Chance Encounter editionI was going to snap a picture of a flower when this Saffron Finch came flying and stood on one of its branches>Previous Thread Image Limit Reached >>4500320
Saw this little guy's nest, but only had 70mm on me. I thought I could get a decent shot of him sitting in the entrance, but he probably didn't like me standing under his tree.
*flies into the thread*
>>4507785I got into birding recently and grabbed a Canon sx50 hs second hand for cheap! The 50x zoom comes in handy even though with my luck they've already flown away by the time I close in and focus
quick reflexes season. god damn.
fast little shits.
Had to add artificial bokeh blur to make the bird pop. Does it look natural?
>>4507813For reference this was the original
>>4507781nothing special but first burd photo with my new OM-1
Henlo
>>4507811Great shot, early morning?>>4507792Love the colorThis one is from the waterfront, handheld catadioptric lens, but the heron was patient like a saint.
Cinnamon Hawk (Harris Hawk)
All the chicks are out and about. I did snap a photo of a Great Crested Grebe pulling a worm out of it's arse but it's not great to look at. >>4507811I hate photographing Goldcrests. Still hoping to see a Firecrest at some point.
>>4507884>I did snap a photo of a Great Crested Grebe pulling a worm out of it's arse but it's not great to look at.post it anyway
I love these little guys so much
The elusive two-headed swan
>>4507979who else /uʍop ǝpisdn/ here?
>>4507884we get ruby and gold, no ruby shots this year yet
lingering weird ducks
>>4507849doing this shit with a mirror lens is wild
>>4508149Love these little lads
>>4507974
>>4507974By not great, I simply meant it's a crap photo, not that it was horrific to look at. But hey, I didn't know birds can get worms but I guess why not.
>>4508284sometimes cool shit happenstance doesnt wind up making a good shot
There was a bunch of Blue-gray Tanagers eating pink peppercorns, they're cute
>>4508386god id love to go to south america. how likely am i to get robbed lugging my giant camera around in the jungle?
>>4508412In the jungle? Some areas (towns/cities) are rough depending on the country. I heard there's a Cuzco expedition where you go into the jungle for 4 days with a tour guide to look at the flora and fauna. Probably the same for other countriesThis one I took at the park near my house. I live in Lima, Peru (coastal). OP picture is also mine, same park. Lots of cool colored birds just out and about here in the cityHave a vermilion flycatcher I saw the other day
>>4508386Huh, just realized the color correction on this one was a little yellowishI'll get better with time and practice
sooc. no crop
Smallest bird I have photographed. I hear goldcrests all the time but never managed to take a picture
A curious juvenile (female) black bird
>>4508157It's challenging, but that's the charm of it. And carrying around a 500mm shorter than a can of Pringles has its moments as well>>4508437Lovely detail on the feathers
>>4508460your blackbirds are like our robins, and your robins are like our chickadees. i don't think you guys have anything quite like our blackbirds
Don't think I've ever seen on of these before. Found on a bush block right near my house. Pretty happy
>>4508546
>>4508538fem/juv black bird or sparrow?
Does this count as a bird?
>>4508559Just a sparrow, the shot seemed neat and I wanted to share, shaper and more interesting than picrel
>>4508635Which lens is that? I've been contemplating getting the 500mm tokina, since it's so light and cheap, but I'm reading conflicting reports about the IQ (by reflex standards).
>>4508641That's with an old Jupiter 11, 135mm/f4. I'm mostly carrying around vintage shit and am still a complete amateur at this.These>>4507849>>4508476>>4508538are all Tokina. Mine is from 1991 and all those images did receive at least a minor edit and crop. Primarily for missing contrast and being hazy/washed out. Even though it's f8 its DOF is crazy thin. Picrel is one out of maybe 15 shots of this fast little bastard that's even remotely sharp. I can't say I'd recommend it without knowing more, a regular lens will always be sharper than it and maybe getting a TC instead for one of your faster lenses would be a better choice.
i really hate birding
>>4508635Sharper for sure but I love the flowers and lighting here. So relaxing. It would make millions in body mists or air fresheners
>>4508691I wouldn't bring a big, heavy lens with me most of the time, so spending a lot of money on it feels like a waste. So I spend it on multiple cheap things of questionable value instead. Picrel is 180 AF-D with TC-201 (heavy crop). I leave that at home most of the time though.
took this really fast from my window when it landed on a tree i like it
camera focus was fucking with me today unfortunately
>>4508779im retarded no pic
grackle jumpscare
Met these tiny fuzzballs yesterday
he was nice
>>4507781I only had wide angle, and it's already very cropped :)
>>4508723Okay fair enough. Be aware that it has a niche 30.5mm filter set of skylight, nd2x and nd4x that need to be included with it as they're required for optics (mounted at the end, not front, look into that as I suck at explaining). Also keep in mind that the hood gives it quite a bit of length but it's still a lot lighter than a classic lens. Other than that, if you don't expect tack sharp pictures with it, go for it, it's a really fun lens and 500mm is a ton of reach. Getting a tripod or a monopod is a great next step but I managed to snap up some decent pictures from hand as well.
First time out with my dad's old camera setup he's given me.Touched it up a tiny bit with Windows' built in editor after converting it to jpg made it look really washed out and dull.
>>4508780mine 2
Tried to rescue this one in editing, but it just ended up more washed out... Should I just throw these away in the future?
>>4509184When in trouble, b&w is there to save the day.
>>4509225Dang yeah okay, thanks! And there I was going full Rockwell on it. Though it really does bring home how grainy it is. I'll have to try again soon, in better light hopefully.
Sleepy time
>>4509376
>>4509502Man, that looks way more vibrant in Photoshop. This website sucks the colour out of images like an amazonian giant woman would suck the nut out of me like a protein shot.
this may be the comfiest thread>>4508778i like itdo you have a flyscreen? i like the star in the eye
>>4509513thank you anon. yeah, took it quick through the screen in the window i was surprised it blocked it out as much as it did.
Getting a pipit with a ladybird through a gap in a fence was pretty lucky. I think that 'luck' element is why I like photographing birds a lot.
i really dislike bird photos which only show the bird. Without context. Probably became a trend due to social media like Instagram. I like it „zoomed out“.Maybe it’s just cope from my side because I can’t get closer…
>>4509993
>>4509994i really wish the focusing area on my 5Diii was bigger. Really hard to focus on objects that in the corners. Then I need to focus and recompose, and if the subject is moving, it’s impossible…
>>4509997One of the only things I actually like about photographing birds is getting up early and going the the lake. Its something I am then proud of myself, even if the photos are mid.
>>4509993Yes generally a photo of just an animal isn't going to be as good as an animal doing something interesting, in action or giving off some sort of intense behavioral facial expression... I went down the instagram wildlife photo rabbit hole once and like 80% of them were people trying to cope with their debt they most likely took on to buy their 30,000 dollars in gear by show casing their bazooka lens and how close they can zoom in on whatever local animal they live around.
Chuffed with this one, but maybe went a bit overboard with editing
These little guys havent fledged yet but are already much bigger.
>pair of crows chasing away a red kite>all the shots are terrible but a fewThe combo really showed its bad side this time.
>>4510575
still fuzzy two weeks later
Pre-dawn, ISO 20000
Magpie Lark. Was having a ciggie and taking some test shots with my newly repaired and serviced Vivitar S1 70-210.I've not owned one of these old push-pull zoom focus ring style lenses before, I'm really enjoying it so far. Combined with the impressive sharpness this lens has and it might be pretty decent for taking backyard snapshits of the local birds.
>>4508892If you're still on the fence on the Tokina, I managed to snap up this comparison and tried to crop up as close to each other as I could. 300mm Tair 3S - behemoth lens but relatively sharphttps://litter.catbox.moe/5dv9ro8bedjl3ka0.jpgAnd picrel with Tokinahttps://litter.catbox.moe/ggu1r2oplkm0ucqr.jpgThe softness is apparent but if you can live with it go for it. I'm hoping to get a shot with the fledglings at some point.
>>4511127I'm a moron, it's reversed, you can see it on the bokeh..
>>4511127Sort of. With many of these unnecessary purchases I'm often considering them for a year or more before making a decision. Vivitar MC 24/2 and ET8550 are currently on the photography related list.Picrel is 105/2.5 with a TC, sooc. By all rights, it should be culled, but for whatever reason I find it intriguing.
>>4509993Agree. They do end up looking a bit samey. Ironically here’s one of my shots that looks like yours.
>>4509993No, I completely get you. It's the same for me with macro where I prefer wider angles with background that isn't just a monolithic smear.
>>4511403
could have been a great pic if it wasn't for the slow ss
>>4511207this one i like the most but all are very sharp. what gear?
That's a long neck
>>4511475
>>4511435Thanks. Canon 90D, Tamron 100-400mm lens.ISO 400, f/7.1, 1/2000 second, 400mm, -2/3 EV
more birds incoming. i have 200 gigs of photos to cull on my dogshit integrated arc graphics laptop. its so slow i hate it and i put it off till i have no card space left
crow
Egret this morning.
>>4509993Nah, you're right. Isolated static pictures of birds are kind of boring "who has the longest lens?" portrait contest. Birds in context, as long as it doesn't detract, makes the image more interesting.
went on a long ass hike and caught a few birds
>>4512214
>>4512215
Found this cute ‘fella while in the parking lot! Shot on CINEMA-V.
>>4509993i agree also disagree, its a different game of skill, more llike huntingi got a nice tree heron this season too!>>4512210>>4512210Do some math. even with an 800 you have to be closer than you think to something the size of a ping pong ball to get uncropped frame filling.
>>4512393That tracks. The big money boomer at the place I used to try and do bird photos when I was a kid had a Canon 1200mm f5.6 and I was slapping around with an AE-1 and a 200mm f5.6 zoom. I've only ever seen one of them, and that guy was there with it several times.
>>4512389looks like a piece of plastic lol, what the fucks cinema v?
>>4512216What a beautiful shot>>4512389I use the Cinema-V Raptor as well!! So cute >_<>>4511798I have never seen this kind of bird before :-0 or maybe I just need to open my eyes haha
I was chasing a heron around a pond, trying to get close enough for a food shot when I noticed a dark lump up in a tree. It was a barred owl.
>>4512517good shot*
>>4512517Said heron WAY across the pond.
Went out to a lake and wasn't much anything there. It was somewhat sunny but suddenly went overcast when I got setup. This pic was about 500ft out
A heron this morning
An egret this morning
And a red-winged black bird.
Bird dudes, you're using long lenses for a lot of your shots. Any experience on how well Snoy's IBIS works with UNstabilized telephotos in the 400mm range?I got a great deal on an old 70-400mm SSM from a yard sale and it has no stabilization, I'm not sure if I should sell it at a normal price and put the proceeds toward a stabilized lens like a Tamron 50-400 or Sigma 100-400, or if my old A7III's IBIS will be just fine at 400mm. No, I can't test it yet, I'm hunting for a deal on an adapter. I do not currently have a telephoto that fits my mirrorless and my biggest DSLR lens is 300mm.
>>4513156I tried out an older nikon 300mm f4 on a z6ii thinking with the same logic, but the IBIS wasn't enough, it needs to be in the lens pretty much. Now, that's just nikon, but I'd imagine they all work similar. I think the IBIS is more for video to be honest. If the case was that older lenses could greatly benefit from the IBIS they'd still be rather expensive on the used marker.
>>4513180IBIS was pioneered by cameras with no video chops whatsoever and remains a stills feature. In video, it causes edge/corner warping (blurs UWA photos too). It’s really more for keeping 28mm-85mm primes small, cheap, and reliabld after the disaster that was the DSLR VC/VR/IS primes almost no one bought because lens VR usually brings double gauss character to reality scanner price points and lens sizes, completely defeating 90% of why people prefer primes over the 30 year old virgin lens (24-70 f2.8).
>>4513180>I think the IBIS is more for video to be honest. If the case was that older lenses could greatly benefit from the IBIS they'd still be rather expensive on the used marker.What are you talking about? Do you not understand what image stabilization is? It's not even difficult to test the effects it has in stills. I've never tried IBIS with my telephotos because my telephotos have it built in, but its efficacy is clear with my shorter lenses.
>>4513180IBIS=video is a marketing invention to get newbie videographers to pay out the ass for some awkward crippled or poorly made mirrorless (ie: any panasonic or sony). its objectively BAD for professional videography (corner wobble, sensor heating, "snapping", lack of configurability, limits camera selection to rather flawed/terrible cameras just to get IBIS thats set up better for video) and all professional videographers use external stabilization that works with any camera whenever possible.
>>4512135Yes!
>>4513182Ok well you're contradiction by saying I'm wrong and then saying you've never used it is kind of a wierd flex lol... I tried it on an older 300mm, it didn't do anything from what I saw, how is the IBIS going to stabilize the lens at the long end? Camera shake gets exponential with telephotos... >>4513181It's for both from my understanding... >>4513183Well I figured that. A pro isn't gonna rely souly on the cameras out of the box feature lol...
>>4513186>Ok well you're contradiction by saying I'm wrong and then saying you've never used it is kind of a wierd flex lol...You illiterate piece of shit, I said I didn't use it on TELEPHOTOS. I use it all the time with shorter lenses and it is CLEARLY not "more for video" and "no benefit to older lenses"
>>4513187Anon asked about telephotos, I gave my opinion on it. If the lens doesn't have VR or whatever and it's relying on IBIS it doesn't make much of a difference. Ao your opinion on this matter is useless since we are exclusively talking about telephotos. And yes IBIS gas a huge influence on today's mirrorless cameras for video. It's one of the selling points, it works nicely with one of my older lenses for video, so I don't know what you're freaking out over.
>>4513194IBIS is primarily a stills feature in reality. It is unironically bad for video. If you convince yourself it isn’t you are primed set yourself up for disappointment and chase body upgrades. This is why marketing now calls IBIS a video feature. Use this handy guideVideo: Gimbal or steadycamTelephoto: Lens VR only or hybrid VR+IBISNormal stills: IBISUWA lenses: Lens VR onlyProtecting your virginity: TripodCarrying a weapon in europe: monopod
>>4513195Why do you say that? After being disappointed with panasonic i bought a canon r5ii for video and im finally happy with the IBIS. My youtube shorts have never been better.
>>4513194You're a fucking moron
>>4513195Almost all lenses made today have image stabilization, or are fast enough they don't need it, plus IBIS. For your average joe IBIS is good enough for basic video needs. All the other shit added on like gimbals and such just make it better. >>4513197Leave this bird thread.
>>4513198No, IBIS is genuinely terrible for video unless you hit peak consoomer. IBIS in video drives more camera upgrade idiocy than anything else. I really recommend anyone using IBIS in video forget about it from now on and buy a gimbal for their next (and last) upgrade b
So I have a crazy idea. I'd like to try birding with a 35mm film camera. The film I'd like to try is kodak ecktachrome e100 so it can be cut up to put in slides for a kodak carousel projector. Do you think a 200mm lens is good enough or should I find something a bit longer? Am I just setting myself up for failure?
>swiggity swooty
>>4513198How about you leave? You're the guy who replied to my genuine question with zero applicable experience and flagrant boomerlore >IBIS is more for video>If old lenses benefited from it they would be more expensiveOld lenses aren't cheap because IBIS doesn't work with them, they're cheap because they aren't native to newer systems and most of them are optically worse than the modern equivalents. I just want to know if anyone has experience with IBIS and a lens this long, and how well it works, hence asking the bird guys instead of the gear thread who will just start arguing about brands and top of the line lenses. I know it works great with my unstabilized 17-50 f4 and 105mm Nikon Macro, and if it is basically useless with a 400 I was just going to flip the lens instead of buying an adapter and buy something more modern.
>>4513180>Now, that's just nikon, but I'd imagine they all work similar.Considering that Nikon doesn't even offer an adapter for AF-D lenses, I wouldn't be surprised if they disabled or gimped IBIS similar to how Sony gimped framerate and focus modes if you use adapted A-mount lenses, or aftermarket adapters for other brands.
>>4513211IBIS gets exponentially less useful over 85mm and under 24mm (corner smears)Focus point linked IBIS is a thing but its still not as good as a stable camera
>>4513214>exponentiallyThat's an answer that hints that there's data or math to this, do you have it or are you just making something up?
>>4513206Why not? You definitely "can" but birding is like 40% location, 20% luck, 20% skill and 20% gear. What long lenses and fast AF do is shrink the luck and location requirements and give you more opportunities because they bring you closer and are faster. The shorter your lens and slower your gear the more dependent getting the shot is on luck, location, and skill. You could go to a preserve boardwalk or something and there might be birds close enough to get a good shot with a 200 no problem or you could go on a hike and not see a bird that does more than fill a focus point marker with a 200. When I first got into photography with film and my 100-200 FD lens I think I got one photo of a bird that was worth keeping before I eventually got an AF SLR and a longer lens because they were otherwise too far away or too fast. I need to see if I can dig it up but all of my old negatives from my middle school years are in a box buried under other boxes.
>>4513211Zero experience? Anon I literally gave you a real world experience, with a non stabilized lens it doesn't do much. Even calibrated it was still a bit shit, definitely not a handhold experience if you're going for sharpness. Oh well. Take it or leave it, go waste some money on older lenses or whatever it is you're trying to do. >>4513199Yes it's for consumers, the average person, how many times do I have to repeat that? For stills it's nothing special, it's been around for a long ass time within the lens world, but for video ibis wasn't much pf a thing until recently.
>>4513213Pretty sure native Z gets 5-axis, but f-mount on ftz or anything else on a dumb adapter gets 3-axis. Not sure on adapted to chipped adapter. The focus point based IBIS is neat though.
>>4513228>Not sure on adapted to chipped adapter.That's the real question, because we all understand that with old manual lenses the real time distance and focal length data is not available, but with smart adapters it should be, since you can see focal length in the EXIF. I'm not sure if all AF lenses, or at least all AF lenses that don't use screw drive, provide distance feedback though. Seems like they would.
Mor egrets.
>>4513209I'm confused about the surface he's on.
>>4513304That's vegetation reflected on shallow flowing water. Got no sharper pictures, unfortunately.
>>4513156Here's a video of a test with that lens on an A7RII though not an A7III. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QKFCZMSN_g IBIS test review starts around the 7:00 mark, it definitely works based that test and as I recall when the IBIS sonys came out DPreview did a test where they went up to 200mm and saw a massive improvement vs no OS. Personally I think the best option is a 50-400 Tamron because it's quite a bit lighter and the AF should be faster. The lens based OS will probably be more effective but really you'd have to do a back to back test to know for sure.
>>4513229>focal length dataYou can just set the FL for IBIS purposes for any adapted lens on every mirrorless I've used (when using dumb adapters and dumb lenses)Distance is a good point
>>4513311Yeah that works great with primes but with zoom lenses it's not great unless you're going to be using a specific part of the range almost exclusively. You can probably set a custom button to bring that setting up and alter it fairly quickly but it's still slow and clunky vs the real time data the system needs for optimal performance. The reason 5 axis needs focal length and distance to subject is because it's moving the sensor on an arc for the yaw and pitch movements, and the arc radius has to be defined. X Y and roll do not require this because they're linear (and axial rotational) motions. 5 axis IBIS is not a meme, second gen stabilized lenses didn't just shift an element in the X and Y directions, they also rotated it in pitch and yaw directions in a similar way, but due to their placement in the optical path these movements are a bit different than the sensor movements since it is located at the focal plane.
i love jackdaws
>>4513206peacock on 55mm portra 800. if he was coming towards me i think it wouldn't been a decent shot.
>>4514025Wonderful
First seagull I saw to not eat trash, encountered it on the Island Heyabeliada which is a short ferry ride from Istanbul.
