birds

Ecas32 · Jun 8, 2009

took these from all the way across my yard from inside my house.... they were pretty noisy so i had to remove it and they turned out softer than i'd like.....

1. 1/320 5.6 800

2. 1/500, 5.6 800

lvcrtrs · Jun 8, 2009

From that far away. That was a challenge. I'll bet you can sharpen the first one up respectably in a photo program.

Samanax · Jun 8, 2009

Ecas32 said:
took these from all the way across my yard from inside my house.... they were pretty noisy so i had to remove it and they turned out softer than i'd like.....

1. 1/320 5.6 800

2. 1/500, 5.6 800

The reason the images were noisy is because you shot them at ISO 800. Higher ISO settings will give you more noise. Lower ISO settings are recommended especially if you are shooting in good lighting conditions...unless the scene was actually much darker than what the pictures show.

I think you could have shot these at ISO 400 or even ISO 200 and gotten good results...unless the birds were moving around too much.

Are the birds hanging around a compost pile?

Ecas32 · Jun 8, 2009

Samanax said:
The reason the images were noisy is because you shot them at ISO 800. Higher ISO settings will give you more noise. Lower ISO settings are recommended especially if you are shooting in good lighting conditions...unless the scene was actually much darker than what the pictures show.

I think you could have shot these at ISO 400 or even ISO 200 and gotten good results...unless the birds were moving around too much.

Are the birds hanging around a compost pile?

i know i was shooting at 800, and i was shooting at that high of iso so i could use a faster shutter speed. shooting at 300mm is hard w/o a fast shutter speed. the camera shake is just multiplyed when shooting with that focal length.
i wasnt able to use a tripod either because i saw them out there and didnt have time to put in on the tripod cuz i knew they would be gone....

they are at the bottom of feeder... all the seeds drop to the ground because of the squirrels that jump up on it lol.

Samanax · Jun 8, 2009

Ecas32 said:
i know i was shooting at 800, and i was shooting at that high of iso so i could use a faster shutter speed. shooting at 300mm is hard w/o a fast shutter speed. the camera shake is just multiplyed when shooting with that focal length.

Ahhh...I see. I'm at work on a computer with no exif reader and didn't know what focal length you were shooting at. At 300mm with no tripod you made the right decision to go high on the ISO setting, just gotta deal with the noise after.

Actually I'm pretty impressed...I have the EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III and the CA on the long end is awful. Looks like your copy is pretty good. I don't even use that lens anymore, not even on the short end...the autofocus is just too slow.

Ecas32 said:
they are at the bottom of feeder... all the seeds drop to the ground because of the squirrels that jump up on it lol.

So it is a compost pile :mrgreen:.

Ecas32 · Jun 8, 2009

i hate this lens too... im saving up for a f2.8 70-200!

and ya.... i guess it is composed then lol.

Samanax · Jun 8, 2009

Ecas32 said:
i hate this lens too... im saving up for a f2.8 70-200!

I just got my EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM last month and can't believe how heavy the thing is (about 3.5 pounds). But it's so much better than the Ef 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III...just gotta get used to the weight.

Ecas32 · Jun 8, 2009

ya i heard that the 2.8 is really heavy. but i would much rather carry around the extra weight than get the f4. i really need the wide aperature because when i shoot, its always in the evening when the animals are active

ooh you got the IS. verrry nice but its a little more pricy