Beginner Avian Photography Help

[Orangetang]

Hello everyone, this is my first post here.

The weather here has been great lately so I have been bringing my camera with me to the little lake down the street. First of all, I understand that my 70-300 VR is a fairly low-end lens, but the results I have been getting seem to be excessively soft, sometimes having a slight halo around the subject.

I am shooting @ ISO 800-1000 at F5.6 to achieve 1000-2000/s shutter speeds for these quick little guys. That might sound high, and maybe it is (let me know), but I find anything less to give bad hand-held results for bird in motion, or on windy days, which is almost everyday.

Is the halo and softness a characteristic of this lens and my high-ISO, or could it be camera shake? I always use a Hoya UV filter and sometimes a Hoya CPL and factory lens shade.

Here are a few examples. I'll probably start by uploading a few of my sized-touched up photos. I have not even read the max file size yet... So, the artifacts I am talking about might not even be visible... I can always crop a full-size later on...Any help or comments are welcome. I went out and bought a bird book the other day, so this is quickly turning into a bit of a hobby. Shoot the bird, figure out what it is, trying to get a pair together, etc...

Thanks in advance for your help!

 

[Orangetang]

Here is a 100% crop... Soft, noisy and free of any sharpness. Is this normal, even at ISO ~1000 in daylight? Any tips, other than buying a faster lens? The camera was held still against a post, and the bird was at moving at all. It almost looks out of focus to me.

 

[farmerj]

I can't help you.....

All I can say is that now I don't feel so bad. I thought I was going nuts with my 70-300VR thinking it was me or my camera giving me soft or noisy images.

Enough so that I want to trade my Nikkor glass in on a Tamron 70-200 f/2.8.

I have found that if I turn off Active D-Lighting, I get a slightly better image.

 

[Orangetang]

I found the in-camera sharpening does not help. I'll try no D-lighting, though I think I had it OFF.

It might not be the lens, maybe we are both using it wrong, or maybe it is the lens.

 

[epp_b]

300mm is about the shortest you want to go for shooting birds. 500mm or longer is ideal. The ideal lens is a 300/2.8 (to which you can add a 2x teleconverter to make it a 600/5.6), 500/4 or 600/4. As these are hideously expensive, Sigma has a number of XX-500 zooms that are much more affordable.

 

[sburatorul]

what camera you are using? these just seem like noisy to me...plus that any lens has a sweet spot where it is sharpest. a certain focal length and an f number. cheap telephotos tend to be soft at the long end... i know mine is...

 

[Orangetang]

Sorry, I thought I posted my camera... It's a D90, and I'm using the 70-300mm VR.

 

[NateS]

Is your filter a standard Hoya UV lens or is it the HMC or S-HMC version? If it's the standard version then I'd guess that it is your culprit. Remove all filters and re-shoot....post your results. I've seen some incredibly sharp photos from that lens, even at 300mm, so something isn't right here. Maybe try setting up a tripod and shooting a few static objects at 300mm (say some flowers or something) to see if it is camera shake or missed focus (you might be moving a little after getting focus and before snapping the shot.)

 

[farmerj]

hmmm,

I use the same set-up.

D90, 16-85 VR, 70-300 VR and 50mm f/1.8

I have stopped using any UV filters on my lenses. I do on occasion us a CPL.

 

[Orangetang]

I will give that a try. Reading some reviews of this lens, it is soft at 300mm but not this bad.

 

[Josh220]

3 things will help when photographing birds:

1. Tripod
2. Tripod
3. Tripod

 

[NateS]

3 things will help when photographing birds:

1. Tripod
2. Tripod
3. Tripod

That would be one sturdy setup....9 tripod legs would be hard to setup though..

Something isn't right with the OP's setup though. I've seen a thread (this forum or another...can't remember) and somebody was using the 70-300VR with a Kenko TC....(don't know if it was 1.4 or 1.7) and they were getting very, very acceptable shots. I also did a quick flickr search and saw many nice photos at 300mm....in particular a hawk/eagle (don't remember) at 300mm that was stunning and sharp.

 

[Josh220]

3 things will help when photographing birds:

1. Tripod
2. Tripod
3. Tripod

That would be one sturdy setup....9 tripod legs would be hard to setup though..

Something isn't right with the OP's setup though. I've seen a thread (this forum or another...can't remember) and somebody was using the 70-300VR with a Kenko TC....(don't know if it was 1.4 or 1.7) and they were getting very, very acceptable shots. I also did a quick flickr search and saw many nice photos at 300mm....in particular a hawk/eagle (don't remember) at 300mm that was stunning and sharp.

They most likely used a tripod.

Three of them in fact.

 

[farmerj]

3 things will help when photographing birds:

1. Tripod
2. Tripod
3. Tripod

That would be one sturdy setup....9 tripod legs would be hard to setup though..

Something isn't right with the OP's setup though. I've seen a thread (this forum or another...can't remember) and somebody was using the 70-300VR with a Kenko TC....(don't know if it was 1.4 or 1.7) and they were getting very, very acceptable shots. I also did a quick flickr search and saw many nice photos at 300mm....in particular a hawk/eagle (don't remember) at 300mm that was stunning and sharp.

They most likely used a tripod.

Three of them in fact.

Then why can I take the same set-up, both on and off the tripod, and get similar soft images?

 

[Josh220]

That would be one sturdy setup....9 tripod legs would be hard to setup though..

Something isn't right with the OP's setup though. I've seen a thread (this forum or another...can't remember) and somebody was using the 70-300VR with a Kenko TC....(don't know if it was 1.4 or 1.7) and they were getting very, very acceptable shots. I also did a quick flickr search and saw many nice photos at 300mm....in particular a hawk/eagle (don't remember) at 300mm that was stunning and sharp.

They most likely used a tripod.

Three of them in fact.

Then why can I take the same set-up, both on and off the tripod, and get similar soft images?

Do you do anything to the lens when you put it onto the tripod?