Getting MORE from your photos !

[mudnut]

This is with the 75/300mm lense at 300mm, on AV mode 1/500th shutter speed with an f value of 6.3. To me it looks washed out with the goats coat dominating the pic.

I also went to manual AF mode and selected the central focus point. I am unable to reset the focus to the default which highlights the complete picture.

[Cuppa]

This is with the 75/300mm lense at 300mm, on AV mode 1/500th shutter speed with an f value of 6.3. To me it looks washed out with the goats coat dominating the pic.

I also went to manual AF mode and selected the central focus point. I am unable to reset the focus to the default which highlights the complete picture.

I don't think it looks washed out, but I can see what you mean about the goat's coat dominating the pic. I believe that this would be less so if you had used a higher f stop to obtain a greater depth of field, getting the wagtail & some of the grass behind in greater focus. The Goat wasn't moving so you could afford to drop the shutter speed quite a bit, especially if the bird wasn't moving much either. Dropping the shutter speed & increasing the F stop should allow for greater depth of field whilst maintaining much the same ISO.

[mudnut]

I'll try that, Cuppa. It was a bit tricky, as the wagtail would suddenly pounce on an insect then flit back up, so getting it in a still shot was pure luck. I'll have a go at playing with filters to add a bit of colour or reduce the glare.

This was shot taken on full auto and the wren's beak was was a bit blurred so I have had a bit of fun with touch up, filters and such.

[mudnut]

Red Wattlebird. A common honeyeater found right across southern Australia. It is nomadic, following the cyclic and seasonal bloom of flowers. A fairly aggressive and nomadic tree and shrub dweller, its main sustenance is nectar and pollen, but it will also eat fruit and hunt insects.

I used a Sigma 150-600mm lens, shutter speed 1/200 f6.3. Having to run it through Paint detracts from it though. Is there another way to resize pics so they are sized appropriately?

[Cuppa]

Resizing for forums is problematic because most have a relatively small file size limit. If you reduce the file size you lose clarity. One way around this is to use an online photo host - upload to it & then use a link to it on the forum.

There are heaps of free photo re-sizing programmes for Windows, Others here may be able to advise which they like, otherwise it's just a matter of trying some to find one to suit. On my Mac I just export the photo from my photos app & choose the size as I do it.

Provided the size is acceptable to a forum, saving as a .png file retains more of the photo's information. Often it's a balance between physical size of the image & it's file size.

Is that a Wattle Bird or a spiny cheeked honeyeater?

How do you like the lens. I bought the same lens last year, but struggle with it's weight. Ok on a tripod, but hard work hand held. Wish I'd bought a 400mm zoom for birds, but the one available for my camera was over $4k!

[mudnut]

I have edited the post with the species name.

To be honest, I have had very mixed results with the lens, Cuppa.

I am getting maybe one good pic in 20. The 600 I have is the contemporary style which is supposed to be far lighter than the more rugged sports lens.
And yes, I struggle with the weight. Mrs mudsane has been carrying the equipment in a rucksack for me on field trips.

I bought a cheap Inca tripod to use until I can find a good half ball type with a better camera mount.

I am thinking about building a hard shell case with a collapsing handle, pneumatic wheels and a seat cushion on top, so I can get to good sites alone.

I tried numerous different settings and modes for this shot of a Great Egret at around 70-80 metres away. The pic was the best of a bad bunch and is same settings as above.

And yet the Chest Teal is almost perfect. Same settings, but only 40 metres away.

[Cuppa]

I'm still experimenting with the Sigma lens. A few things have made it focus quicker , but stuffed if I can remember precisely what. I have used the Sigma software to change how some of the functions & switches of the lens work. I also use reasonably fast shutter speed (& consequently larger aperture and/or higher ISO) when hand held. Constant focus helps a lot but drains the battery more quickly. And Back Button Focussing helps a lot too. But yes I get pretty mixed results & know the frustration when the only shots you have turn out to be crap. Particularly frustrating is being unable to focus a clearly as I need to,mbecause in the rush to get the shot have forgotten to change the 3 position switch for the lens' focal range. I also suspect that becoming fluent with such a large lens requires an awful lot of practice/experience. The lens itself is certainly capable of high quality, it's the user input which needs to improve. Shots need to be planned which involves observation & learning about the bird's behaviour & habits - it's favourite perches for example (something I quite enjoy). Spontaneous shots with the big lens can 'get lucky' , but is definitely hit & miss. When going out to try to get shots of a bird which I may never see again, especially in heavy cover like the rainforest I've rather disappointingly learned that it is better to trade the closer close-up shot, for a clearer more distant shot with my 55mm-210mm Sony zoom, with a 1.7x Olympus teleconvertor fitted. Just *much* easier & faster to handle.

[mudnut]

I have tried on numerous occasions to capture a good image of a Tree Creeper. No matter what focus level is chosen, the tree trunk comes out clearer than the bird.

I have used the 18-55, the 75-300 and the 150-600 lens with the same results. Apart from the fact that the it never sits still, I have come to the conclusion the White Throated Tree Creeper emits a camouflage aura.

[Cuppa]

To my eyes both tree trunk & bird are very 'soft'.

Do you have a setting which enables auto focus AND manual focus? It may help to get 'in the ballpark' with auto focus & then try to tweak it manually to improve it. I use this quite a lot when in heavy undergrowth as I found the camera would often focus on a nearby leaf or twig when I thought it was on the bird. Result was 'snaps' which my wife found acceptable but all I could see was a bird which should have been 'pin sharp' but wasn't.

[mudnut]

I had a go at getting some insects, 18-55mm lens, but lost the settings info. Took over a hundred snaps to get these two. The first fly ate a smaller insect after I took the pic.

The lenses all have manual focus. I have tried looking for back button focus, but my model camera doesn't have that extra AF button.