MatthewK wrote in post #19126565
I did see that news article, very sad
It was rough seeing the little warblers in the photos, knowing that we're seeing the same birds in our outings these days. I have to assume it's due to the fires and all the smoke these migrants have to deal with, else they'd be dying all over the country.
Yes, I am aware of that, I have been following the problems with forest fires in the US for a couple of years, and the droughts in California. Rather than scare people off, I hope reports such as these make people aware that we need to transition away from the burning of fossile fuel in whatever form ASAP. And we are smart enough as humans to do it, but it takes an enormous effort which starts with awareness, and then action by innovation. Europe is, as EU, formulating a new EU wide strategy for the coming decades which involves drastic action, including CO2 reduction of 55% by 2030!
Awareness is really growing here that now is the time to transition, or future generations will be in dire trouble.
This still has to be executed EU wide, but the time for excuses is past, all EU members will have to make the ultimate effort to innovate.
Hopefully across the atlantic a similar effort will arise across the whole of the US to transition to a sustainable economy, so birders in the future will still have a wide and abundant variety of species to shoot, instead of sitting with their 15.000,- high-tech rigs in their laps, waiting for nothing. This I pray for (although I am not conventionally religious )
Oh, these warblers were anything but static, they never sit still! Evidence of this is in the Magnolia shot, you can see his foot moving as he was just about to hop to the next perch. It's exhausting trying to keep up with these little birds! 1/640 is my default, and I'll venture down to 1/400 to eek out the last bit of exposure, but motion blur then becomes an issue. Part of that ISO 6400 was caused by inaccurate metering on my part, as in my efforts to track this CMW I think I probably metered off of that dark background and skyrocketed the ISO... in fact, I know that to be the case because I actually reduced exposure by -1EV in post, so that means I could have done 3200
heck, I probably could have gotten away with 1600. The D500 is good for it though, I wasn't too concerned.