to agree. Just present our thoughts and critiques in a civil manner and try and be as honest and helpful as possible. I honestly do not get the take an image and dull it down way of thinking. Nor do I get the remove contrast and make something look flatter than it really does way of thinking either. To my eye it produces images that are duller and flatter than how they look in real life. Bears are beautiful animals with rich tones and textures. To my eye the original post does not do them justice. The repost is closer but I still feel could be pushed more. I just do not see how 2 bears on a moving river with green foliage in the background could possibly look flat and dull. Even in dim conditions, green is still green and brown is still brown, and shadows are still dark and rushing water will still have areas of darks and lights with highlights and shadows. Things are not uniformly neutral in the wilds of eastern Russia or anywhere else.
-
BPN Member
Steve i have two bodies ... attached with 500 and 200-400 , but sometimes i rather stick to one combo and shoot the options i have . Other times i was wondering around at the location , as far as possible , and left the other kit at the backpack . So not always the case to have both kits on hand , many times those short arguments were just short !!!!!! Just growl , growl .... bang , bang ....finished .
I am 50/50 on which version i prefer ....OP or RP .
Cheers Andreas
-
Wildlife Moderator
Steve i have two bodies ... attached with 500 and 200-400 , but sometimes i rather stick to one combo and shoot the options i have .
Great, thought you had and it's a great pairing, but still prefer the 500 every time given the choice, just curious.
-
BPN Member
Hi Isaac thanks for sharing your thoughts ... makes the forum healthy to have different options of seeing things .
You are referring to contrast .... just asking where is the contrast coming from in todays digital world , i think most photogs use the contrast given by the camera manufacturer and/or the preferred raw converter . So not their view ...IMHO ...the manufacturer view . Unless you have the ability to use a linear tone curve on your raw file .... only a few raw converters do have that option , and you can get the exact contrast you want , like i do !!!! Most of the time.
But for sure this is just my view and all of us can choose their preferred way of doing things , it is like a bit in the old days ...when using different film types , just you do more today , total control of everything in post !!!!!
Just wondering how you get the impression that the two bears cannot be dull and flat under the given situation in Kamtchatka , have you been with me ? I was wondering how the bears were differing in their furs , from darkish brown to blond with different shades of reddish coloration . They did look very different .....
I have seen bears in fog ... with no contrast at all , total neutrality even in far east russia 
.
But if you like i can fire the RAW to you ... to show how you would interpret the image .
Cheers Andreas
-
I do not just mean contrast. I mean that the original post seems artificially flat. I do not think that any of the modern sensors that I have seen do a proper job in low light conditions or in really warm direct sun conditions. I think in low light that if the photo is not built back up with deeper tones and highlights then it looks more like a flat 2 dimensional image instead of having proper form and being a 3 dimensional image. I have never been to Russia but I know very well what limits there on with sensors and what things look like in low light. Also if being fully honest, I used to visit the Wildlife forum more often but stopped because I do not like the way most of the photos are presented . The vast majority of the photos that I see posted here have the same flat look to them and it just does not appeal to me. As we said, different strokes for different folks. Interestingly, last evening I was at a local grassland and was watching 13 Short eared Owls fly around. It was full overcast and the sun was setting so the light was very dim. But even in that low light the deep yellow of their eye, the black bands on their tales, the warm tones of the barring on their flight feathers, the black around their eyes and so on, all stood out quite well. I left when it was basically too dark to see as I was with a friend who had never seen those owls before and he just did not want to leave until it was literally impossible to see them.
-
Post a Thank You. - 1 Thanks
-
BPN Member
-
Just to be clear, I am not saying that I like to make things look artificially 3 dimensional by building them up. I am saying that in flat light that the sensors do not properly give the depth and form that was actually there and the images coming out of the camera need some work to get back to what they look like when making the photo. Minor difference but I think an important one. I am not saying to take a picture in flat light and try and make it look bold and saturated and like it was taken in warm evening sun.
-
Wildlife Moderator
Hi Andreas, if you want to pop the file over via he usual channels, then happy to have a look tomorrow. Any later and I'll be away for the next 10 days, your call, no worries if not.
-
BPN Member
-
BPN Member
Thanks Isaac .....exchange is good in any way , but sometimes some things are not going together ....LOL. So we should leave it that way , in this case ..... you have your views and i mine and well i do find it more than ok , as it keeps variety amongst the photographic community .
And more important in this case .... an edited version by i.e. you would be better , than typing back and forth .
Cheers Andreas
-
Wildlife Moderator
IN the end i am happy with my presented output , not saying that it can be handled differently or even slightly better .....
... and so you should be.
No where exciting this month, just back to the other house, may see what the Grouse are doing, if there are any left and not all shot. 
-
I love this one...Top class photography.
The second post I like more...Looks like some more contrast and depth.
Cracking image
-
BPN Member
Thanks a bunch Dumay ...
Reply With Quote
