Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Dipper

  1. #1
    Macro and Flora Moderator Jonathan Ashton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    17,017
    Threads
    2,604
    Thank You Posts

    Default Dipper

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    Canon 7D Canon 500mm f4 L IS ISO 200 1/60 sec f4
    I deliberately chose ISO 200 to try to get a quality image and I also wanted one that would show a little action.

    All C & welcome.

  2. #2
    Forum Participant Joe Senzatimore's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    new york
    Posts
    3,509
    Threads
    524
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Amazing how this dark subject is set against a dark BG , and still jumps out. Fine job. Love how it is all puffed up.

  3. #3
    Ofer Levy
    Guest

    Default

    I am not sure iso 200 was the right thing to do when you're interested to get some action. The motion blur in here weakens this image IMHO.

  4. #4
    Macro and Flora Moderator Jonathan Ashton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    17,017
    Threads
    2,604
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ofer Levy View Post
    I am not sure iso 200 was the right thing to do when you're interested to get some action. The motion blur in here weakens this image IMHO.
    I don't think I explained myself properly, what I meant was I wanted to show some motion whilst at the same time retaining a degree of sharpness in the rest of the bird. Most pictures of dippers tend to be taken with a fast shutter speed thus freezing all motion.

  5. #5
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Africa
    Posts
    3,723
    Threads
    251
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Im not sure if this works Jonathan, I like that you are trying something different but feel the blurry legs and beak don't add to the image. Great lloking bird on a nice BG.

  6. #6
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Posts
    1,076
    Threads
    129
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    This image reminds me that I need to understand the Canon models more. Because I don't know Canon well, I can't tell you that you needed to use a much higher ISO; perhaps you're right, you needed a low ISO with your model in order to get a "quality image" (i.e., one without much noise [I presume]). If your camera is one in which in many circumstances IQ is quickly lost above say ISO 800, then I'd have to say that your idea here, while ambitious, wasn't technically feasible, given the limitations of your machine. The fluttering lower bill, the result of the low SS, isn't a problem. But f4 is a problem. Look at your very shallow DOF. Your dipper's foot, just a few mm behind the focal plane, is already out of focus; that's of course the result of the shallow DOF, for the foot obviously was motionless. I think that it's possible that your experience and skill are growing and that you're beginning to push up against the technical limitations of your setup. It may therefore be time to consider a high-ISO camera.

  7. #7
    Macro and Flora Moderator Jonathan Ashton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    17,017
    Threads
    2,604
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Craig you have hit the nail on the head - absolutely. I guess I was trying for the almost impossible, I wanted a "different" shot of a dipper - quality and action and in unfavourable conditions. I agreee with your comments entirely...... but I cannot justify a 1D Mk1v much as I would like one it just grates on me to spend that kind of money knowing it will be superseded in a matter of 18 months to two years.
    Don't get me wrong I would get a great kick out of owning one but I think the 7D does what I want, I think the main limitation I have is me, not the equipment - it's just a matter of putting more time and effort in and in the end I will be rewarded. Thanks for your observations - much appreciated.

  8. #8
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Posts
    1,076
    Threads
    129
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan Ashton View Post
    . . . it just grates on me to spend that kind of money knowing it will be superseded in a matter of 18 months to two years.
    Jonathan, with many products, "obsolescence" has more to do with marketing than any technological advancement. Companies hype the "new" product, which often isn't improved enough to justify replacing the older model. But that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about you getting into a whole new product line, because the product stream in which you find yourself now may not be satisfactory. If you bought a high-ISO camera, you wouldn't simply be updating to a newer model, you'd be getting into a new, more professional line of cameras. A high-ISO camera would be a great leap forward in comparison to the machine you have now. Last year, I was beginning to reach the limits of what my Nikon D300 could do. I asked myself, do I shoot for another year to 18 months with the D300 and wait for the Nikon D4, or do I buy the D3S now? The D4 will be the successor to the D3S/D3X, but the D3S is not the successor to the D300; it's a different sort of camera, a different line, more expensive, and overall better suited to bird photography. I opted not to wait; I bought the D3S. The expense was great, but with the old D300 I'd have never got shots like this one:

    http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...her?highlight=

  9. #9
    Macro and Flora Moderator Jonathan Ashton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    17,017
    Threads
    2,604
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Craig Brelsford View Post
    Jonathan, with many products, "obsolescence" has more to do with marketing than any technological advancement. Companies hype the "new" product, which often isn't improved enough to justify replacing the older model. But that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about you getting into a whole new product line, because the product stream in which you find yourself now may not be satisfactory. If you bought a high-ISO camera, you wouldn't simply be updating to a newer model, you'd be getting into a new, more professional line of cameras. A high-ISO camera would be a great leap forward in comparison to the machine you have now. Last year, I was beginning to reach the limits of what my Nikon D300 could do. I asked myself, do I shoot for another year to 18 months with the D300 and wait for the Nikon D4, or do I buy the D3S now? The D4 will be the successor to the D3S/D3X, but the D3S is not the successor to the D300; it's a different sort of camera, a different line, more expensive, and overall better suited to bird photography. I opted not to wait; I bought the D3S. The expense was great, but with the old D300 I'd have never got shots like this one:

    http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...her?highlight=
    Craig I understand and agree with your comments entirely, but paying in excess of £4000 for a camera at the moment seems a little too expensive to me I agree I may get some shots under poor light that I cannot get now but that doesn't add upto to 3 x the cost of a 7D for me and just knowing that there is a marketing strategy that would make yet a another new model available shortly after I buy the preceding one just grates on me.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Web Analytics