GBH Portrait
I managed to sit and shoot a whole bunch of photos of this very patient Heron. Unfortunately, there was a big fallen tree behind him, and the DOF was deep enough for it to be a distraction (can't wait to get my 2.8!!!). So, I zoomed in to get some portraits without the background for a distraction.
Nikon D80
70-300 VR lens @ 300
ISO 800
f 5.6 (wide open for that lens - sigh)
1/160 sec.
Thanks for looking!
Amy D.
I like your image, Amy, especially the curve of the neck, the feather details on the shoulder, and the wonderful glowing color of the lower beak. The face and neck seem softer on my monitor. Can you selectively bring out details there by contrasting or sharpening? gotta love those big birds!
I visited Anna Marie Island and Ft. Desoto this spring. WOW!! Where did you get this image?
Very nice Amy. Excellent background and composition, I like the crop. I think you might need a little bail money for the HAP :eek::eek: you know they are out in full force.
Regards and Congrats.
............ busted :D:D:D that bird is looking the other way just a bit !!!
Did well with the bg no complaints for here Would lighten the eye just a bit to make it pop. Good sharpness for the 1/160 ss Might do an alternate crop and take some from the right side? Looks interesting.
Lens wise are you going for a 300 2.8? Sure is a fine lens and might be the sharpest in the line up. With that price you are right about there for a 200-400 VR Tempting difference. I have it and use it a lot Fabs has it but uses more the 300 2.8 Only a pound less but much easier to hand hold. If there is a possibility of using before buying would be good for you. Can't go wrong with either one,
Zooming in to pixel level, he is actually quite sharp, but I did try to mask and get rid of noise in the background - and sharpen the bird. My mask might leave something to be desired....
I realize he's not turned a few degrees TOWARD me, but Im not sure he's turned away.... I do have others in which the head angle is just lovely - but there's the background.....
I am looking at the 70-200 VR - Alfred, I think you came up with a good suggestion in another thread that this lens plus the 1.4 or 1.7 is a good combination for the price - and it's in the right range. I don't think I will be unhappy with that lens.
I'm not sure a straight 300 would be best for me, as on the river, that might actually be too long in some situations - I'm sure I would want the flexibility of the zoom since , the river is where I typically shoot. The kayak rental is just one exit up 75 from me....
Cheryl - this was on the Hillsborough River that runs through Tampa. East of the city there is a chain of state parks with boat/canoe ramps along unpopulated parts of the river. As mentioned it is very close by and convenient to me, though all those pesky trees seem to spoil the background for everyone. :eek:
Maybe I'll post some of the others even though the background is not pristine.... I think this river is just magical sometimes - always different every time I go out on it.
Amy D.
Pretty shot Amy! I like your composition, although I might add a little canvas up top. You've already been busted by the HAP, so I'll leave that alone. I might brighten the whole bird just a little. Look forward to seeing your photos with the new lens!
Upcoming Workshops: Bosque del Apache 2019, Ecuador 2020 (details coming soon)
Website - Facebook - 500px
Amy, Were you in a kayak/boat when you got this image?
Lady Amy, This is a very nice composition. I like it. All of the good information and techs. have been addressed; so I just want to say good show and looking forward to your next one...:cool:
By the way, I have the Nikkor 70-200 lens. I super happy with it, its razor sharp and very fast...te only thing you need to get is the 1.4T/C or and the 1.7T/C and your set...:D
Hi Cheryl,
Yes - I was in a kayak. It just so happened that there was a patch of hyacinths and river grass to stop the kayak so that I could pretty much sit and shoot - sometimes there's no convenient place to stop, or you have to maneuver too much and scare your subject away! But I still think it's worth it - simply because it's such a beautiful river. I'll have to post some of the landscapes.
Meanwhile, Doug, here is a repost brightened, and I lightened the eye for Al. I had to burn in the crown of the head since lightening caused some of the whites to clip.....
:)
Amy, sounds like you need a partner to handle the kayak, while you handle your camera.
sounds like a wonderful way to spend time! My brother and i kayaked on Rainbow River (I think that is the name) and I was surprised at how much closer you can get to wildlife when on the water as compared to when on land. It was my favorite part of my visit with my brother.
Hi Amy - looking good - have some bail money for you - looks like the HAP have you. :(
The 70-200 VR is a fantastic lens , I use one with a 2 X converter and am very happy with the results, although I must say I find it not long enough for many circumstances - it really is my lens of choice when I can get really really close to the birds.
:)
Cheryl, I learned a long time ago that a solo kayak is the only way to go, if I want to stay married by the end of the trip! :) I couldn't even imagine trying to get someone to put the kayak where I want it, when I want it. I'm sure I would not be much fun to be around!!! :)
Sometimes it works out great - sometimes not- but it's never a waste of time to be on the river! Not possible to go out there in anything with the motor because some of the trees almost make it un-passable even in a kayak.
I'll make it up to the HAP somehow. :)
Thanks for the feedback about the lens, Lance. It seems to be backordered everywhere, so my local camera shop is going to call me when they get the next shipment.... :D
Amy D.
Hi Gus - thanks for the info on the lens. Yes, I will also get the 1.4. I have a 2.0, but so far, I am not very happy with using it on my 70-300. We'll see. I know I want the faster lens - we'll see if I need the bigger glass, too. So far it's the speed that's been my problem.
Thanks for the comments.
Amy
Questions:Originally Posted by Amy DeStefanis
1. I have the TC 14II and it doesn't fit the 70-300 f 4.5-5.6 VR. So, what TC you're using?
2. Is the 70-200 f2.8 VR with a TC 2 still a fast lens, given that it no longer is f2.8?
I shoot sporting events in high school gym and the like and from my experiences, if you're shooting in poor lighting conditions, there simply is no way around it but to use high ISOs, i.e.,1600 and above to get a shutter speed of 1/400 or faster, or artificial lighting aka flash, even with the so-called fast lens. There's only so much a f2.8 or larger can do without the TC.
Last edited by Desmond Chan; 09-13-2008 at 08:17 PM.
Desmond,
I have a Tamron-made 2x converter that does fit the 70-300, but as I just realized, Nikon did not make that lens intending for it to have a TC, evidently. So, I am assuming that the poor performance I experience with it is because it really wasn't designed to have the extra glass in there.... I'm sure I could start a debate thread in the equipment forum about it.... :) I definitely would not recommend trying this to shoot sports. I have had enough frustrations with it on a tripod.
Looking at Nikon's website, THEIR 2X reduces the aperture by 2 stops. So, I assume Tamron's would too. The 1.4 reduces by only 1 stop. 1.7 by 1.5 stops.
Lance has a photo of a goose he shot with is 70-200 2.8 and a 2X converter in this ETL forum - check it out. It's tack sharp. :)
Amy
hi amy! i like the light on your repost. really looks great. i you had a head turn you'd have a big winner!!
as far as TC's, AF works on my 70-300 with a kenko 2x TC in good light. it actually works quite well. just the images are a little softer. good luck with the decision. agree with al. if i was gonna spend the money, i'd rather have the 200-400 rather than the 300 2.8!
Posting Permissions
