Seagull at sunset

[coastalconn]

I came across a bargain grade Nikon 300 F4 (non-afs) really cheap and it is a lens that I have wondered about for a long time. I love my tamron 200-500 dearly and it has produced some amazing results for me. I always felt it was just missing a little something. This seagull is shot wide open with a 1.4x TC. So I loose 80mm, but I gain a stop as I normally shot the Tamron at f8 and I think I picked up the last little something in detail. It's just a seagull, but I'm wondering what you think about detail?


Seagull at sunset by krisinct, on Flickr

 

[manaheim]

Simple but pretty. Beautiful sky.

A little contrast and curves and sharpening would do this wonders, I think.

 

[jbkm1994]

It's a nice shot...I have to second manaheim,

 

[coastalconn]

I didn't do much with it as you can tell. I was more looking at detail. I just adjusted white balance and did an auto-level in LR. I looked at LR and it cranked the contrast down to -25 easy fix... One thing I have never figured out is curves.. Color, Saturation, luminance?

 

[manaheim]

Curves is VERY worth learning.

I'd take a pass at editing your lovely birdie but it says NO!

A bump in saturation might be nice too, but I think the curves would actually cover it.

 

[Majeed Badizadegan]

For a very easy to photograph bird, this is a nice, solid shot.

 

[coastalconn]

Curves is VERY worth learning.

I'd take a pass at editing your lovely birdie but it says NO!

A bump in saturation might be nice too, but I think the curves would actually cover it.

Oh why play with a silly lttle jpeg when you can play with raw... DSC_2949.NEF
If anyone else wants to download it and play feel free. It is just a gull... The auto white balance made it very blue...

 

[Aloicious]

oooOOHHhh...raw....heh..I might have to give it a go. I think overall its a solid shot, I don't see any IQ issues or anything, on the terrible hospital monitor I'm on right now it looks at least on par, if not slightly improved IQ over most your tamron shots, 80mm loss is less pronounced at the super-tele end of things, personally I'd prefer having the extra speed over the slight focal length.

have you tested the AF performance with and without the coverter? I had to adjust mine slightly on my 2.8, it made a slight but noticable improvement in the AF quality, definitely worth looking at when you get a chance.

 

[coastalconn]

I got stuck at work so I had far less time to play with the lens then I wanted. I had very little light left by the time I started shooting so this is only at 1/200th. It was cloudy above and the sun was setting, hence the funky white balance. The next 2 days this Nor Easter is blowing through so I will have wind driven rain and no light. I'm sure once I have some light and I have some more shutter speed it will be even sharper. Everyone said the AF was too slow on this lens, but it works just fine with the 1.4x TC. If I get some sunlight I will throw the 2x on and see what happens.

 

[ceeboy14]

The color balance as you stated more eloquently than I - I say whacked out or FUBARRED which made it far more dificult,,but hey, what's life without a little fun?

 

[roentarre]

The background colour is mesmerising. Quite a great capture with punchy impact from seagull.

 

[bc_steve]

Here's my take on it. Someone near me is selling the AF-S version of that lens and it is of course tempting me. They are asking $1000, but it has been for sale for some time so maybe they would take a little less. Your post has got me thinking if I should try and pick up that lens or maybe wait until I am ready to spend a little more on something else. Glad to see how well it works with a teleconverter though!

Thanks for posting