soaring pairs

[big baldo]

I really didnt have much time to get prepared for these, hence a little OOF. They flew right over my head.:mad2:
I am still practicing on shooting everything manual including focus.Should I have switched to AF for these? (they were really moving)
Thanks for looking!:thumbsup:

[terryger]

if you did that with manual focus my hat is off to you.

there is a reason that auto focus was added to cameras and it has nothing to do with laziness.

i don't know what rig you are using but my canons have a al servo setting on the af that allows the camera to follow moving objects once it locks on them. it is also there for a reason.

yes, i know how to manual focus just like i know how to drive a manual transmission. it being 2007, i see no need to do either, other than on rare occasions.

btw, that shot came out pretty darn good regardless of the focus method. :thumbsup:

[Jaedon]

I have to agree with terryger about the shot. I was working on MF skills today as well and I see the necessity for it on occaisions. What I have gotten accustomed to doing now is to set the camera to C-AF+M. On my camera it stands for Continuous AF with manual adjustment. That allows me to use the AF when I need it and easily switch to a manual adjustment for shooting through tree branches once it locks. It gives me the best of both worlds. If your camera has a etting similar I would greatly recommend trying it for shots like this will work out a whole lot better in the end.

Now all that being said using MF and you got these 2 on the fly your MF skills are way ahead of mine. Excellent work and awesome luck for being in the right place at the right time.

[big baldo]

That actually is the setting that I use. On the Nikon d80 I believe its C+AF/M. I am now in the habit of using autofocus, then fine tuning with manual. Looking back, I should have just let the camera take control on such a fast moving subject.:mad2: Oh well, now I know:thumbsup:
Thanks for the help

[Copy_Kot]

You did one heck of a job, it's hard enough to get a shot directly above you even using AF! The image doesn't look to OOF not to be a keeper.

[paulnj]

Sweet image!!!!!!!!!!

[Loupey]

Nice job, BB! Keep practicing!

I still say that manual hones all the reflexes and frees up the eye/mind to survey the entire viewfinder. And I'm still faster than the AF on my 300mm - tried it a few times as it hunts back and forth.

Here's my reasoning: Imagine me driving around with the camera on my lap or walking around with the camera hanging off my shoulder - it is "asleep" 99% percent of the time. But when I spot something and assume it's going to be a one-shot opportunity, I'm simultaneously focusing it when it is waking up to my preset exposure. Nine times out of 10, there is no time to fiddle with any knobs, switches, or further thought

And what is my camera set to 90% percent of the time? ISO 400, 1/500s, f/11 with my 300mm+2x.

[big baldo]

Thanks everyone!
Loupey, On stationary objects, I can "see them pop" when they come into focus using manual. I think my eye is starting to get trained:thumbsup:
Something I just figured out last night was that objects that looked in sharp focus in my viewfinder, then when on my computer, looked slightly OOF.:mad2: Its an older CRT so thats probably the problem. More $$$ to spend!!!

[Jaedon]

I find the same problem BB. Maybe we both need to make an adjustment to the view finder dial to make a correction for our eyes? The optometrist tells me that I am 20/20 but I still seem to get the slight oof when I manually focus. It's such a find balancing act although I can see loupeys point about the camera waking up while he is focusing... that certainly is an advantage.

[Loupey]

BB, is the image sharp on the camera's LCD when you zoom it to the maximum? I can't tell if you mean that the image is sharp but your post processing computer makes it look non-sharp.

Yeah, the wake-up time used to be a HUGE problem with the 10D. It takes it a full 2 seconds :mad2: I missed a large number of shots that I composed, focused, and "shot" before the camera had a chance to wake up.

The problem is nearly non-existent now that I've been using the 30D for the past 2 1/2 months. But old habits die hard and so I'm still focusing manually as if I have no power.

[big baldo]

I take a few shots of a bird, then look in the viewfinder.I zoom in on the birds eye/beak area. Some are slightly oof(rear/front focus**LT) and others are spot on. Zoomed in so I can see the "whiskers" .
The ones that look great in the viewfinder(eye/face) look underexposed and just a little oof when i put them on my comp...:idea:

** Loupey Tip

[terryger]

Yeah, the wake-up time used to be a HUGE problem with the 10D. It takes it a full 2 seconds :mad2: I missed a large number of shots that I composed, focused, and "shot" before the camera had a chance to wake up.

The problem is nearly non-existent now that I've been using the 30D for the past 2 1/2 months. But old habits die hard and so I'm still focusing manually as if I have no power.

now i see where you are going with this.

i couldn't for the life of me understand the mf as opposed to the af.

i would have to agree on your being a creature of habit.

just a theory but my bet is your searching problem is due to the 2x and not the af.

1.4 and 2x have a well known problem with this when the camera is moving. they hunt like birddogs. even on a stationary object the camera is still moving to get to the shot, often quickly. you still breath and still have to hold the camera. if camera shake could be over come easily, IS and tripods would be of no use at all.


as you may remember from my questioning the extenders in the other forum a while back i was not happy with it then. i have become happier in that the 1.4 is only used with the 70-200 2.8 now. even then there is still slight birdogging.

many of you here knew me when i didn't know the difference bewteen tubes and extenders. with extenders , that is not the case anymore.


manual would be good with your particular setup(300x2) loupey but i'm sure your would find without the 2x you don't have that birddogging situation. you would also find you don't have the range.

when you said old habits die slowly i believe you.

i think , and i say this in a purely friendly manner, that your expert macro has bled into your longer range wildlife and is giving your fits. i went through that myself. i even went to manual but lost so many great shots due to fooling with a dial that it killed me.

they are 2 totally different birds(pun intended)


in reposnse to several questions concerning focus,
with the long range even the slightest shake(and everyone does it) will result in softness. IS is a great addition to a lens but is just a tool and does not cure every problem.

there is also the exact auto focus parameters of a canon, and i would assume nikon. the focusing
square (if you are using center weighted) is senative to even a inch difference on a birds body as well as reflective lighting .

sharpest shots often come out of a series of 10 or more as usually only 1-2 have no or limited softness.

i could fix this with a tripod but that device is not conduscive to fast moving wildlife, even if it is a wimberly.

many of us tend to jerk a trigger opposed to squeezing. i learned to cure this quite serious accuracy problem with my precision rifle and pistol shooting. a shutter is no different


camera work is of the same principle. rock solid foundation along with snmooth fluid movements result in accuracy. anything removed from this formula will result is less accuracy.

try hand holding a spotting scope if you don't believe me or shooting a rifle or pistol offhand.

i do not profess to be an expert but i do profess to being obsessive/compulsive.

and once i find a probelm i won't rst until i have the answer.

now. i am the first to admit that mf has its place but shooting birds on the wing is not one of them.

[Loupey]

now. i am the first to admit that mf has its place but shooting birds on the wing is not one of them.

Whatever works is the right method

The AF hunting that I was referring to is with the 300mm straight (no TC). It will go from minimum to maximum and then to minimum if the subject is relatively small against a vast and low contrast background. Now don't get me wrong, I do use AF - typically for sports or kids parties, etc.

The MF comes in handy when you've got a frame-filling shot of a bird (or any subject for that matter) and you are picking a very specific plane on which to focus on an otherwise very 3D subject. Using AF then compensating or recomposing defeats the purpose IMO. AF doesn't know where the eyes are

As for AF with the 300mm+2x, I don't even have that option as the 10D/30D won't even actuate the AF servos even if I wanted it. So everything I been shooting with this combo (which has been just about everything here including macros of last fall) is only with MF. I think they turned out OK

You raise a good point about squeezing the shutter. I was trained in the very beginning that no one should be able to see your index finger move at all when you trip the shutter. Because of this, I still fire off 2 frames instead of 1 almost every time with the 30D The first image is always sharper than the second.

Good discussion, terryger!

[terryger]

Whatever works is the right method

^^^^ no truer words were ever spoken


The AF hunting that I was referring to is with the 300mm straight (no TC). It will go from minimum to maximum and then to minimum if the subject is relatively small against a vast and low contrast background. Now don't get me wrong, I do use AF - typically for sports or kids parties, etc.

^^^I see now. it was my misunderstanding. i thought it was with the 2x.

i also agree with the cluttered background comment. as a matter of fact, i have gotten some good sharp shots of ducks flying 40-50 mph past reeds that are the same color. how the camera caughtthem is amaziong to me. i also have several gig of those same shots that are just blurs

The MF comes in handy when you've got a frame-filling shot of a bird (or any subject for that matter) and you are picking a very specific plane on which to focus on an otherwise very 3D subject. Using AF then compensating or recomposing defeats the purpose IMO. AF doesn't know where the eyes are
^^^excellent point

As for AF with the 300mm+2x, I don't even have that option as the 10D/30D won't even actuate the AF servos even if I wanted it. So everything I been shooting with this combo (which has been just about everything here including macros of last fall) is only with MF. I think they turned out OK

^^^they turned out swell:thumbsup: and even better when you consider the skill and patience you need with the mf.

^^^my hat is off to you and this is another example of there being more than one way to get a shot in the bag

You raise a good point about squeezing the shutter. I was trained in the very beginning that no one should be able to see your index finger move at all when you trip the shutter. Because of this, I still fire off 2 frames instead of 1 almost every time with the 30D The first image is always sharper than the second.

Good discussion, terryger!

^^^my wife(a new partner in my photography business) asks me all the time why i snap 10 in a row

i tell her its habit from squeezing and when ya figure that 9 out of 10 of my shots are throw away its a good thing, eh?

i enjoy the discussion also loupey. even if "back slapping and atta boys" are deserved, they can get mundane after a whilwe