From a Canon EOS 70D..

22 posts / 0 new
Last post
Reflex
Reflex's picture
From a Canon EOS 70D..

Araminta
Araminta's picture

From a SONY SLT-A77V wink

M-L

Devster
Devster's picture

Hey reflex, thats the camera I trying to buy.

I would love to get together with you and any others that are interested so you can show me what I'm doing wrong with my camera.

My photos are either too blurry, over exposed or under exposed. blush

Nothing as crisp as these.

Could you kindly share your camera settings.

Cheers

Devster

Devster
Devster's picture

Wow Araminta, those are some crisp shots.

I really need some lessons.

The detail is just breathtaking.

Reflex
Reflex's picture

devwenbull@hotmail.com wrote:

Hey reflex, thats the camera I trying to buy.

I would love to get together with you and any others that are interested so you can show me what I'm doing wrong with my camera.

My photos are either too blurry, over exposed or under exposed. blush

Nothing as crisp as these.

Could you kindly share your camera settings.

Cheers

Devster

Devster, You should ask Canonguy, he claims to know all the answers.

Samford Valley Qld.

Araminta
Araminta's picture

Just another random photo. I love those colours. I'm just showing you these to say, take your time chosing a brand of camera, there are other good cameras. I have done nothing to the photos.

M-L

Reflex
Reflex's picture

Some good quality photographs from camera's that someone said were not worth considering.

Samford Valley Qld.

Reflex
Reflex's picture

And another one....

Samford Valley Qld.

Araminta
Araminta's picture

winkgood on ya Reflexwink These ones are very good, sharp and no noise, and lovely colours.

I went to the March in Melbourne today. I witnessed some of the short falls of canon cameras first hand. As we were slowly (cheeky) marching down the street, I oberved several people taking photos using their canons trying to manually focus, but because we were moving towards them, I noticed them trying to get sharp pictures. They had to walk backwards to re focus, or run ahead to have enough time to get the camera to have enough time to focus. That has not happened to me yet, my Sony is very fast to adapt to different distances and focus on moving objects, using AF. A great advantage for bird photography.

But then again, what would I know? Those people might justnhave been bad photographers?

M-L

Devster
Devster's picture

How do you get to see birds soo close.

Just about every bird I see is miles up in the tree.

Araminta
Araminta's picture

I did answer to your question , no idea what happened to it?crying

Here is some of my answer. I’m good at sneaking up to them. It does need a bit of practice, but once you get the hang of it, easy most of the time. You’ll have to observe the behaviour of the bird, as to anticipate what the bird will do next, stay one step ahead of it. Simple tricks like make sure you walk as slowly as you can without making much noise , casting shadows on the ground doesn’t help either. Move when the bird is busy doing other things, like eating, preening and that kind of activity. Hide behind trees and shrubs etc. The bird might still fly off before you get close enough. Don’t despair, more practice will get you there. I have often quoted this friend of mine , a professional photographer, who told me: let your feet do the zooming in rather than your camera.

Good luck practicing cheeky.

M-L

birdie
birdie's picture

That is not strictly a good comparison M-L. Canon cameras are very fast in focussing but it would depend on what lens the individuals were using , if they had too long a zoom on then maybe they had to back off to get within their minimum focal distance.  You cannot compare focussing speeds based on summations like that... it is the lens that controls stuff like that.... if they for example had a 200ml fixed prime on then there is no ability to back off  the focal distance.

When you are talking to people who have very little knowledge and are eager to learn, I really feel it is better to be accurate and without bias.

There is so much more to photography than which camera you use and what lenses you have.  You can have the best gear in the world and not have a clue how to get results from it. or..... you can have the very basic stuff, like I use with my EOS 600D, and get good shots most of the time ( some may say that is debatable) .

Reflex not sure if there was sarcasm in your mention of Canonguy but I can assure you , he knows more than we will ever learn in most cases and gives freely of his knowledge when asked in the right way to so many people smiley

why is this in the challenge thread? just wondering ....

Sunshine Coast Queensland

Rick N
Rick N's picture

Hi Devster,

Though there has been some mention made by various posters I feel it is important to emphasise the

benefit in being able to get close for your shots. Far and away this will get you the best results for the least cost but

involves a commitment to learning the ways of the birds and then practicing in the field. It has taken me a few years

to start to get good results and come to the realisation it is not just abou the equiptment, though as the shooting becomes more

demanding ie birds in flight etc some of the more expensive gear, lenses for example, do come to the fore.

It is not particularly difficult, with practice, to take excellent shots of stationary birds with some very basic equiptment

and an understanding of their behaviour.

As for judging the merits of a camera by watching someone you don't know walk backwards in a crowd. No Comment.

Hope this helps.

Devster
Devster's picture

I would love to come out with one or some of you guys sometime to watch your technique. I am very much a kinesthetic learner. (I think thats how you spell it). I love the quote let your feet do the zooming. Most of the time its my feet that give me away lol.

Anyway I am getting better, I have realised that just because there is a bird there doesn't mean its going to be a good shot. I am starting to be more awar of lighting, backdrops etc.

I still haven't found the sweet spot with my lense and for the life of me can't figure out hot you get photos so crip and have a brilliant blurr in the back ground.

I am practicing a bit each day and taking photos pf birds I haven't even seen before as it's making me so aware. 

Spotted my first Silvereye & Scarlet Honeyeater today. Can't believe I haven't ever seen one in 42 years.

Anyway thanks for your tips.

Happy Birding

Devster

birdie
birdie's picture

Hi devster.... just wondered where do you live... which state at least?

You are right in your observation that each day you practice it makes you more aware of what is hiding out there. I am not particularly skillful at creeping up on birds, and do tend to lose patience with them. But the more you put yourself out there the higher the chance of you seeing and capturing a good shot !!  If you want to practise the "blurred background " technique in an artistic manner ... otherwise known as Bokeh in photographic terms there are a few things you need to appreciate.

1. It depends on the length of the lens you are using at the time... the longer the lens then the better chance of a nice Bokeh in birding terms as you are unlikely to get close with something like 85 ml unless it is a captive bird.

2. It also depends on the distance to your subject .... so the closer you are ( through the viewfinder) the better the chance of getting the blurry effect. It is based on something called depth of field...and if you google that there are plenty of explanations out there about how it works.

3. different lenses produce differing effects with the Bokeh.... some better than others. As a rule if you can remove the extraneous subject matter when you are framing your shot then it will always look better, and as you have noticed,  checking out what is behind your subject is always better, however birds are notoriously uncooperative with this part!!!!! Especially little birds who love to hide in the twigs and thorns laugh

4. Sometimes the beuaitul part can simply be achieved by the way the light points blur out....  there is so much involved but again, the more you practise with a long lens... minimum of 300ml I would recommend ... then the more you will see how it changes.

here is a link to a good explanation with pictures of varying Bokehs

http://photographylife.com/what-is-bokeh

Hope this helps and enjoy your birds and your photography

Cheers

Adrienne

Sunshine Coast Queensland

rawshorty
rawshorty's picture

birdie wrote:

Hi devster.... just wondered where do you live... which state at least?

Cheers

Adrienne

http://www.birdsinbackyards.net/forum/Introductions-all-round

Shorty......Canon gear

Canberra

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rawshorty/ 

Devster
Devster's picture

I live in Samford Qld - Let me know if anyone is keen to do some birding with me on the weekend.

Cheers Devster

birdie
birdie's picture

Well it does sound as if Reflex would be your closest then!!!

I am up on the sunshine coast so only get down that way occasionally.  Good luck with your birding then !

Sunshine Coast Queensland

Headsie
Headsie's picture

Araminta wrote:

winkgood on ya Reflexwink These ones are very good, sharp and no noise, and lovely colours.

I went to the March in Melbourne today. I witnessed some of the short falls of canon cameras first hand. As we were slowly (cheeky) marching down the street, I oberved several people taking photos using their canons trying to manually focus, but because we were moving towards them, I noticed them trying to get sharp pictures. They had to walk backwards to re focus, or run ahead to have enough time to get the camera to have enough time to focus. That has not happened to me yet, my Sony is very fast to adapt to different distances and focus on moving objects, using AF. A great advantage for bird photography.

But then again, what would I know? Those people might justnhave been bad photographers?

The shortfall you have identified in the canon camera has nothing to do with the camera and you have got it wrong or you dont understand how focusing works. It wouldent matter what camera those people had, if they were slow at manually focusing then nothing can help them, but if they have a canon camera they can swap to auto focus in shutter/apeture mode and have one of the fastest focusing cameras.

You cant do that with your camera, your camera cant auto focus unless you are in auto mode so if you tried to shoot in shutter/apeture/manual mode you lose your auto focus, thats pretty poor for a camera.

birdie
birdie's picture

Is that right about the Sony Headsie? I must look that up... how strange to have that feature on a camera!

I thought that most cameras kept the AF controls separate from the exposure control, which seems logical huh?

Sunshine Coast Queensland

Headsie
Headsie's picture

birdie wrote:

Is that right about the Sony Headsie? I must look that up... how strange to have that feature on a camera!

I thought that most cameras kept the AF controls separate from the exposure control, which seems logical huh?

I read a review on the A77V, as you know there is very little between cameras and most people would be scratching to know the difference between them and as for the photos themselves it wouldent make any difference what camera you used, the difference comes when you want to buy lenses, and other bits and pieces.

Quote:

You can only use autofocus in what's essentially automatic mode. It's unavailable in shutter/aperture-priority or manual modes. And I'm not crazy about the automatic gain/ISO sensitivity decisions the camera makes, or the fact that it lacks any audio controls. The less-expensive Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 delivers better video capabilities and quality, even unhacked. However, the SLT-A77V is still far superior to Nikon's options, and probably a bit better than the 7D.

The A77V isn't the fastest in its class--that honor remains with the 7D--and even lags behind the Nikon D7000, but it does pretty well considering it's processing so much more image data. And except for the annoying "processing" message it throws up when you're in automatic review mode, it feels quite fluid and zippy to shoot. It is noticeably slower than others to start up and shoot, taking half a second, possibly in part because it has to initialize two LCD displays. The time to focus and shoot in good light is a class-typical 0.3 second, and in dim light rises to a still-reasonable 0.6 second. Shooting two sequential JPEG or raw images runs 0.6 second as well; using flash bumps that up to 0.8 second. And it jets past the rest of the field with a standard burst of 8.5fps.

http://www.cnet.com/au/products/sony-alpha-slt-a77v/ 

birdie
birdie's picture

Thanks for that Headsie.... interesting article.  I cant imagine anything more annoying though than not being able to use autofocus with a manual or priority setting I must say.  So is the Sony actually a DSLR? 

Sunshine Coast Queensland

 and @UrbanBirdsOz  @birdsinbackyards
                 Subscribe to me on YouTube