A Really Nice Roseate Spoonbill - And a pop quiz :-)

It's always nice when you get an opportunity at a nice, mature Roseate Spoonbill. Their colors are far deeper than the younger ones, and they have that nice black collar, the yellow shoulders, and the alomost-red pink on the wings (not to mention, that nice wrinkled bill and bald head!). Most folks don't get a chance to shoot these nice mature ones very often. The younger, whiter, less colorful ones are far more common. It's almost guaranteed that when I submit these for review to the various stock agencies, they will initially be rejected for being "over saturated" or "over filtered". I ALWAYS have to explain that this is just how they are, and then they accept them after the explanation. Their inspectors are never used to seeing the ones like this.

Now for the pop quiz: Which image (or images) were shot with the 2x Teleconverter, and which weren't?

No cheating - Look at the EXIF only after you've looked with your eyes first. I'll post the EXIF data on each shot later for those who don't have an EXIF viewer handy. Enjoy!

http://catcheroflight.smugmug.com/ph...1_6Eg7A-X3.jpg

http://catcheroflight.smugmug.com/ph...1_NLXuC-X3.jpg

http://catcheroflight.smugmug.com/ph...4_3VYZF-X3.jpg

http://catcheroflight.smugmug.com/ph...5_omvD5-X3.jpg

http://catcheroflight.smugmug.com/ph...1_qWtYm-X3.jpg

Awesome images and I say all were shot with a 2x.

LOL - Good guess (and that may give me an idea for the next time I do one of these :-)), but I promise that there are at least some with, and some without :-)

Didn't look at the EXIF but gonna guess 2 & 5 with, 1 3 & 4 without.

[Edit] ...and I'd be wrong, :( LOL
Very nice shots

no idea :mad2: if I knew what to really look for in differences, maybe :(

excellent captures Bob!

They are all sharp, but going solely by the highlight in the eye, I'd say that #1 & #2 were without the 2x and the rest were with. Beautiful shots though.

WOW! Bob, these are amazing. I don't know enough about the 2x teleconverter to guess which were taken with and without.

That first photo looks like it could be in National Geographic (actually, all do, but I think this one captures the bird most beautifully).

Simply awesome photos!! Excellent captures..The color is amazing!

And the answer is:

Number one and number three were with the 2x TC. The rest were just 600mm.

When I first settled in to begin the shoot, they were out just a bit too far for me to feel comfortable cropping them. I had carried both TC's into the mud with me (along with the 40D with the 100-400 on it), so I opted to just mount up the 2x because I was getting plenty of light. Once they worked their way in closer to me, I removed the 2X and just kept going. I guess my point in all this is that when the conditions are right, you can hardly tell the difference between the TC shots, and the ones without. They definitely have their time and place, but require proper technique to get the right results. I was shooting around 1/640th at f/8 with the 2x on, but was off a ground level tripod....so that slower speed was sufficient. I was at 1/3200 and above with the naked 600 at f/4.

Thanks for the comments!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canon_Bob

...I guess my point in all this is that when the conditions are right, you can hardly tell the difference between the TC shots, and the ones without. They definitely have their time and place, but require proper technique to get the right results...

---

My sentiments exactly. Smile to those who always say TC's always produce soft or "unacceptable" results :)


But now you let the cat out of the bag.

I have seen images with 2 and 3 TC's on a 600.... how you mount them is a mystery to me.. Those images were very impressive and better than most image I have seen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulnj

I have seen images with 2 and 3 TC's on a 600.... how you mount them is a mystery to me.. Those images were very impressive and better than most image I have seen.

---

duct tape

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulnj

I have seen images with 2 and 3 TC's on a 600.... how you mount them is a mystery to me.. Those images were very impressive and better than most image I have seen.

---

I've double-stacked mine before. You mount the 2x to the lens, the 1.4x to the 2x and the camera body. Heck, on the 1D bodies the auto-focus even works with them stacked! You need LOTS of light to get any kind of a decent shot, though. I used double stacked TC's, a cable release, and MLU to shoot the Ghost Orchids at Corkscrew Swamp this year. Was a major pain in the butt.

That I knew how to do, but I think a 2) 2x tc and 1) 1.4tc had a 12mm tube in the mix too. It was a long time ago and the image was on naturephotoghaphers.net and was an eagle in a tree on the delaware river during the winter if I remember corrects.. shot by a guy named Ken ???? I think? Definately wasn't Greg, EJ, Jim Zipp, or the other well known guys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulnj

That I knew how to do, but I think a 2) 2x tc and 1) 1.4tc had a 12mm tube in the mix too. It was a long time ago and the image was on naturephotoghaphers.net and was an eagle in a tree on the delaware river during the winter if I remember corrects.. shot by a guy named Ken ???? I think? Definately wasn't Greg, EJ, Jim Zipp, or the other well known guys.

---

Hmmmm....Ya got me on that one. I know Artie Morris is a big TC fan, and occasionally stacks tham. Maybe I'll ask him about it. I use a single TC when the conditions are right, but rarely double them up. I prefer to use my stalking skills in lieu if TC's.

BTW - If anyone cares....My favorite image of this series is number 4. The blending of the blues in the BG, the perfect head angle, exposure, and that nice water drop make it a really good image IMO. We'll see what the buyers have to say about it :D

#2 is my favorite for action and body position, but I see exactly what you mean about 4. That endless water to sky blending is perfection!!

Ask Greg downing, he should remember. It was with a 20D I do believe and awhile back before naturescapes :wink: I haven't been to those sites in years sadly, but should make time to.

#4 is a great shot, but I'd think that #2 would have some marketability for it's humorous aspect. Possibly on a greeting card? :p

WoW Bob, Outstanding images of the Spoonbill. The low angle really makes these photos.