Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Some Kestrel and Little Owl pictures from last weekend

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Some Kestrel and Little Owl pictures from last weekend

    All taken on Canon 7D MKII with 400mm f/5.6 USM L

    Kestrel chicks on the nest, the eldest of the two is now exploring nearby branches so I hear.


    Female returns to do a bit of feeding, eyes me suspiciously but settles in afterwards.

    1/500 sec, f/5.6, ISO 800

    The male would sit nearby while the female did the feeding.

    1/1000 sec, f/5.6, ISO 500

    Little Owl

    1/500 sec, f/5.6, ISO 800


    I'd be interested in some constructive criticism, especially around post-processing, overdone/not enough etc.

  • #2
    Very nice! Great composition and sharpness!
    Originally posted by Aaron
    I want those sweet cherries

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks! I've actually been working really hard to get sharper images but it is a tricky tradeoff between shutter speed and iso noise. I'm hoping it is my technique more than the lens because stepping up the lens would be too expensive.

      Comment


      • #4
        i love that owl dude

        images look great to me but maybe playing with the framing/cropping will gain the most impact?

        https://holycrop.wordpress.com/2011/...ule-of-fifths/
        "Those able to see beyond the shadows and lies of their culture will never be understood, let alone believed, by the masses."
        Plato

        Comment


        • #5
          Thanks luke22 that is useful feedback, I was generally trying to keep to rule of thirds but I honestly don't understand it as much as I could so I will make that my next thing to study. Are they all a bit off or is there one in particular? With the male Kestrel on the branch that is basically uncroppable because he filled the frame, I wasn't going to complain about being too close

          The owl I was a little disappointed with because of the backlighting, I think it works because of the background and his eyes but I lost detail because of the ISO.

          Comment


          • #6
            i think it being so sharp in contrast to the background is what makes it so striking to me.

            it is almost like how i imagine it sees the world. where it is looking, hunting, is in focus and nothing else matters
            "Those able to see beyond the shadows and lies of their culture will never be understood, let alone believed, by the masses."
            Plato

            Comment


            • #7
              Honestly he was a tenacious little guy! He was sitting on a telegraph pole when the Kestrel tried to land there, he attacked the Kestrel before it got to the perch, talons out going for the head, the Kestrel beat a hasty retreat.

              A couple more shots of the Little Owl.





              I didn't like these photos as much, mainly because the top one is a bit cluttered behind the owl despite being much closer, and the second one you can't really tell if it is an owl or a telegraph insulator.

              Comment


              • #8
                Colours are also cracking!
                Originally posted by Aaron
                I want those sweet cherries

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by luke22 View Post
                  i love that owl dude

                  images look great to me but maybe playing with the framing/cropping will gain the most impact?

                  https://holycrop.wordpress.com/2011/...ule-of-fifths/
                  Yeah I'd crop the little owl pic slightly to put his eyes dead center. Great pics though.
                  Why did the chicken cross the road?
                  To get away from the Canadian poultry farmer with loose trousers.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Very nice, how you finding the 400mm? I was looking at reviews of it last night and not a bad word to be said about it.
                    Check out FL-Photos & Lee Whittaker Photography

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Thanks. The lens is good, now...

                      I actually bought it 2nd hand from an amzn private seller. Looking back the price was too good to be true because a few months later it developed a focusing issue and cost me quite a bit to have fixed. To the point where I could have got myself an immaculate one 2nd hand from a trusted site.

                      Lesson learned, but I'm still suspicious about if it is hitting focus as much as it should. Unfortunately I have no frame of reference so I'm sticking with it until I can get a 100-400 or similar.

                      I did try and avoid the old trap of buying cheap, paying twice but unfortunately I have been through a 60D, Tamron 18-270 (horrific, wtf was I thinking), 55-250 (ok kit lens).


                      Did a ton of reading and came to the conclusion that the 7D MKII and 400mm were pretty much the best Canon entry level prosumer for birds/wildlife. So yeah I messed up a bit on the 400mm but for the 7D MKII I got a used version for just under 700 refurb which is probably not as good a price as the bay but I got some warranty and peace of mind.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Oh that sucks balls mate and hate it when things like that happens but still the photos look very sharp and all in focus.

                        I have the 70-200 at the moment and was looking at just getting the x2 converter as I want to start doing some wildlife stuff myself but for the price of it might as well just save up the extra and get the 400m.

                        I read that the 400m is better (sharper) than the older versions on the 100-400m so id look at getting the newer version if you get one.

                        Also I've read but not found yet that somewhere on the Canon site you can put the SN in for lenses and tells you the year they were made so know how old the lens is.

                        If you do end up upgrading and want to get rid of the 400m for cheap (ish) keep me in mind lol
                        Check out FL-Photos & Lee Whittaker Photography

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Funlester View Post
                          Oh that sucks balls mate and hate it when things like that happens but still the photos look very sharp and all in focus.
                          I think it is probably in my head about the focusing, I do tend to compare my results to those with much more experience and better equipment.

                          Originally posted by Funlester View Post
                          I have the 70-200 at the moment and was looking at just getting the x2 converter as I want to start doing some wildlife stuff myself but for the price of it might as well just save up the extra and get the 400m.

                          I read that the 400m is better (sharper) than the older versions on the 100-400m so id look at getting the newer version if you get one.
                          This is pretty much what my research told me as well. The only thing with the 400mm is if you get rid of the 70-200 you are giving up flexibility. For wildlife though the 400mm is the better option than the 70-200 with x2 so I would keep saving if you still need 70-200. The older 100-400 I think has always been just OK, not great, the new one however is on a par with the 400mm but it has IS and much more flexibility. I'd love to own it but I can't justify it yet.

                          Having said all that there have been occasions when I needed something which could focus inside of 3metres, if you can get the wildlife to come to you then you don't need 400mm. Depends how good you are at being quiet. Camo also helps, I don't go mad with it but combats, a flecktarn shirt and a neoprene lens cover do seem to help. The Kestrel was much more tolerant when I was in that get up for example. You can't look silly if nobody can see you


                          Originally posted by Funlester View Post
                          Also I've read but not found yet that somewhere on the Canon site you can put the SN in for lenses and tells you the year they were made so know how old the lens is.

                          If you do end up upgrading and want to get rid of the 400m for cheap (ish) keep me in mind lol
                          I'm pretty sure the lens I got is an oldie, although by this point probably 70% is brand new because it got a whole new focusing system and front element. So... win? You're tempting me to buy the 100-400 now

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X