Interesting comparison-

Went out to the Hummer feeder and was trying some different settings. Both shots are Tv-shutter priority w/ ISO 400 and aperature ended up at 4.00(wide open for my 300). Flash fill at 1/8 power and distance was +/- 10 feet. 1st shot ss was 1/250-dialed in 1250 but forgot to hit set, the 2nd was at 1/1250. No.1 was over-exposed and 2nd under-exposed. My limited pp skills gave me these. My conclusion is better to err in the direction of over-exposure. Thoughts-criticisms-corrections?

I checked out both threads Rog and I think in your case I'd agree that you did better with a little over-exposure. Bret will come along and disagree I'm sure, but my usual setting for anything is +1/3stop EC. I will admit that I am actively testing his under-exposure method, so there, I've been totally PC haven't I
The wings on this one are interesting with the flash in use, but I'm not sure yet whether I like it. Could just be the particular wing position in this image which, BTW, looks pretty darn good.

CamFan01 wrote in post #16952322
I checked out both threads Rog and I think in your case I'd agree that you did better with a little over-exposure. Bret will come along and disagree I'm sure, but my usual setting for anything is +1/3stop EC. I will admit that I am actively testing his under-exposure method, so there, I've been totally PC haven't I
The wings on this one are interesting with the flash in use, but I'm not sure yet whether I like it. Could just be the particular wing position in this image which, BTW, looks pretty darn good.

Hi Steve-appreciate your looking in. I think I remember hearing that the 7D being noisy on exposure boosted shots. But that just seems to be my ongoing problem here. As for wing blur, I can go either way-I just want crisp, well exposed, non-noisy images. Not too much, right?

LOL,Lmao........... Dump the flash!

Oldjackssparrows wrote in post #16953313
LOL,Lmao........... Dump the flash!

Bret(OP)-I do believe your a bit of a sadist! In about an hour, the feeder will be out of the shade and I'm going to try again your way-f8-1/320-ISO at, let's try 600 and no flash. I'll be back!

200!

Oldjackssparrows wrote in post #16953972
200!

SS or ISO?

A shot at the above listed settings(ISO at 640, no 600). Used a tripod. Sky had a high thin overcast which I thought would be great, but in the interest of full disclosure, while I was out the overcast burned off and the bright sun yielded some new possibilities. Will get to those shots a little later.

I think the 7D is not as for forgiving of under exposure. With a 1D4, 5DIII or 1DX a little underexposure just protects the highlights. That being said those cameras also do a better job overall in recovering an image with under or overexposure.

She's definitely underexposed at whatever settings you used Rog.
My hesitancy to underexpose on a regular basis comes from the dislike I have of my ability to add light back in and make it look pleasing or natural.

That being said I took your .jpg and raised the exposure 2.5 stops.....WOW, that's a lot! Now that's across the entire image, not just the bird. The lighting looks brighter, but I'm not sure better. Yes, I re-cropped to remove the feeder and make her a little bigger so you could see the results.

IMAGE LINK: http://s407.photobucke​t.com …d-1b_zps4657af88.jpg.htm​l

CamFan01 wrote in post #16955372
She's definitely underexposed at whatever settings you used Rog.
My hesitancy to underexpose on a regular basis comes from the dislike I have of my ability to add light back in and make it look pleasing or natural.

That being said I took your .jpg and raised the exposure 2.5 stops.....WOW, that's a lot! Now that's across the entire image, not just the bird. The lighting looks brighter, but I'm not sure better. Yes, I re-cropped to remove the feeder and make her a little bigger so you could see the results.

IMAGE LINK: http://s407.photobucke​t.com …d-1b_zps4657af88.jpg.htm​l

You're the pilot of your ship Rog. Pick whatever settings you can that give you what you want.

Steve, I did not intend this to be a final product. Posted this SOC to show Bret what I typically have when using his preferred settings-f8 and slower ss. See earlier replies in this thread. Interested what he'd do in my stead. Bret also posted "200"; wasn't sure he meant ISO or ss. Also tried Auto ISO w/ these and it went to 3200-immediately discarded those!
High haze did burn off and I did get some possible keepers, but still relatively high ISO. Hope to get to these in near future. Other duties call.