Red Shouldered Hawk vs. Snake, you know who won.....

[matthewo]

these guys are pretty amazing they wait till the right time then get their pray.

1)Stalking its prey from a nearby branch

2)Swooped down to this ground level branch, it then soon after went into the brush and grabbed the snake. i couldnt get a photo the brush was too thick. i think i saw him tussel with the snake a little bit then fly off to his eating spot...

3)Eating spot

4)Eating spot

5) yum...

watch in HD is possible

 

[Deeger]

Amazing shots!


What lens are you shooting with there. ?

 

[matthewo]

thanks.

just sold the lens but it was the following

nikon 300mm 2.8 with 2x teleconverter. i think a 1.4 teleconverter on the second one

#5 i did a little fun edit on it, a little topaz clean and some selective sharpening and noise reduction. but i like how it came out

 

[Deeger]

thanks.

just sold the lens but it was the following

nikon 300mm 2.8 with 2x teleconverter. i think a 1.4 teleconverter on the second one

Very nice. How much time did you spend out with him?

 

[matthewo]

maybe 45min very corporative subject.

seems like when these guys are after a meal sometimes they let you get pretty close.

 

[coastalconn]

Excellent series. It is amazing getting so close to them after they grab their food. It is amazing part of nature that few get to see!

 

[baturn]

You got shots like this and you sold the lens???

 

[bc_steve]

those are great, especially the last one!

 

[Aloicious]

nice! I like the video too. really good work.

 

[matthewo]

You got shots like this and you sold the lens???

haha, you are probably right, I may regret the size and weight of the 300, but I need more reach. I was using the 300 with the 2x teleconverter pretty much 90% of the time, and it did pretty well. but after shooting with a 500mm and 600mm F4 last Saturday, the image quality and focus reliability is much better with the straight 500mm and 1.4 converter, vs the 300mm and 2x converter, which is to be expected, plus you get another 100mm. then the 500mm by itself is better then the 300mm with the 1.4x converter = 420mm. so the 500mm is what im going for, plus im looking for a VR model so I can use lower shutter speeds and gain back iso for stationary subjects, as you can see these photos have some noise(even using a better beamer), which I could have been at 200 iso probably with a 500mm

 

[Aloicious]

just sold 'eh? that was QUICK! didn't you just post it on FM a couple days ago?

what made you choose 500mm f4 over say like the 600 f4 or 400 2.8? EDIT- nevermind I just found your other post, I'm going to go read that...

I've been really happy with my 300+1.7x, I've been really on the fence about a 2x TC....some days I'd rather just put the cost towards saving up for a longer lens altogether (although the lenses I want will take a LONG time to save for haha), I'd probably keep the 300, and save up for either a 600 f4 or 400 2.8...I assume the 400 would do equally well or better than the 300 with the 1.7x, making it a 680mm f4.8, so I'm really torn right now, because like you I want the extra reach, but the 300 is SOOOOO nice, especially for BIF and handheld stuff (and racing stuff that I actually purchased it for), so I can't really sell it to finance anything else....

I may have to rent a 2x III TC and test it out to see if it is worth tiding me over until I can save up for the expensive stuff over the next 50 years ...

 

[matthewo]

i was very happy with the 2x, but there is only so much it can do, any lens with a teleconverter is going to be not so great when compared to just a lens by itself. i have a 70-200, and while its not as good as the 300mm it still will fill the void, and works good with the 1.4 on it for 280mm.

i doubt you will see much difference optically between the 17 and 20, tc because the version iii is improved, just more reach.

i have also hear the 400mm is a tad sharper then the 300mm, but i cannot justify the weight after using a 600mm that is similar in size and weight.

 

[KenC]

Great shots of a beautiful bird.

In #5 you made his feathers look really strange - too much sharpening perhaps, or some other effect you tried - doesn't work that well, IMO.

 

[Mully]

Very nice shots .....it is great he stayed out in the open for you. Several weeks ago I had one in the woods eating a mouse but the shots are bad because of how much branches were in front of him...happy shooting!

 

[Aloicious]

i was very happy with the 2x, but there is only so much it can do, any lens with a teleconverter is going to be not so great when compared to just a lens by itself. i have a 70-200, and while its not as good as the 300mm it still will fill the void, and works good with the 1.4 on it for 280mm.

i doubt you will see much difference optically between the 17 and 20, tc because the version iii is improved, just more reach.

i have also hear the 400mm is a tad sharper then the 300mm, but i cannot justify the weight after using a 600mm that is similar in size and weight.

I appreciate your feedback Matt, I replied over in your other thread, it seems the more relevant place over there, I don't want to derail this thread of yours when it should be about your great hawk images...