Not Quite NASA, but almost

Pics should tell a tale, or so I am told. So we have two red eyed finches seeking relief from 30C heat. The tree beside the bath is a Banksia which is their haven and from which they flit to the bath and back.
Taken with a tamron 300mm zoom, hand steadied against the window frame in our back room. Setting on exposure time of 1/640. ISO 100 LFS* pretty high
* Luck Factor Setting:D
Comments gratefully accepted. Thanks for viewing
old ucci


http://i39.tinypic.com/vcrq1j.jpg
Incoming!

http://i42.tinypic.com/9huvkj.jpg
Houston, we have lift-off!

Nice ones Ken

:D

Cool shots Ken.

You should really go much higher on the shutter speed for tiny moving birds.

A clean crisp shot would take maybe 1/2000. Since lighting is obviously good with 1/640 @ ISO 100, try ISO 400 next time. Modern cameras are pretty good with noise up to about 1600.

To get one could be considered LFS: high, but to get two means there is definitely some skill involved.

Keep 'em coming, Ken!

- Bill

Nice ones! I always enjoy looking forward to, and seeing your images, Ken.

From what I understand, future cameras will shoot bursts of video and you can not only see exactly how they use their wings for landing and launching, but you will be able to take the best frames for the high resolution still shots.

Lovely shots and they tell a beautiful story, well done Ken

Thank you to all who viewed. But a special thanks to those who took the time to comment. Your effort in doing so is very much appreciated.
Cheers
Old Ucci

Very nice Ken, you certainly do tell a story with these photos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bobobird

A clean crisp shot would take maybe 1/2000. Since lighting is obviously good with 1/640 @ ISO 100, try ISO 400 next time. Modern cameras are pretty good with noise up to about 1600.

---

Great stuff, Ken.

Bobo makes good points re shutter speed and the decisions you need to make as to extent you want to freeze things. I think there's an interesting debate to be had around this. Do you want the bird that's in flight (landing or taking off) to be absolutely frozen. Most opinion would maybe say 'yes'.

But if you have another bird (as you do) not moving as quickly, then you can freeze that, but still have a bit of movement blur of the one that is in flight, to add some energy into the image.

But, then again, if it's a study of a bird in flight, then you do need to nail it so that all the detail is visible.

Discuss!!

Thank you Mr D. for the discussion suggestion. If there is to be one, maybe I could start with my 2 cents worth. Basically what Bobo says is quite correct and technically sound, in most cases. My problem here was to keep a sense of realism of motion for the small bird in flight against a bird bath as background. The stationary bird on the edge was a static prop to help give some credence to the motion. However I believe that had the bird in flight been too sharp and crisp there was a risk that it may have seemed to be bordering on the artificial; a PS pp cut and paste job in this setting, which is quite different to capturing a raptor soaring on a thermal when sharpness and clarity are essential. I felt I had achieved almost what I was aiming for in this case.
Cheers
Old Ucci

old ucci

Ken
Your bird pics are very nice. The depth-of-field really helps to give the NASA feeling. Try not to lose that when you change settings.
Tim