Does it Get Any Worse?

[MDJAK]

I went out with TXDUGGAN, also known as Tom, a fellow POTN member, yesterday to find bald eagles in the wild. My first time ever seeing one.

Unfortunately, my 300 even with the 1.4 was just not long enough all day.

This is the best shot I got. It's a hundred percent crop, less than 1mp.

Do you see motion blur here? I did take out my tripod, but don't know if I used it for this one or not. I truly feel the picture stinks.
Thanks for looking and commenting.
mark

[bonefish]

Originally Posted by MDJAK

I went out with TXDUGGAN, also known as Tom, a fellow POTN member, yesterday to find bald eagles in the wild. My first time ever seeing one.

Unfortunately, my 300 even with the 1.4 was just not long enough all day.

This is the best shot I got. It's a hundred percent crop, less than 1mp.

Do you see motion blur here? I did take out my tripod, but don't know if I used it for this one or not. I truly feel the picture stinks.
Thanks for looking and commenting.
mark

You've already beaten yourself up, you want the rest of us to have a go too ? . Sometimes the birds just are not where you can get a good shot of them and somtimes you just can't afford a 600mm lens.

[Booswalia]

"Stinks" might be a bit strong. For the distance and at a 100% crop it's actually pretty good. You've captured nice detail in the wings.

[hTr]

I have gone days and not seen a bird, Many time the camera came home empty. Quit feeling sorry for yourself next time they will be all over ya, but a 500 or 600 would be damn nice for one and all. (Eagle shooters)

[MDJAK]

I actually thought that would happen. I figured what would be the chances of seeing any. Well, as soon as we were within 10 miles of the Eagle Institute, we saw a car pulled over to the side and they were looking at the eagle above.

We spent the entire day driving around and actually saw quite a few.

I guess as a completely inexperienced bird shooter, I just don't know how hard it is. I was actually snapping away when they were flying what seemed like a mile overhead. I got like little specs for pics.

I can't wait to go back.

mark

[txduggan]

Originally Posted by MDJAK

I actually thought that would happen. I figured what would be the chances of seeing any. Well, as soon as we were within 10 miles of the Eagle Institute, we saw a car pulled over to the side and they were looking at the eagle above.

We spent the entire day driving around and actually saw quite a few.

I guess as a completely inexperienced bird shooter, I just don't know how hard it is. I was actually snapping away when they were flying what seemed like a mile overhead. I got like little specs for pics.

I can't wait to go back.

mark

I'll do the stinkin' around here..thank you very much!!!! This is with a TRIPOD...100-400 + 1.4x TC, manual focus...(20D....no AF) Please notice how I put the artifacts in for texture: http://tomduggan.com/misc/_MG_8552.jpg Did about a zillion sharpening passes; shows you how good the RAW was....bleh.... Things looked better through the binoculars Bleh... Tom D

[morehtml]

Put a 2x TC on the 300 2.8 and put it on a good tripod. Works wonders. A 1ds crops a ton. The eagle was probably so small the AF point couldn't get a exact fix.

[MDJAK]

Is the WB more accurate on this one, or is it just different? Well, I know it's different. Is it better, worse, or ...

[morehtml]

No 1st looks better. The head looks blown.

[bromm]

When birding It seems that there is a certain distance that is different for each lens where the quality drops off, When you get withing the working range of the lens the improvement is very very noticable. Last summer I was shooting an osprey nest with my meager tamron 100-300 on my XT, I sat in the car so as not to spook the birds. Image quality sucked, especially on crops. So one day I crossed the road and sat on the side of the ditch, a difference of 33 feet or so and poof, I was amazed at the difference 30+ feet made on these fair sized birds, even close to 100% crops printed off nice. Hope this helps, and keep at it.

[canonloader]

It seems that there is a certain distance that is different for each lens where the quality drops off,

I've noticed this too. There is a definate break point, even on my 400L. It'll go out to a certain distance, and everything is fine. Go another 10 feet, and it's trash and can't be saved.

[MDJAK]

I am truly happy to read that. I think.

Never having owned a telephoto prime before, I guess I just expected too much. I just thought no matter how far away the object was, it would still be able to lock focus and look good.

This was one of the few, if any, in-flight shots I will dare to show. I fully realize these shots are not up to par with the shots posted here regularly.

And I do appreciate the feedback.

mark

[pttenn]

Originally Posted by canonloader

I've noticed this too. There is a definate break point, even on my 400L. It'll go out to a certain distance, and everything is fine. Go another 10 feet, and it's trash and can't be saved.

Amen to that!
Karen

[bromm]

I have a lot of shots where the bird was just beyond the working distance of the lens, If I learned anything this last year here on the bird forum it was the need to get close.

Never having owned a telephoto prime before, I guess I just expected too much. I just thought no matter how far away the object was, it would still be able to lock focus and look good.

Same here Mark, keep at it, you'll be posting eagles like Mitch,HTR and the others...I just cant get close enough to eagles yet.

[canonloader]

I just thought no matter how far away the object was, it would still be able to lock focus and look good.

Well, that is still true, if your shooting landscapes. Everything will be in focus for the most part. But you can't pick a dot out of the sky and blow it up til it resembles an eagle. There just aren't enough pixels left in it to make a good image. If you want to shoot landscapes, they will look good from way back. If you want to shoot eagles, you just have to get close.