First birds shots are mushy; need some help

[gckless]

I thought thee looked about as good as a top-level APS-C camera could do at those types of distances, at the variuous ISO levels; I can see a loss of acutance at ISO 640 as opposed to the ISO 200 shots; that is going to be noticeable on APS-C OR on FX...but the ISO 640 will look a bit worse on APS-C than on a modern, hiogh-0MP FX Nikon like a D750 or D820.

But, really, I think for SOOC JPEG these are good. I would wager you could get a sliught bit crisper images if you would shoot in .NEF mode, and the carefully convert the NEF files to JPEGS...as good as modern cameras are, most have a slightly less-than-ideal image when shooting in SOOC JPEG mode as opposed to raw image mode.

A single-length 500mm lens would likely do better than the zoom, but still: the biggest issue is HOW FAR away the birds are in most of these: you really want to be closer to the subjects in order toget a bigger bird image in-camera.

Yeah, ISO performance isn't spectacular on this. It's not terrible, awesome compared to even a few years ago, but there are still limits. I really can't decide if I want to upgrade to FX; much better ISO performance when I need it, but then there's the distance issue made worse. Can't win! That's a long-standing personal debate, that's a whole separate thread lol.

I always shoot JPEG+RAW. I am going to see what I can do with the images in post, but I figured I'd post the SOOC images to give a better idea of what I was seeing. Maybe that wasn't the right move. But I also wanted to ask the question, and didn't have as much time to process them. One or two of them might be worth saving, I kinda like that shot of the ducks.

But I hear ya, and pretty much what I was expecting, I'm just too far.

Just gotta focus on practicing and capturing better moments.

This is always going to make the biggest difference. Learn what the habits are of the birds in your area. Where they nest, eat and at what time. Find locations that you can get to, where you can get close enough without spooking them.
Sometimes luck is your friend but only persistence and a willingness to learn will get you constantly good shots.

Yep, absolutely. I know these aren't good shots by any measure. And that's fine, can't expect that my first time out. I have much to learn.

Don't take my comments as saying that the only way to get good bird photos is with a pro body and a 600mm zoom that is fast. This is a genre where your equipment matters tremendously. But if you've got a D7200 and a 200mm zoom, then you have to stack the deck in your favor.

1. Think about a hide (so birds get closer).
2. Do a lot of scouting to find ideal spots...not just spots where birds feed or nest but ideal spots for good light or where you might be able to get close. And maybe give up shooting in low light situations.
3. Think about setting up a tripod and then triggering the shutter wirelessly from 50 feet away.
4. Recognize you've got a smaller window to play with: you can't jack up ISO without a lot of noise on the D7200, you don't have a fast ultra zoom. So you may want to shoot only in really strong light (so you don't have to go with ISO 3200 or 6400) in order to get a fast shutter speed. Or use a teleconverter (recognizing that this will mean you'll be too slow to capture good shots in flight) but will be able to fill the frame with your subject.

All of these are frustrating b/c they demand more patience than this genre typically calls for and you'll likely have a higher percentage of rejects than if you were shooting with a better body and lens. What you're having to do is compensate for your equipment limitations by planning, patience, and utilizing what options you do have creatively.

Good tips. I know what you meant, I need to find ways to get around my limitations. I guess that will make me better in the end though. Or that's what I'm going to tell myself lol.

 

[coastalconn]

Yeah, sorry about that, I tend to make it look easy... Others have hit on most points and I covered some others in that article.. Make sure your fine tune is spot on and spend as much time as humanly possible in the field studying the birds and trying to figure out how to get closer... I disagree about shooting in Aperture priority though. I find shooting in manual with auto ISO, spot metering and EC much easier and quicker because you can basically control the shutter speed as needed.. 1/250th or whatever your threshold is for stationary birds and at least 1/2000th for any fast moving BIF... Also practice without the pod, it is too limiting in motion for flying birds in my humble opinion..

 

[gckless]

Yeah, sorry about that, I tend to make it look easy... Others have hit on most points and I covered some others in that article.. Make sure your fine tune is spot on and spend as much time as humanly possible in the field studying the birds and trying to figure out how to get closer... I disagree about shooting in Aperture priority though. I find shooting in manual with auto ISO, spot metering and EC much easier and quicker because you can basically control the shutter speed as needed.. 1/250th or whatever your threshold is for stationary birds and at least 1/2000th for any fast moving BIF... Also practice without the pod, it is too limiting in motion for flying birds in my humble opinion..

You only make it look easy because of the time and effort invested. While some may not see that, I sure do. Your stuff is definitely among the best out there.

I know my fine tune is pretty good, that's the first thing I do with any lens. It has been a while with some international travel there, so maybe it's time to double-check. I agree, I think manual was much better. Honestly if you're using a priority mode, shutter seems like it might be the more sensible option, but it probably depends on how much available light you have and what the camera's going to do with the setting it has control over. Either way, going with manual was much easier with consistent lighting. And I sure noticed the pod was a bit of a nuisance the few times I had to pick up the camera to track BIF. It's light, but leverage plays a big part.

 

[Braineack]

But, really, I think for SOOC JPEG these are good. I would wager you could get a sliught bit crisper images if you would shoot in .NEF mode, and the carefully convert the NEF files to JPEGS...as good as modern cameras are, most have a slightly less-than-ideal image when shooting in SOOC JPEG mode as opposed to raw image mode.

I'm in this boat--and I love to point out softness--but these look fine to me.

They could, however, use some serious processing in post -- where you could always sharpen them up a bit (check out bird photographers' sharpening methods)

 

[gckless]

I did go back and throw these into Lightroom and quickly process them, they're not perfect but better. I've updated the OP with the edited photos, and left the old ones on Flickr for now if anyone's interested. @Derrel it didn't change a whole lot, though I could probably use some work with my sharpening/NR.

But, really, I think for SOOC JPEG these are good. I would wager you could get a sliught bit crisper images if you would shoot in .NEF mode, and the carefully convert the NEF files to JPEGS...as good as modern cameras are, most have a slightly less-than-ideal image when shooting in SOOC JPEG mode as opposed to raw image mode.

I'm in this boat--and I love to point out softness--but these look fine to me.

They could, however, use some serious processing in post -- where you could always sharpen them up a bit (check out bird photographers' sharpening methods)

That's reassuring, that these look fine. See above for my sharpening note. I initially thought it could just be a resolution/distance thing, I've seen it before shooting racing, but I wanted to come here and make sure. I mean, you guys give the best advice! After hearing what you guys said, I went back out there. Same body/lens combo.

This first one was still quite a distance away, maybe ~20-23m, and is pretty much the same result I was getting before.
1) 1/1250th, ISO400, 460mm
DSC_3217 by Gilbert Kless, on Flickr

But then this duck was walking around fairly close to me, didn't seem to care much at all. This shot was at around 10m, and finally! Feather detail!
2) 1/400th, ISO320, 450mm
Hole in Your Bill? by Gilbert Kless, on Flickr

And then I turned around and spotted this damselfly at roughly 5m, so I snagged this, and I'm able to see some decent detail on him as well.
3) 1/400th, ISO320, 410mm
Damselfly by Gilbert Kless, on Flickr

And while the sun was setting saw these plants, no idea what they are, but sure looked nice. And I'm able to see some pretty good detail on this as well. Around 5m away.
4) 1/400th, ISO320, 200mm
DSC_3273 by Gilbert Kless, on Flickr


Soooo, pretty much confirms it's a distance/resolution issue. What I sorta suspected and you guys thought as well. It's nice to know you're right sometimes, isn't it? So that's good and bad news. It's goood that it isn't my technique causing it, though I know it could always use work. But it's bad because I don't have the cash to pick up the gear needed for this, and because it's really hard to get close to those herons! Ah, first world problems, eh? Anyway, thanks guys, appreciate the help.

 

[dxqcanada]

Yup, that's why we less fortunate wildlife photographers have wide angle lenses to take landscape images that don't suck

 

[chuasam]

Inexpensive consumer grade lenses are generally not terribly sharp wide open