Tom Reichner wrote in post #19093137
.I'm surprised to see you say that.
I know you shoot a lot of small birds like Warblers.
. They are so small that one usually needs to shoot them right at minimum focus distance in order to fill the frame with them, so that there won't need to be any cropping or wasted pixels.
. And when shooting 600mm or 800mm at MFD, I have found that depth of field is so thin wide open that I need to stop down to f9 or f10 or f11 just to get most of the bird in focus.
. I don't really want shots where the head of the bird is in focus, but the flank and feet are soft.
So, how is it that you shoot where f5.6 is sufficient for frame-filling images?
. Do you wait until they turn sideways, or something like that?
. Or do you just go ahead and shoot wide and then crop in post?
. Or do you just accept soft feet or flanks, as long as the head is sharp?
. Or maybe you
prefer that the head be sharp and the rest of the bird be a little soft ....... we all have different tastes and I need to remember that the way I want my bird images to look isn't necessarily the way others want their bird images to look.
I have found that I can shoot birds at 800mm at around 1/120th of a second
(without IS) and still get most of the frames to be nice and sharp.
. I think most people can shoot at much slower shutter speeds than they realize and still get tack sharp images.
. Maybe these new f11 lenses will force people to shoot at shutter speeds that they were always afraid to use, and they will be pleasantly surprised to learn that they never needed those fast shutter speeds, anyway.
. When shooting bird portraits, there is just no need to "keep the shutter speed up"
(assuming good long lens technique and a quality tripod are being employed).
. With the D500 and the 1.5 crop on the 500mm, and the ~9ft MFD, I 'm extra mindful of DOF; just as with shooting portraits of people and having one eye in focus and the other out (which I hate), I also don't want one bird's foot in focus and the other soft, but there are times when a subject just won't listen to my commands and I have to shoot at a less than optimal angle. If light is good and I'm closer in, I'll stop down to f/8 or f/11. At near-MFD I'll also stop down until I start bumping up against the 3200+ ISOs, and then I'll gradually start to open up again. I do't always get it perfectly right, but there's a balance I try to achieve b/w ISO and DOF.
Shutter speed also plays a roll as well in that. My default is 1/640, as I find that it freezes a good amount of bird movement for most occasions. Once I get what I consider a decent shot, then I'll start experimenting with slowing down the shutter speed in an attempt to lower my ISO value. Active warblers are an example of where shutter speeds need to be bumped, as those little guys love to flit and tumble through the tree branches while they hunt bugs, and so I'll bump shutter up to 1/800 - 1/1000 to compensate. Stationary or slow moving birds though, I have no fear of shooting at slower speeds as long as I can maintain good bracing fundamentals. The stubby, lightweight Nikon 500PF allow for that sort of capability.
Another thing to consider, is that with these new lenses and their 20' MFD and maximum f/11 aperture, birders shouldn't have any DOF problems, but on the same token they'll be faced with some demanding work in order to get a pleasing background blur, as distance to subject is so large due to that MFD, meaning they'll need a doubly distant background. That's preference, of course, as some shooters will prefer to have a sharp, in-focus background in order to present the subjects in their environment.
A 20' MFD presents another unique challenge because framing up a shot will need to be a much more considered, deliberate process, as does keeping a clear shooting lane free of leaves/twigs/etc. Having a short MFD with lenses like the 100-400 II and the 500PF make them ideal for impromptu close encounters, but with these new lenses I can see missing out on more shots due to subject flying under that 20' MFD.
I'm still thinking more about the ramifications of these lenses on how I'd employ them in my photography. It wouldn't be impossible, but it'd be a far cry from my learned preferences I now enjoy.
