TUTI - Another Which and Why?

[kenn threed]

Hi again all,

I hope it's ok to do this... to post not one but two different poses from the same series as Artie recently did.
I'd be glad for any comment or critique on either or both, but would especially appreciate your thoughts on which is better and why:

#1

Canon S5-IS + 1.7xTC @600mm Manual ISO100 F3.5 1/400

The very similar pose with identical exif to follow...

Kenn

Kenn & Temple
Backyard Birders in St.Louis, MO
Current Slideshow

[kenn threed]

And #2:


Thanks very much for your any comment.

Kenn

[Allen Sparks]

I like the second one best simply because of the open beak and angle of the head turn. That's the only difference I see in the photos. very nice shots both of them.

[Mack Hicks]

Gorgeous perch. I like the second frame with the open beak more. The BG is excellent, really compliments the titmouse's colors.

[Luis Villablanca]

Although I like the open beak on the second one, I prefer the head angle in #1.
So, if I have to choose one it would be #1.

Anyway, background, colors and feather detail are excellent in both pictures.

[Duane Noblick]

Kenn,

You have two outstanding images here and I think if we learned anything from the other thread is that it boils down to personal preference on what is liked or disliked (dislike is not the correct word in this case).

That being said I would have to choose #1 over #2...don't ask we why but I personally like the slight head turn downward...although the open beak is a definate plus. Smooth BG, nice details and color. Well done on both images my friend. ;)

Duane

[Chris van Rooyen]

Both images are outstanding IMO. Lovely soft light, fantastic feather detail, great BKGR.

[Bob Decker]

#2, it has more personality. I think static shots are more common, making the open beak "action" shot more dynamic and unusual.

[RAM MALLYA]

Lovely bird and perch overall a great image

[Harshad Barve]

For me both images are too good , lovely pose , BG , perch and looks , techs spot on & details looks very good
TFS

[Steve Kaluski]

Very, very nice Kenn. Great detail, prefer the first one.

Can you please help me with the tech data, as I am not up to speed with the model of Canon as I am from across the pond, plus you say 1.7x is this for this model series? Also what lens was used too.

thanks
Steve

[Bryan Hix]

I like the HA on the first and the head also appears a little sharper to me.

[Bill Dix]

Kenn - Both are great images. Detail and BG are excellent. I don't know if a smaller aperture would have brought the perch into focus, or what it might have done to the lovely BG, but the OOF perch is secondary to the handsome bird. Agree that the HA is better on the first, but the open beak makes #2 less ordinary, so #2 would be my favorite. Both are keepers in my book. Well done!

[kenn threed]

Thanks to all for both your observations and your encouragement.

The sweet calm pose in #1 appeals to me a lot. But the more animated open-beak capture in #2 is so very typical of this bird's happy character.
Titmice have this subtle little curvature in their upper beak which makes them appear to be always smiling. They are lovely cheerful little birds, and great subjects for us. :)

Very, very nice Kenn. Great detail, prefer the first one.

Can you please help me with the tech data, as I am not up to speed with the model of Canon as I am from across the pond, plus you say 1.7x is this for this model series? Also what lens was used too.

thanks
Steve

Steve - The Canon Sx-IS cameras (now superceded models) have a built-in zoom lens of 36-432mm equivalent, which for this series of shots was set to @348mm. We also had a Sony DH1758 teleconverter lens mounted for another 1.7x magnification; ...yielding just slightly less than a 600mm field of view in this case. I always feel a bit awkward to specify our focal lengths this way, but I believe it is more accepted and meaningful to express it in terms of 35mm equivalence.

Thanks again everyone for all your comments,

Kenn

[paul leverington]

#1 is better cause he's looking directly at us. For #2 to work he either needs to be or obviously not looking at us, or most definitely looking at us.. Almost, maybe, sort of, kind of looking at us does not get it. The intent of the comp should be clear to the viewer. That all being said, # 2 is still not real bad because of the open beak to some degree. But if his head angle was like # 1, you'd have no choice at all-both would be equally excellent IMO.

I would work to get the left part of the perch sharper--it's somewhat a distraction.

Beautiful shot to say the least.

Paul

[Kris Mortensen]

Another vote for the open beak!

[Peter Farrell]

I would be thrilled with either. If i have to choose i will take #2 for the open beak.
That is a beutiful perch, looks like a piece of dritwood?