It Ain't the Camera and it Ain't the Lens PART IIII

[Arthur Morris]

This Marbled Godwit was photographed at DeSoto last Tuesday morning with the handheld 400mm f/4 IS DO lens and the EOS-40D while laying on my belly with my elbows on the ground supporting the lens. ISO 500. Evaluative metering +2/3 stop: 1/1000 sec. at f/4.5. Flash on-camera fill at -2 stops. Added a bit of canvas top and right and lightened the iris with a QM. I went with the fast shutter speed rather than going for additional d-o-f.

[Layton E Parham]

I love the Image. Though the birds bill keeps leading my eye to the OOF white object in the background. Layton

[Sid Garige]

Excellent eye contact and soft touch make this image for me. Great job.

[Juan Carlos Vindas]

Great image! well, I am used to see this quality coming from you!
I really enjoy the composition and sharpness of this guy! I would have liked to see the legs a bit more sharp, but is not a big deal.

[Ramon M. Casares]

As is is preety sweet. Now, I would have liked more DOF so to get this bird's legs on focus.
Also, although I agree 100% with the point you're trying to make here, let me say that it all comes down to the fact that this 400mm is not a lens to do this "It ain't..."excercise as it is really is a fantastic lens and the 40D is indeed a superb camera, in my case, I have been shotting with a Xt and a Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 plus a TC2x and let me say with all my humbleness that I have some preety sharp results, now, it all comes down again, and as you say, to the man behind the camera. What I am trying to say is that a 40D and 400mm are not at all (to me) just some regular lens and body that with a great phtoogrpaher behind them will make wonders. A great photographer will know how to use any lens and any body and still get sharp shots, a good photographer with a better equipment will be for sure a better photoghrapher. I probably didn't make myself clear hahaa.. I am a terrible writer...
Bottom line.. I love the shot :)

[Ed Prete]

deeper DOF might be nice if it was soley about the subject, but would sacrifice some of the mystical qualities this image has. The soft smooth background simply disappears without knowing where it begins or ends which to me, really makes this complete. Excellent.

[Dan Brown]

Love this shot as is! In a case like this with the legs OOF, could the shooter have snapped two shots, one with the focus as posted here and one with the focus on the legs, then combine the two in a "stack" with software available, thereby preserving the soft and smooth BG? Dan Brown

[Isak Pretorius]

Regarding the issue of the OOF legs... my opinion is that if this was created to get published in a bird book it would have been better with the legs in focus, but if you tried to create art this is very nice as is. As art, I love it as is. It has a nice feeling to it. Do you agree?

[Nicki Gwynn Jones]

Yes, leave it as art.

[Arthur Morris]

I love the Image. Though the birds bill keeps leading my eye to the OOF white object in the background. Layton

Thanks Layton. I am not sure how I missed that but I did. Three seconds of Patch Tool work yielded the repost.

[Axel Hildebrandt]

Great light and mood, angle and crop work very well, too. Thanks for sharing!

[Jim Fenton]

This particular image with the shallower DOF works well for me. I'm assuming that the head / eye / bill were intended to be the main focal point of the image and it has therefore succeeded nicely.

My only two comments would be that now that others have mentioned it, my eye does go to the OOF highlight at the end of the bill and secondly, while I like the soft light / high key type presentation, I think the subject could use a bit of contrast adjustment...just a tiny amount.

[Arthur Morris]

Although I agree 100% with the point you're trying to make here, let me say that it all comes down to the fact that this 400mm is not a lens to do this "It ain't..."excercise as it is really is a fantastic lens and the 40D is indeed a superb camera, in my case, I have been shotting with a Xt and a Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 plus a TC2x and let me say with all my humbleness that I have some pretty sharp results, now, it all comes down again, and as you say, to the man behind the camera. What I am trying to say is that a 40D and 400mm are not at all (to me) just some regular lens and body that with a great photogrpaher behind them will make wonders. A great photographer will know how to use any lens and any body and still get sharp shots, a good photographer with a better equipment will be for sure a better photographer

Ramon, I see your point. But do understand the following:

1-there are thousands and thousands of folks photographing birds with Canon and Nikon 500 and 600mm lenses as their prime telephotos.
2-the 40D, though a great camera body, is a relatively inexpensive pro-sumer body. Lots of the thousands of folks above are using camera bodies that cost 4 to ten times as much.
3-as you wll know, sharpness is not the only reuquirement for a good or a great image.

In addition to wanting folks to realize that it is the person (be it man or woman) behind the lens that matters, I want folks to realize that they are far better off honing their skills with the equipment that they own than lusting after the latest greatest camera or lens.

[Ramon M. Casares]

As I said, I do agree with you Arthur, and about what you have just said, again, I understand and agree with you. Thnaks for answering!

[Arthur Morris]

Many folks are wishing for more d-o-f. There are lots of factors involved. #1, I was handholding a lens with an effective focal length of 640 mm so shutter speed is of utmost importance, esp. when on your stomach. #2, and most important, my personal style is and has been for more than two decades to work close to wide open, focus on the bird's eye, and let er rip. I am too old to change now, plus I love the shallow d-o-f looks. #3: If you raised the ISO here and stopped down to f/11 or f/16 you would have enough d-o-f to get the legs sharp, but you would be bringing up unwanted BKRG detail. In many cases, folks are asking for more d-o-f to make the tail of a warbler sharp when the photographer is already at f/8, 1/60 sec., ISO 1600.

IAC, all comments are valued and appreciated.

ps to Jim: see the re-posted image; our posts crossed in cyber-space.

[Vincent Grafhorst]

The repost is simply perfect!
Artie I do not really understand what your are trying to prove with your 'it aint the camera' series when you use a 40D, which is an excellent camera, and is a piece of $5,500.- L-glass. Together that is some professional kit you have there, even though it maybe your 'back-up' kit. Of course it is not the equipment that makes a good photographer, but show us some images with a point and shoot, I am sure you will be able to pull of some magnificent photo's with that;)

[Arthur Morris]

The repost is simply perfect! Artie I do not really understand what your are trying to prove with your 'it aint the camera' series when you use a 40D, which is an excellent camera, and is a piece of $5,500.- L-glass. Together that is some professional kit you have there, even though it maybe your 'back-up' kit. Of course it is not the equipment that makes a good photographer, but show us some images with a point and shoot, I am sure you will be able to pull of some magnificent photo's with that;)

In addition to the points I made above, I forgot to mention that there are lots of on-line reviews trashing the 400DO as worthless and I just heard that the Rob Galbraith is now claiming that the 40D has AI SERVO AF issues as did the MIII. And yes, send me a point and shoot and I will see what I can do.

[Maxis Gamez]

I'm with Artie on this one. I have a 40D :D:D

[Layton E Parham]

Artie, you could make a masterpiece with a pinhole camera.
You are right, a good photographer can make a good picture with any camera.

[Ákos Lumnitzer]

This is great Artie. Personally I would always go for sharpness over more DOF. People perhaps want more but need to also put themselves in your shoes at the same time or in the same setting to understand the meaning of what you are doing. I think you should have renamed the title to "It ain't rocket science!" . I might sound a little sarcastic though. Sorry 'bout that. :) I am surprised you missed the tiny bright spot that Layton pointed out. ;D