Sideview Sparrow

[Thanaboon Jearkjirm]

D700
300mm f/2.8 VR II with TC-20E III
600mm
ISO 1600
f/7.1 at 1/200s
Aperture Priority mode
Matrix Metering
+0.7EV
AF-C, Dynamic 9 points
Auto white balance
handheld

Level, Set white/black point, NR and Sharpen.

The bird is much closer (less crop) and histogram is better than the previous image. This image was shot at the same time as previous image, so still wishes for a lower angle and more DOF. Last two posts I got comment about being a bit too bright, how about the brightness this one?

All comments and suggestions are welcome.

[Fabs Forns]

Not bad at all for ISO 1600, but then, Nikon sure has an edge on the high ISOs.
Normally I don't care for perching birds on the ground, but we get them where we can :)
I didn't see the other one, sorry, but this bird looks good to me. The BG is what's bright, you can go to Curves, click on the hand and move it down to tone it down, if you have CS4 or 5.
Very sharp and good head angle.
DOF is critical when you are very close and I see you didn't have too much s/s to go any tighter.
Photography is all about compromises.

[Dave Mills]

Hi A number of good qualities to the image. Head sharpness,backround and good exposure on the subject. Agree with Fabs regarding the backround and for my taste would have liked to have seen sharp feet. I realize there was a speed issue...

[VinceRossi]

How did you keep the noise down with the ISO being 1600 ???

[Dave Mills]

Hi Vince, a D700 has a sensor that can handle that speed....

[Lance Peters]

Fabs nailed it!! I wouldnt have hesitated to go to 3200ISO with a light scene like this - would have allowed for somemore DOF whilst keeping the shutter speed high.
Lots to like here.

[Alfred Forns]

Excellent critiques !!!

Vince regarding ISO those cameras perform well and others that do not can be made to look good :) The real deal in high ISO is keeping feather detail and this has it !!!!

[WIlliam Maroldo]

The failure to have the entire bird in focus, on basic profile shot(though a more steep viewing angle than optimal) is a major problem. Although a greater depth of field would have fixed it, here it also has to do with where on the bird the focus point was. Although focusing on the eye usually works, it can have problems. There is an area in front of as well as behind this point that will be in focus, the greater the Fstop the more distance that is covered. It is possible F7.1 was sufficient to cover the entire bird. In other words if the mid section of the bird(and not the head) had been focused on, it is possible that both the head and feet would have been in focus. Perhaps not, but focusing on what is closest wastes 1/2 of the well focused distances you have to work with.regards~Bill

[Thanaboon Jearkjirm]

The failure to have the entire bird in focus, on basic profile shot(though a more steep viewing angle than optimal) is a major problem. Although a greater depth of field would have fixed it, here it also has to do with where on the bird the focus point was. Although focusing on the eye usually works, it can have problems. There is an area in front of as well as behind this point that will be in focus, the greater the Fstop the more distance that is covered. It is possible F7.1 was sufficient to cover the entire bird. In other words if the mid section of the bird(and not the head) had been focused on, it is possible that both the head and feet would have been in focus. Perhaps not, but focusing on what is closest wastes 1/2 of the well focused distances you have to work with.regards~Bill

Good point, that reminds me of the eye need to be in focus, but not necessary mean I have to focus on the eye.

[subhrashis]

@Vince, Despair not, even on D5000 you can use ISO 1600, if you dont crop much....
This was an image i was surprised to take, shown here +/- noise reduction..
http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...ad.php?t=63257
Full frame sensors, though are another story, and one was handled very well here! Excellent portrait showing how beautiful a bird we tend to think common is... :)