Black Skimmers of Cape May

[Scottes]

Well Cape May was not as good as CDS & I had hoped, but we managed to get a few birds.

Here's some of what I got practically in front of the motel on the beach. OK, so this was about 200 yards down the beach, but they roamed quite a bit and made for easy pickings. In fact, both CDS and I were tired of shooting skimmers about 30 minutes after seeing them. Almost.

Here's my choice Skimmers.


One in flight:

http://www.itsanadventure.com/postimages/Skimmer_52887.jpg


One of many posing opportunities. With the 400 prime I had to often back up because they got so close. Boy that's tough.

http://www.itsanadventure.com/postimages/Skimmer_52912.jpg


We were out before sunrise the next morning I was playing with the 400 prime while waiting for the sun to come up. (It's easy to get up this early when a beautiful sunrise is right across the street.) Even at ISO 800 this pic was 1/13 shutter. I kinda like the effect, and I'll have to try this some more.

http://www.itsanadventure.com/postimages/Skimmer_53069.jpg

[IanD]

#3 is wicked! That my friend is worthy of being hung on a wall.
The first two ain't too shabby either but I love #3.

[JMAS]

Fantastic detail on a dificult subject, Scott.
And the third one is very artistic. Cool effect!


Jaime

[CyberDyneSystems]

Whoa... you went and got all "Artsy fartsy" on me!

That is just awesome! I remember that color... but I didn't even try to get a bird shot in that low light. Fantastic!

[LazyPhotographer]

Superb images, Scott...

The feather detail on #1 is outstanding and the purple haze is fabulous!

[Scottes]

Thanks folks.


...and the purple haze is fabulous!

You just titled that one: "Kiss the Sky"
Awesome! How appropriate!

[stoneylonesome]

Fantastic everyone, Now #3 is one you can use as a sobriety meter, when it looks sharp you'll know you've consumed to many adult beverages :lol: :lol: :lol: All kidding aside it's a real neat effect.

P.S Scottes my Mom grew up a little north of Boston, (Winchester)

[PhotosGuy]

I like the feeling of #3 a lot. (Bad news: You'll probably have to shoot a few hundred more to get another one as good.)

[Scottes]

(Bad news: You'll probably have to shoot a few hundred more to get another one as good.)

Gee, thanks Frank. You've really inspired me.

:-)

Yeah, it will be tough. Just getting the opportunity - skimming birds at sunrise/sunset - won't be easy. But at least now it's on my mind when I'm thinking that the light is too low.

Then again, pushing a 400mm to f/22 certainly makes things interesting in *any* light.

[PhotosGuy]

You've really inspired me.[/sarcasm]

:lol: Looks like we need a 'sarcasm' smiley, along with one for 'thumbs up'!

I'm sure that you know by now that I love well done blurs & I've shot (& thrown away) a lot of them. You're wildlife shots are of some of the toughest subjects that there are & I don't expect that you'll quit something out of frustration once you see the possibilities. In the back of my mind my comment was directed to others who might want to try blurs & then decide that they just can't do it after 10-20 shots. :wink:

[Tiger1]

:D Ninja,

Do you prefer to shoot with primes :?: I know they are supposed to be sharper than zooms, but don't you miss some opportunities without a zoom?

Looking for all the help I can get :!:

Thanks,

Gene

[Scottes]

Do you prefer to shoot with primes :?: I know they are supposed to be sharper than zooms, but don't you miss some opportunities without a zoom?

I love the versatility of zooms, I'll admit. I *love* the 100-400 L IS. But I got the Canon 400 f/5.6 L because it's so much better at auto-focus and low-light focusing, thus much better for birds in flight.

As to sharpness, I have about 8,000 frames with the 100-400 and 3,000 with the 400 prime, and I can't say which one is sharper. They're so close as to be meaningless, IMHO. Primes are supposed to be sharper, but I think an excellent zoom will beat a good prime, and the 100-400 is excellent. Now if you were talking about the 600 f/4 L, it's fantastic, and that's a different story.

Here's a review I wrote comparing the Canon 100-400 to the 400 f/5.6:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=43436

[djudes]

I like the colors in the first two.

[Tiger1]

:D Ninja,

Read your review that you referenced - Thanks. :D

How long have you been doing digital :?: I'm curious about the learning curve to the type of success that is maybe not expert, because I don't think anyone ever gets there, but far better than average and maybe outstanding (sort of).

Your work shows that you have eclipsed that plateau.

Thanks,

Gene

[Scottes]

How long have you been doing digital :?: I'm curious about the learning curve to the type of success that is maybe not expert, because I don't think anyone ever gets there, but far better than average and maybe outstanding (sort of).

Well I spent 2 months with film and decided that I needed to go digital. So I bought a 10D. 2 weeks from today will be my 1-year anniversay with that camera. I've been shooting birds for less than 8 months.

My first bird post, Feb 24, 2004: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=25834
Pretty sad, huh?


As to learning curve, I found books to be paramount, second only to practice. But readng should be done first because practicing something is useless unless you have some knowledge.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=42510

[Tiger1]

:D You sure shortened the curve. Your work reflects someone who has been doing digital for a lot longer than 1 year.

Be Proud, man, be proud :D :D :D

Thanks,

Gene