My bird shots are just horrible! I need some help!

[Andrew S.]

Just for giggles. Try using aperture preferred and letting the shutter speeds run higher. I think that your shutter speeds are close to the minimum allowed for a 200 mm lens. With birds you want to freeze an instant in time, a very small instant. Something ending in thousands is preferred. Push the ISO a little higher if necessary to speed up the shutter speeds.

If the higher shutter speeds get at least some of the picture in sharp focus then you know you are on the right track.
Once you start to get close to birds with a wide open aperture you may run into depth of field issues and then you have to close it down a little.

Make sure you technique for holding the camera is correct and you are supporting the lens to hold it steady. It does make a difference.

It took me a while to get it right but shooting birds is my passion so I kept at it.

One question: do you ever get sharp pictures with that lens? There is a chance that the camera and lens do not play well together and it is not focusing correctly.

Andrew

 

[Mike D90]

Just for giggles. Try using aperture preferred and letting the shutter speeds run higher. I think that your shutter speeds are close to the minimum allowed for a 200 mm lens. With birds you want to freeze an instant in time, a very small instant. Something ending in thousands is preferred. Push the ISO a little higher if necessary to speed up the shutter speeds.

I was using that method to start with and got very bad photos. Was told to move to S-Priority and keep shutter speeds up. That led to high ISO and wide open aperture and, under this seasonal lower sunlight, grainy images.

If the higher shutter speeds get at least some of the picture in sharp focus then you know you are on the right track.
Once you start to get close to birds with a wide open aperture you may run into depth of field issues and then you have to close it down a little.

Already running into wide open aperture issues. Considering another lens but I don't think that is the only issue. Low light is a main concern during these winter months. My light source is behind trees most of the day with only a couple of spots where it can shine through. Even then, it is at the wrong angle.

Make sure you technique for holding the camera is correct and you are supporting the lens to hold it steady. It does make a difference.

It took me a while to get it right but shooting birds is my passion so I kept at it.

I am definitely working on that as well. I need to try to set up the tripod at this location and see what difference it makes.

One question: do you ever get sharp pictures with that lens? There is a chance that the camera and lens do not play well together and it is not focusing correctly.

Andrew

I can and have a few times but, even then, not as sharp as I have been striving for. Mostly at better light with smaller apertures is its best. It does not seem to like to be wide open at 200mm length. I have tried with VR on and off, manual focus and shorter focal lengths as it just does not get tack sharp images so far. Still could be my technique though so I don't want to push too much blame off on the lens.

 

[dramtastic]

I still believe you need to stop down to F8-F11 Mike if the light is good. Very few lenses are sharpest when they are at or very close to their maximum aperture.

 

[dramtastic]

And this should help cheer you up Mike. Check out these stinkers
Top 25 Wild Bird Photographs of the Week #44 – News WatchTop 25 Wild Bird Photographs of the Week #46 – News WatchTop 25 Wild Bird Photographs of the Week #49 – News Watch

 

[Mike D90]

I still believe you need to stop down to F8-F11 Mike if the light is good. Very few lenses are sharpest when they are at or very close to their maximum aperture.

I agree I at least need to try that but, I just cannot achieve that with the light I have had lately.

And this should help cheer you up Mike. Check out these stinkers
Top 25 Wild Bird Photographs of the Week #44 – News WatchTop 25 Wild Bird Photographs of the Week #46 – News WatchTop 25 Wild Bird Photographs of the Week #49 – News Watch

God I wish I had a ban hammer, you wold be so "out of here"! What did you do, sell some of your images to those guys so they could post them? :smug:

 

[nmccamy]

I suggest you do some experiments with your lens to know better what it can and cannot do. You may need to fine tune your autofocus. Try shooting a target with autofocus (use a tripod), then shooting again using live view and manual focus and compare the results. Shoot at varying ISOs and apertures too to get a good "feel" for your lens\camera combo.

You can also rent lenses should you decide to purchase something else, or to compare with your current lens.

 

[Mike D90]

I still believe you need to stop down to F8-F11 Mike if the light is good. Very few lenses are sharpest when they are at or very close to their maximum aperture.

You were right Brian. I stopped down a few stops while there was better sunlight today. Even though handheld, at 1/60th of a second shutter speed, I got a better more sharp image and this is heavily cropped. Aperture must be the issue. I also made sure to keep the ISO as low as possible and was usually at 400 or less.

 

[dramtastic]

Big improvement Mike. Very clean profile with the background blown out somewhat. You should be proud of that shot. I don't think you need to keep the shutter speed so slow though. Even though still shots of birds are a type of portrait, I almost never go below 1/250th as there are always subtle nervous movements with birds. In saying that, you did a great job keeping any blur so low at that speed.
When you get the 70-300mm play around with the F stops as the sweet spot may be different on your D90 compared to your current lens. ISO 400 should be fine for still shots in reasonable light. It's only when you get into BIF that you may need to ramp it up to ISO 800. I think your D90 will handle ISO 800 no problem with the 70-300. For BIF don't even muck around with slow shutter speeds as it's not something you can just experiment with. That is to say, you can't just go I think I'll have a crack at 1/125th or 1/250th. Minimum is 1/1000th for a large cruising birds like pelicans or egrets. A small bird like the one in your latest shot, go to 1/4000th for BIF shots. I've read the specs on the D90 fastest shutter speed and it does go that high. Also set to maximum burst rate. D90 is 4.5 frames per second.

 

[Mike D90]

Big improvement Mike. Very clean profile with the background blown out somewhat. You should be proud of that shot. I don't think you need to keep the shutter speed so slow though.
I've read the specs on the D90 fastest shutter speed and it does go that high. Also set to maximum burst rate. D90 is 4.5 frames per second.

If I set the aperture to f/6.7, as in this shot above, and the ISO at 400 maximum then the shutter had no choice but to be at 1/60th. If I let the ISO run to 800 or 1600 my shots are so full of grain and noise they are almost unusable after they are even mildly cropped. I have no software that removes grain/noise successfully.

I don't know how else to do this. If I need a fast shutter speed then something else has to compromise. It is either ISO or Aperture. What am I missing? If there is something I am not seeing please tell me how to change it.

I did shoot a few at 1/1500th and 1/2000th second and they were not near as sharp as the one I posted. I was unable to even use them due to noise and the exposure was way under.

I am simply going to have to find a bird park or sanctuary close by so I can get out into brighter sun.

 

[Mike D90]

Well, lets see if this is any improvement.

I am now using the 70-300mm VR lens that arrived today. Quickly I set out to my spot to shoot a few of the regulars at the feeders.

Light is still an issue as we can't seem to shake the cloudy over cast.

These are definitely better than before. I do see that I have some learning to do with this lens though. I think I introduced some real camera shake with this longer length. Here are a few of the ones I did not toss.

Also, if you noticed, these are not shots of the birds at the feeders. With this lens, and it being an FX lens, I now can frame the birds the way I want to see them from distances of 10 feet or more on the other side of the feeder. I don't need to be so close anymore!!

 

[Bill16]

Awesome looking shots my friend! Way to go Mike!

Well, lets see if this is any improvement.

I am now using the 70-300mm VR lens that arrived today. Quickly I set out to my spot to shoot a few of the regulars at the feeders.

Light is still an issue as we can't seem to shake the cloudy over cast.

These are definitely better than before. I do see that I have some learning to do with this lens though. I think I introduced some real camera shake with this longer length. Here are a few of the ones I did not toss.

Also, if you noticed, these are not shots of the birds at the feeders. With this lens, and it being an FX lens, I now can frame the birds the way I want to see them from distances of 10 feet or more on the other side of the feeder. I don't need to be so close anymore!!



View attachment 62165

View attachment 62166


View attachment 62167

View attachment 62168

View attachment 62169

 

[pictaker64]

That last tufted titmouse shot is real nice,A little PP to remove some of the shadow and you would have a beauty.That new lens has things alot crispier for sure.....Thanks for sharing them.Backyard birds are cool,cant wait to see more.

 

[Mike D90]

That last tufted titmouse shot is real nice,A little PP to remove some of the shadow and you would have a beauty.That new lens has things alot crispier for sure.....Thanks for sharing them.Backyard birds are cool,cant wait to see more.

Thank you sir! What is "PP"? Pixel Peeping? And what shadow are you mentioning?

I wish some other species would show up out there. I am a little bored with the Titmouse and the Chickadee. The Redbirds are nice but they are a lot harder to get into the camera's viewfinder. They are skiddish.

 

[480sparky]

.......... With this lens, and it being an FX lens, I now can frame the birds the way I want to see them from distances of 10 feet or more on the other side of the feeder. I don't need to be so close anymore!!.............

Why does it being FX make a difference? If it were a 70-300 DX lens, you'd see exactly the same thing.

 

[dramtastic]

Great start Mike. Smoother background as well. As pictaker said, they could so with some PP to bring out more detail and make the shot pop a bit more, but if I remember, you don't have the software?

 

[480sparky]

............ What is "PP"?.........

Post Processing. AKA editing on your computer.

 

[Mike D90]

Why does it being FX make a difference? If it were a 70-300 DX lens, you'd see exactly the same thing.

FX on a DX sensor makes this effectively a 450mm lens doesn't it? Anyway, the extra length I had over the 55-200mm sure makes a whopping difference.

 

[480sparky]

FX on a DX sensor makes this effectively a 450mm lens doesn't it?

Nope. It's still a 300mm lens. The lens doesn't 'know' there's a DX-format camera behind it. Besides, it can't change it's optics internally to magically become a 105-450mm lens.

 

[Mike D90]

Post Processing. AKA editing on your computer.

Ahhh! All I have is Photoshop 7.0 and LightZone.

 

[Mike D90]

Nope. It's still a 300mm lens. The lens doesn't 'know' there's a DX-format camera behind it. Besides, it can't change it's optics internally to magically become a 105-450mm lens.

I got ya. But if I were using an FX camera what I see in the viewfinder would look, to my eye, like a little wider view? Or not?

I understand the DX format crops the image of an FX lens, so an uncropped TTL view would look look different?