First time eagle pictures... Apparently need pointers...

[FadeOut]

Like the title says this is my first try at this and I'm pretty disappointed with my results, nothing is sharp or even seems to be in focus, please help me out... I was using my father in-laws quantaray af LD 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 Tele-macro(1:2) soo maybe not a very good lens? Im sure its just me though. thanks!

1. iso 125 f/5.6 1/500sec 300mm

2. iso 125 f/5.6 1/500sec 300mm

3. iso 100 f/4.0 1/1000sec 77mm

4. iso160 f5.6 1/400sec 300mm

5. iso 100 f/5.6 1/640sec 259mm

6. iso 100 f/5.6 1/640sec 259mm

hope this isnt to many pics...

 

[coastalconn]

Ahh, bird photography, my favorite, You did ok with what you had. The quantaray is probably a re-branded Tamron or Sigma from an older generation. They are not known for their sharpness. The lighting looks pretty horrible also. There is no sun which can help if it behind you illuminating the bird and increasing shutter speed. The most important thing about bird photography is to practice alot! The seond most important thing is patience, I spend many many hours a week in the woods, sometimes only with 1 good shot...

The lens needs to be at F8 to help with sharpness. Wide open it probably can't do much better. So you still need a high shutter speed so you would increase your ISO to at least 400. Your signature shows a T3i so ISO 400 shouldn't be much of an issue with noise. Once a bird takes flight that is fast, you need at least 1/1600th sec for shutter speed.

It looks like some post processing would help also there is a bunch of CA/PF (chromatic aberrations/purple fringing). The older 70-300 consumer lens always have a ton of CA/PF, plus you were shooting against a white background which enhances this effect.

The second shot has the best chance, if you can send me the raw file (if you shoot in raw) I might be able to fix it a little for you...

I have a shot with almost the same background. I have a Tamron 200-500 that is also sharpest around F8. I have freaky steady hands so I shot this at 1/250th, but F8 and ISO 400 as I have mentioned. This is pretty heavily cropped 1700x1800 or so from 4200x2800... processed in LR4

Bald Eagle by krisinct, on Flickr

 

[FadeOut]

Thanks for all the info! It really helps me out a lot. Yeah lighting was pretty bad, it was a very grey and hazy day today, these I did do a little pp on these pics, but I will have to send you the raw file tomorrow. Maybe I'll look into getting a new lens for myself, any suggestions? Again thank you I really appreciate it.

 

[coastalconn]

Hmm, I'm not a Canon guy, depends alot on your budget. If you really get into birds, I think the Canon 400 F5.6 is pretty highly regarded and costs around 1K used. Others may chime in. If you stay on the casual side Tamron makes a 70-300 VC that is $450 with $100 rebate. I'm not sure how the canon 70-300 is rated. Occasionally you can get my lens for 500-600 used, it has limitations, but for the price it is hard to beat. I'm sure Canon guys (and gals) can give you much better insight. With birds though, you can never get close enough or have a lens that is "too long"...

 

[ColorExperts]

Outstanding shots here, i am so wonder after visit your post. Nice capture and excellent lighting. Thanks for sharing !!

 

[FadeOut]

coastalconn - thanks for the suggestions, gives me something to look into, anyone have a recommendation for me?

ColorExperts - thank you for your kind words

 

[WesternGuy]

coastalconn - thanks for the suggestions, gives me something to look into, anyone have a recommendation for me?

ColorExperts - thank you for your kind words

FadeOut, coastalconn has given you good advice. I would add to what he has said being an avid bird photographer myself. I am a Canon shooter and have lots of experience with birds. If you are interested, you can see some of my photography here - WesternGuy PC Album - Free online photo gallery at PhotoCamel.com - more than just birds, a bit of everything, but a lot of birds scattered throughout. As far as your gear goes, the quantaray is, as CC has said, old glass and does not do justice to modern digital cameras (my opinion). I have been using a Canon 100-400mmL IS lens for about 5 years now for all my bird shooting and it has served me well. I recently acquired a Canon 600mmL IS II, but that is another story. The 100-400mm is currently selling for about $1700. I know this is a lot of money, but you may be able to find a used one for around $1000. With your T3i, it will have the same field of view as a 160-640 telephoto. Personally, I would go for a zoom lens with good quality glass because if gives you more degrees of freedom with what you can do with it. I was recently in Africa in Kenya and the 100-400mm was on my camera all the time. Alternatively, you might want to look at some of the third party lenses such as Sigma, Tamron and Tokina. The other possibility is to go with something like a 70-200 zoom and get a 1.4x extender.

CCs suggestion of increasing your ISO is also a good one, in fact, I would try it up to 800 and shoot raw, that way you can always fix the noise you might get, if you do get some noise. I would also recommend you try some shooting using the shutter priority (TV) setting. That way you can set a higher speed and the camera will give you the best aperture. As well, I would use the AI servo setting if you are trying birds in flight. Centre weighted and or partial metering are also settings I find useful when I have a bright background. I often find that +1 to +1 1/3 Exposure Compensation can give me better results when I am shooting a dark bird against a very light background. Google is your friend - if you search the web, you will find lots of stuff on bird photography, one of the best that I like is Art Morris's blog -Arthur Morris/BIRDS AS ART. HTH.

WesternGuy

 

[FadeOut]

Thanks ill be putting all this new info to good use, time to study up, ill be checking out those sites tonight for sure, thank you for posting them for me!

 

[NancyMoranG]

Welcome. You will quickly learn there are some great bird photographers on this site! I am not 1 of them but a couple have already chimed in here on your photo...
i was where you are now, just few months ago, it gets better as you listen to their advice, try their settings and keep practicing.
I got my 1st great, clear photo of a bird recently, and its so exciting!
Keep learning , it pays off.
Nancy

 

[shents]

Ahh, bird photography, my favorite, You did ok with what you had. The quantaray is probably a re-branded Tamron or Sigma from an older generation. They are not known for their sharpness. The lighting looks pretty horrible also. There is no sun which can help if it behind you illuminating the bird and increasing shutter speed. The most important thing about bird photography is to practice alot! The seond most important thing is patience, I spend many many hours a week in the woods, sometimes only with 1 good shot...

The lens needs to be at F8 to help with sharpness. Wide open it probably can't do much better. So you still need a high shutter speed so you would increase your ISO to at least 400. Your signature shows a T3i so ISO 400 shouldn't be much of an issue with noise. Once a bird takes flight that is fast, you need at least 1/1600th sec for shutter speed.

It looks like some post processing would help also there is a bunch of CA/PF (chromatic aberrations/purple fringing). The older 70-300 consumer lens always have a ton of CA/PF, plus you were shooting against a white background which enhances this effect.

The second shot has the best chance, if you can send me the raw file (if you shoot in raw) I might be able to fix it a little for you...

I have a shot with almost the same background. I have a Tamron 200-500 that is also sharpest around F8. I have freaky steady hands so I shot this at 1/250th, but F8 and ISO 400 as I have mentioned. This is pretty heavily cropped 1700x1800 or so from 4200x2800... processed in LR4

Bald Eagle by krisinct, on Flickr

I love this! I have no experiance on photography yet!.. But I love this shot

 

[Tony S]

One word explains why you had poor image quality........... Quantaray. It's better relagated to the role of paper weight.

 

[thetrue]

One word explains why you had poor image quality........... Quantaray. It's better relagated to the role of paper weight.

I agree with this 10000%!!! I don't know much about their lenses, but I do know that their filters are terrible.

 

[Luke345678]

For your conditions, you did great! Keep up the good work and keep practicing. You will be amazed how much that will make you photos better.

 

[FadeOut]

One word explains why you had poor image quality........... Quantaray. It's better relagated to the role of paper weight.

I agree with this 10000%!!! I don't know much about their lenses, but I do know that their filters are terrible.

Sounds like I need to go lens shopping soon! I can give my father in-law his paper weight back once I do

For your conditions, you did great! Keep up the good work and keep practicing. You will be amazed how much that will make you photos better.

Thanks! I practice mostly while I'm driving between jobs while I'm working, I do construction and drive about 150 miles a day so I see all sorts of interesting things, hard to practice at home with two kids running around, makes fun photos though!