Barred Owl


Posted by Michael Eckstein on Tue Sep 02, 2003 12:13 pm

All times are UTC-05:00

Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 11 posts | 
Image

10D 100/400 with 1.4TC @400mm 1/60 @f7.0 ev -2/3 fill flash -1 1/3 Tripod sidekick

Captive owl taken this morning at Homossassa Springs State Park, Florida
"There are no rules for good photographs, only good photographs." -Ansel Adams





http://www.photo.net/photos/Michael%20Eckstein
http://www.meckstein.com/mike

User avatar
Posted by:
Michael Eckstein
Forum Contributor
Location: Spring Hill, Florida
Posts: 479
Joined: 21 Aug 2003

   

by E.J. Peiker on Tue Sep 02, 2003 12:20 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Cool face shot. It looks like the point of focus is a little behind the eyes. A touch of USM would make this one much better.
 

by Mike Wilson on Tue Sep 02, 2003 1:37 pm
User avatar
Mike Wilson
Forum Contributor
Posts: 16364
Joined: 20 Aug 2003
Location: San Diego, CA
Looks like subject movement to me. 1/60 sec with 400mm + 1.4x with digital body would require a motionless subject. Very hard to get it sharp in these conditions.
Mike Wilson
San Diego, Ca
[url=http://www.naturescapes.net/membership.htm]NSN 0047[/url]
 

by Jim Neely on Tue Sep 02, 2003 3:10 pm
User avatar
Jim Neely
Regional Moderator
Posts: 6518
Joined: 21 Aug 2003
Location: Dripping Springs TX
Member #:00100
I agree with Mike on the subject movement.

Nice shot otherwise.

jn
[b]Jim Neely - Dripping Springs TX[/b]
jim(at)jneely.net [url=http://www.jneely.net]Jim Neely Nature Photography[/url]
 

by Bob Ettinger on Tue Sep 02, 2003 3:14 pm
Bob Ettinger
Regional Moderator
Posts: 3111
Joined: 19 Aug 2003
Member #:00148
Michael,

Well done, great eyes and a nice closeup.
Bob Ettinger
 

by Michael Eckstein on Tue Sep 02, 2003 3:33 pm
User avatar
Michael Eckstein
Forum Contributor
Posts: 479
Joined: 21 Aug 2003
Location: Spring Hill, Florida
Thanks for the tips, suggestions and comments.

I wasn't too, bright this guy was moving his head from side to side rapidly. I should have been smart enought to shoot at 1/200. Fortunately for me this location is about a 20 minutes ride; so I wll return and hopefully take an improved shot. I took quite a few today and will look through them more carefully to see if I caught him holding still.

Once again many thanks!
"There are no rules for good photographs, only good photographs." -Ansel Adams





http://www.photo.net/photos/Michael%20Eckstein
http://www.meckstein.com/mike
 

by Paul Grecian on Tue Sep 02, 2003 4:40 pm
Paul Grecian
Forum Contributor
Posts: 534
Joined: 22 Aug 2003
Location: Millville, PA
Michael,

I agree with the opinion that the softness is due to either subject or camera movement and not a focus problem. The use of flash here was effective at creating even lighting and strong catch-lights in the eyes. I don't feel that the background helps the image, it's not bad, it's just that I don't think it was needed. If you were given this opportunity again, I really like to see you go even closer and fill the frame entirely with the owl's face for graphic effect. It may require use of an extension tube or close-up filter on the Canon 100-400 IS. Wonderful subject choice.

Paul
 

by LHays on Tue Sep 02, 2003 8:51 pm
User avatar
LHays
Lifetime Member
Posts: 12363
Joined: 17 Aug 2003
Location: Northern Kentucky
Member #:00040
Definitely subject movement at that shutterspeed. However, a little USM might help get it a little sharper. Live and learn....been there, done that. Since you are so close to where this owl is....go back and try again.
Lana Hays
NSN 0040
[url]http://www.lanahays.com/[/url]
 

by Heather Forcier on Tue Sep 02, 2003 10:22 pm
User avatar
Heather Forcier
Site Co-Founder
Posts: 8188
Joined: 17 Aug 2003
Location: Vermont
Member #:00003
Wow, what an opportunity to have this so close to your home! This would be unbelievable without the motion blur, hope you get a chance again! (Be sure to post the results if/when you do!) :)
[b]NatureScapes.Net Site Co-Founder
[url=http://www.hforcier.com/][u]Website[/u][/url] | [url=http://www.500px.com/heatherforcier/photos][u]500px Gallery[/u][/url] | [url=https://plus.google.com/117191412635501853092/][u]Google+[/u][/url][/b]
 

by Anthony Medici on Thu Sep 04, 2003 9:08 pm
User avatar
Anthony Medici
Lifetime Member
Posts: 6879
Joined: 17 Aug 2003
Location: Champions Gate, FL
Member #:00012
The blurriness looks like motion blur to me. It might be able to be toned down some using USM. The bird could have moved or you might not have been as steady as you thought since you were down to 1/60 at 560mm. Another thought might be the 1.4 and the lens may not work as well together as you might like them too.
Tony
 

by Neilef28 on Sun Mar 14, 2010 5:00 pm
Neilef28
Forum Contributor
Posts: 642
Joined: 26 Jan 2010
I agree with Big Hayes
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
11 posts | 

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group