Flying Peacock

[Scuff]

This Peacock was flying around and landing on house roofs. I had only seen them strutting around stately homes before!

[john999boy]

Nice pic Scuff.

[GRE608Y]

what an amazing picture! As soon as I saw the title of this thread I immediately thought of the film, "The Other Guys"!

[snow_muncher]

I used to live in the New Forest, in a village called Sway.

We had two male peacocks who lived in the village, come spring they started a very loud and unfruitful search of the village for peahens

Twice as big as a pheasant, with half the brains

very cool photo by the way

my memory of peacocks 'flying' is a few seconds later when the bird realises its miscalculated and slams into side of house/bush/hedge/van

[philc]

Nice piccy, must've been a quick shutter speed to freeze them feathers! Not the most aerodynamic creatures, are they?

Phil

[Scuff]

Thanks for all of your kind comments.

It really was like watching an ape in a hang glider

Phill - It was 400asa shutter speed about 1/2000 sec on a 500mm lens wide open at f4. Hand held with IS on (though IS won't freeze the action, it helps stop the wobbles induced by the weight o the lens and camera).

[Allams Skoda]

Very nice photo!

[Lady Elanore]

That made me laugh Is that the lens you are going to give me Scuff?

I hired a 70-200mm f2.8f II for a long weekend and had mixed results trying to capture some bird pictures. I now have a 7D and decided to utilise not only it's high drive speed, but more sophisticated AF and try to get some pictures of gulls flying about in a feeding frenzy. I say frenzy, actually it was my mum tyring to feed some ducks near Warkworth and the gulls sort of joined in, but it gave me access to the birds close up. I kind of blew it though, as I panicked a bit and left the EV on evaluative and the predominantly white gulls mostly burnt out against the grey water and mostly overcast conditions. I also didn't take any RAW pictures as I really wanted to try and get the photograph right, rather than fix it in PP. anyhoo, do you think I should have gone with Spot metering? I also tried AI servo and focus with mixed results. Again I assume because of my close proximity to the birds and the high speed of movement involved trying to track them meant the camera was confused between what was moving and what was background/foreground whipping past the lens as I panned etc. I'd be grateful for any tips for this kind of scenario, eg in amongst the birds by a riverside and a lot of very high speed movement (partly me dodging seagull poo ) as I definitely was subject to the 'all the gear and no idea' syndrome this time :( There are some nice keepers of Ducks of course

Oh and here is one with my trusty 40D taken in my mums garden :(honest, this is Peter the peacock from down the road. He took a wander into my mums garden on a whim ) apologise for the sky but at least i got down in the dirt

Edited 13 May, 2011 by Lady Elanore

[KenONeill]

Well, I never use auto exposure for wildlife photography. Put it in manual and expose about 50/50 looking down-sun.

I've never used autofocus either; stop down as far as I can get a shutter speed I can hold (eg F8 at 1/500 is better than F5.6 at 1/1000) and try to let the depth of field sort itself out. This doesn't apply so much if you've something like a bird table to focus on as if you're after waders, ducks and seabirds.

[Lady Elanore]

Well, I never use auto exposure for wildlife photography. Put it in manual and expose about 50/50 looking down-sun.

I've never used autofocus either; stop down as far as I can get a shutter speed I can hold (eg F8 at 1/500 is better than F5.6 at 1/1000) and try to let the depth of field sort itself out. This doesn't apply so much if you've something like a bird table to focus on as if you're after waders, ducks and seabirds.

I was actually amongst the birds and autofocus was a must for what I was trying to achieve. Tracking the birds as they came towards me etc and using the DoF to help pick them out. The mkII lens focuses in a split second, it is truly remarkable compared to my SIgma 70-200mm f2.8 and that is pretty quick. The same problem came with the birds flying around me altering the exposure. You really can see how fish and the like avoid predators buy swarming all over. I got some nice shots of in air fighting, but think the camera can do so much more to help me. If I could have singled out a bird, I could have achieved better results quite easily, but I wanted to try to catch the action. I might well get a second chance to do this in a few weeks time. I think my mistake was approaching the whole thing like a football match. With a bit of luck, the sun will be out and stay out for my next attempt, then I can stop down, iso up a little and take it easy

Here's an example (as long as Graham doesn't mind)

Edited 13 May, 2011 by Lady Elanore

[Scuff]

Fast action photography is one of the few areas where you really need fast lenses and a decent AF.

This will allow not only a nice diffused background and also keep the shutter speeds high.

If the light is reasonably constant, I will always set up on manual exposure using an incident light reading. Using a spot meter won't help as it will only give you the correct exposure if the metered area is pointing at something 18% grey. ( I tend to use 12%grey for digital to move the exposure away from the 4bit end of the sensor to record more 'bits' in the shadow areas).

I haven't used the 7d, but if it allows you to set up the AF for different scenarios, I would suggest using a single point AF with expansion in case you move off the bird accidentally. I would also suggest that you set up a slight delay for switching between subjects in case another critter flies in front of your subject. That should help the camera keep locked on.

That should give you some ideas to play with Amanda. (And BTW, shoot in raw, you are throwing away sooooo much info by shooting in jpeg you nortee gerl :-)

Edited 14 May, 2011 by Scuff

[Lady Elanore]

Fast action photography is one of the few areas where you really need fast lenses and a decent AF.

This will allow not only a nice diffused background and also keep the shutter speeds high.

If the light is reasonably constant, I will always set up on manual exposure using an incident light reading. Using a spot meter won't help as it will only give you the correct exposure if the metered area is pointing at something 18% grey. ( I tend to use 12%grey for digital to move the exposure away from the 4bit end of the sensor to record more 'bits' in the shadow areas).

I haven't used the 7d, but if it allows you to set up the AF for different scenarios, I would suggest using a single point AF with expansion in case you move off the bird accidentally. I would also suggest that you set up a slight delay for switching between subjects in case another critter flies in front of your subject. That should help the camera keep locked on.

That should give you some ideas to play with Amanda. (And BTW, shoot in raw, you are throwing away sooooo much info by shooting in jpeg you nortee gerl :-)

I'm still getting to grips with the 7D, but you can alter the delay for switching AF points, so that might be a good idea thanks. I chose not to use RAW as I wasn't so much after keepers, rather I was trying to get to grips with the camera and scenario. I realise I could have saved a lot of the burnt and crushed shots, but I reckoned it would have been a lot of work for something I wasn't aiming to do anything with. I will use RAW next time though, as I have a better starting point now and it will help with the very changeable light conditions oop North.

I do love the lens though, it seems light years more responsive than my Sigma and Calumet do offer a discount if you rent from them Mind you, it is far too good a lens for me :( but that never stopped me before I think you would like the 7D (well as much as you could for a C sensor ) as it is very responsive and seems to have quite a lot of the grown up features of the 1D. I can't see me using the video much though.

It's in my nature to do things the difficult way which is why I was trying to force myself to get results with jpegs and if I cracked that, I would therefore get even better results with RAW. It is probably a silly way to go about things, but as I tend to be lazy, it forces me to try new things and work out what I am trying to do.

Thanks as always and don't forget my lens Not sure if photobucket will help much, but here is a handheld, cropped shot wide open at 200mm

Edited 14 May, 2011 by Lady Elanore

[Scuff]

You definitely have your own unique logic

That said, the two images you have shown are very nice, and very saleable with a little tweaking. Keep up the good work

[Lady Elanore]

You definitely have your own unique logic

That said, the two images you have shown are very nice, and very saleable with a little tweaking. Keep up the good work

"Unique logic", I LIKE IT!! :) My school teachers never put it in quite those terms, although i think they called me special sometimes

I think it is traditional to take a picture of a duck with a new lens insn't it? (the picture is of a duck, not one of a duck carrying a lens)

ps you are still avoiding my 'give me your lens' questions

pps thanks for the encouragement too

[Scuff]

"Unique logic", I LIKE IT!! :) My school teachers never put it in quite those terms, although i think they called me special sometimes

I think it is traditional to take a picture of a duck with a new lens insn't it? (the picture is of a duck, not one of a duck carrying a lens)

ps you are still avoiding my 'give me your lens' questions

pps thanks for the encouragement too

Mmmmmm, that would give you an equivalent of An 800mm f4 on yer 7d. That's not allowed

[Lady Elanore]

Mmmmmm, that would give you an equivalent of An 800mm f4 on yer 7d. That's not allowed

Actually as I am OT already, I asked the peeps at Calumet if the 70-200mm with the Canon x2 teleconverter on it was as sharp as the 100-400mm and they said that on the C sensor cameras they thought it would be, at least as makes no difference. Plus you get a stop of two better IS. Trying to track down a cheap mkII X 2 TC now as I gather the mkII isn't really much of an improvement. What do you reckon?

ps that would still be 640mm :p

Edited 23 May, 2011 by Lady Elanore

[Scuff]

Size can sometimes be important. I am soooo happy with the Caon lens, can you guess what I have done? My accountant will kill me.

Actually as I am OT already, I asked the peeps at Calumet if the 70-200mm with the Canon x2 teleconverter on it was as sharp as the 100-400mm and they said that on the C sensor cameras they thought it would be, at least as makes no difference. Plus you get a stop of two better IS. Trying to track down a cheap mkII X 2 TC now as I gather the mkII isn't really much of an improvement. What do you reckon?

ps that would still be 640mm :p

I have both converters. I use the 1.4x on my long telephotos without issue. I occasionally use the 2x, which is ok stopped down a bit. I must admit that I personally wouldn't use either of them on any of my zoom lenses. Now if you were to pick up a nice used 300mm f4, and a 1.4x converter, that would be much nicer image quality.

Don't get me wrong, the 70-200 is very good, for a zoom. But it doesn't really match prime lenses.

If you must get a converter, use the 1.4x on your 70-200.

[Lady Elanore]

I have both converters. I use the 1.4x on my long telephotos without issue. I occasionally use the 2x, which is ok stopped down a bit. I must admit that I personally wouldn't use either of them on any of my zoom lenses. Now if you were to pick up a nice used 300mm f4, and a 1.4x converter, that would be much nicer image quality.

Don't get me wrong, the 70-200 is very good, for a zoom. But it doesn't really match prime lenses.

If you must get a converter, use the 1.4x on your 70-200.

I missed out on the outgoing mkII converter, but I think there might be a few unsold ones still floating about. I don't need to buy a nice big prime as you are going to give me one of yours I thought :p

Just got back from a day in hell at the Manchester 10K and Sprint (working not running). I noticed that a lot of the photographers were using 60D,7D and 5D cameras with grips. Probably saw more of these than 1D's. Not sure if the economic climate is biting, or whether image quality of these cameras is now considered good enough for news and magazines? (I know the 5D is great on IQ, but I am guessing it isn't a patch on it's big brother for a pro snapper who is used to the more advanced features and quicker speeds).Not sure what the Nikon guys were using, but I did see quite a few of their cameras using grips, so I am guessing that they weren't the Pro bodies.

[john999boy]

The BirdForum quite often has some high powered bits of kit for sale - here.

[Lady Elanore]

The BirdForum quite often has some high powered bits of kit for sale - here.

Thank you for a great link

[philc]

I spent Friday at an architectural photography workshop at Kirby Hall, in Northamptonshire, arranged through English Heritage. Obviously it was mostly biased towards taking pictures of buildings, which don't move much, as opposed to birds (which do) but the place is overrun with peacocks, one of whom scared the pants off me by yelling in my ear as I was setting up a shot. So I shot him. Luckily for him, it was with a 50D and 24-105, rather than a 12 bore, but I was wondering how he would taste with roast spuds. Anyway, here's the culprit.

Phil

[DBP]

Same as everone else, fantastic picture there.

[Scuff]

I spent Friday at an architectural photography workshop at Kirby Hall, in Northamptonshire, arranged through English Heritage. Obviously it was mostly biased towards taking pictures of buildings, which don't move much, as opposed to birds (which do) but the place is overrun with peacocks, one of whom scared the pants off me by yelling in my ear as I was setting up a shot. So I shot him. Luckily for him, it was with a 50D and 24-105, rather than a 12 bore, but I was wondering how he would taste with roast spuds. Anyway, here's the culprit.

Phil

I have met that one phil!

I live near to Kirby hall, and being a fan of architectural Photography myself, have taken many images there.

[philc]

I have met that one phil!

I live near to Kirby hall, and being a fan of architectural Photography myself, have taken many images there.

It's a bit of a trek for me, but well worth it -it was presented by a company called Line & Light, and one of the instructors was Martine Hamilton-Knight, who's a well known and respected architectural photographer. She's also a very nice lady, and took huge efforts to make the day work for us all (at one stage she came charging down the main stairs yelling, "The sun's out! Look at the light!!!"). Her infectious enthusiasm showed us all how ro slow down and look at the picture properly before pressing the shutter button. I always enjoy these days -the group varied from a girl who had started her own photographic business and wanted more knowledge, to a retired gentleman (who used to be the Queen's locksmith!) who'd bought a digital camera, but really hadn't much idea what to do with it, to a lady who used to do all the photography for her late husband's architectural business, but had never used digita before (she has a huge collection of Nikon and Hassleblad film bodies).

The Hall itself is gorgeous -I love the honey coloured Northamptonshire stone.

All I need now is a new tripod (mine gave up the ghost on the day) and I really, really want a 16-35 L series lense one of these days, after Bob Rowe, the other instructor, lent me his to play with.

I'll bung some of my results on a new thread.

Phil

[Scuff]

It's a bit of a trek for me, but well worth it -it was presented by a company called Line & Light, and one of the instructors was Martine Hamilton-Knight, who's a well known and respected architectural photographer. She's also a very nice lady, and took huge efforts to make the day work for us all (at one stage she came charging down the main stairs yelling, "The sun's out! Look at the light!!!"). Her infectious enthusiasm showed us all how ro slow down and look at the picture properly before pressing the shutter button. I always enjoy these days -the group varied from a girl who had started her own photographic business and wanted more knowledge, to a retired gentleman (who used to be the Queen's locksmith!) who'd bought a digital camera, but really hadn't much idea what to do with it, to a lady who used to do all the photography for her late husband's architectural business, but had never used digita before (she has a huge collection of Nikon and Hassleblad film bodies).

The Hall itself is gorgeous -I love the honey coloured Northamptonshire stone.

All I need now is a new tripod (mine gave up the ghost on the day) and I really, really want a 16-35 L series lense one of these days, after Bob Rowe, the other instructor, lent me his to play with.

I'll bung some of my results on a new thread.

Phil

That sounds like you had a great day Phil. I look forward to seeing some images