Double Crested Cormorant?

[Scottes]

100-400 @ 400 + 1.4 TC, 100% crop, so not a great photo, but I wanted this for ID. Looks to me like a Double Crested Cormorant, but seems way too small according to the books, and it's neck seems too short. Found in a wildlife refuge in Massachusetts, about 20 miles inland, so habitat fits too.

http://www.itsanadventure.com/postimages/DoubleCrestedCormorant.jpg

Or is it a Justablackperchingbird?

[IanD]

Scottes,
Could he be a Neotropic Cormorant? ( Phalacrocorax brasilianus ) Double Crested should have an all orange beak. This dude don't. Then again what the heck do I know. Just bought the damn book. Before that this would have been a Justablackorangebeakedperchingonabirdhousebird. :lol: :lol: :lol:

[PacAce]

Scott, looks like you hit it right on the head. From the looks of the orange at the base of the bill, it looks like it is a double-breasted cormorant.

Nice catch.

Man, you get all the nice bird up there in Mass. Wish I had the same type of variety here. (Actually, based on a local birding book, there is a good variety. I just have to drive out to like a million different places to see them all! :? )

BTW, I just saw my first red-winged blackbird this morning on my way to work and I immediately thought of you and your pictures. This bird was perched on a grass stalk just like in your pictures. It was gone by the time I stopped and turned around for a closer look with my camera. :(

[PacAce]

Scottes,
Could he be a Neotropic Cormorant? ( Phalacrocorax brasilianus ) Double Crested should have an all orange beak. This dude don't. Then again what the heck do I know. Just bought the damn book. Before that this would have been a Justablackorangebeakedperchingonabirdhousebird. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Just one book, Ian? :shock: You have to have at least THREE books from different sources, just in case a 2nd or even a 3rd opinion is required. :mrgreen:

[Scottes]

According to the book, the Neotropic has a white V where the bill meets the rest of the bird. Also, it doesn't look like Massachusetts is included in the Neotropic habitat.

And the more I look at Cormorants the more this looks like one, but this one seems so small.

[PacAce]

Scott, how was the manual focusing with the 1.4x? That's the only apprehension I have about using the 1.4x with the 100-400. But I guess with the focus acknowledgement light in the viewfinder as a guide, it can't be all that bad, huh?

I'm still debating whether I want to get myself the 1.4x or not. I can definitely use it on my 70-100 f/2.8 lens but I have yet to really get out and shoot with it and I bought it more than a month ago.

[IanD]

Scott, how was the manual focusing with the 1.4x? That's the only apprehension I have about using the 1.4x with the 100-400. But I guess with the focus acknowledgement light in the viewfinder as a guide, it can't be all that bad, huh?

I'm still debating whether I want to get myself the 1.4x or not. I can definitely use it on my 70-100 f/2.8 lens but I have yet to really get out and shoot with it and I bought it more than a month ago.
Leo,
Get the 1.4. I love mine and it works like a charm on the 70-200 IS.
Damn, now I have to go out and buy 2 more birdy books. My one and only birdy book shows the Double Crested with a total orange beak. That is what I get for buying a bird book that was written by Slyvester and Tweety :lol: :lol:

[Scottes]

Scott, how was the manual focusing with the 1.4x? That's the only apprehension I have about using the 1.4x with the 100-400. But I guess with the focus acknowledgement light in the viewfinder as a guide, it can't be all that bad, huh?

I'm still debating whether I want to get myself the 1.4x or not. I can definitely use it on my 70-100 f/2.8 lens but I have yet to really get out and shoot with it and I bought it more than a month ago.

Focus is tricky, but that may be due to the fact that I have bad eyesight and wear glasses. My eyes also play tricks on me - if I stare at something it will come into focus, but if I rest and come back then I can see that it's out of focus.

Out of ~12 photos of this guy - both with and without the 1.4 - about half were what would be called sharp. You're looking at a 100% crop with the 1.4 and some sharpening. The focus confirmation light came on *every* time, regardless of the manual focusing I did - so I don't feel it's that accurate, and I don't trust it when shooting birds because you can never get the eye to fill the sensor.

If you can afford the $280 I'd say it's worth it though. It has given me some good images that I would not have made otherwise. But I consider it handy more than practical. If you *need* the 1.4 to get a shot then I doubt that it's going to be very sellable. But if you *want* the 1.4 to get a tighter shot then it's a different story, and you'll get some nice shots. Just my humble opinion.

When you consider the 70-200 f/2.8 though, it starts to make much more sense, and becomes a lot more handy when you can use it on both lenses. And one day I just might get that 600mm L....

[PacAce]

Scott/IanD,

Thanks for the tidbit on the 1.4x. You've talked me into it and I'll order one as soon as I get done with this post. I was planning to get it some time later but I've just decide that "some time later" has just passed. :mrgreen:

[JZaun]

Yep Scottes I agree with you on it being a Double Crested Cormorant.. My bird book shows the 2 tone bill the wing design and the same tail:D . I think yours is just resting his neck so it looks shorter..

Nice shot

JZ

[CyberDyneSystems]

You know... Iv'e been around Cormarants by the thousands my whole life,.. and like Gulls,. I've never even thought to look at what variety I was surrounded by... :(

My Bad... and at work here I have no reference books..

[Josh]

very nice picture!!