Marsh Birds

ronwoodcraft

Bronze Member
Jul 14, 2007
2,138
6,518
Idaho

Attachments

  • 020.jpg
    020.jpg
    182 KB · Views: 63
  • 030.jpg
    030.jpg
    186.4 KB · Views: 55
  • 0100000000000.jpg
    0100000000000.jpg
    161.3 KB · Views: 57
  • 01000000000000.jpg
    01000000000000.jpg
    132.7 KB · Views: 65
  • 100000000000000000000.jpg
    100000000000000000000.jpg
    193.1 KB · Views: 60
  • 0333333333333333333.jpg
    0333333333333333333.jpg
    182.1 KB · Views: 57
  • 05111111111111111.jpg
    05111111111111111.jpg
    185.3 KB · Views: 53
  • 1011111111111111.jpg
    1011111111111111.jpg
    205.6 KB · Views: 61
  • 111111111111111.jpg
    111111111111111.jpg
    187.6 KB · Views: 61
  • 03555555555555555555.jpg
    03555555555555555555.jpg
    174.7 KB · Views: 74
Last edited:

tamrock

Gold Member
Jan 16, 2013
14,955
29,798
Colorado
Detector(s) used
Bounty Hunter Tracker IV
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
Amazing clarity & focus. How far away were you from those birds.
 

OP
OP
ronwoodcraft

ronwoodcraft

Bronze Member
Jul 14, 2007
2,138
6,518
Idaho
Amazing clarity & focus. How far away were you from those birds.
Thanks Grant, I think somewhere between 15 and 25 feet. The 400mm lens I use wont focus if subject is closer than about 12 ft. All of these have been cropped from the original image. I have a 22 megapixal camera, and to my simple way of thinking, I can crop half of the image away and still have moor usable info left in the image than my first 6 megapixal Canon Rebel.

These were taken this morning while on another mission. Light was still pretty good, but may go back soon earlier in the morning.
 

tamrock

Gold Member
Jan 16, 2013
14,955
29,798
Colorado
Detector(s) used
Bounty Hunter Tracker IV
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
Thanks Grant, I think somewhere between 15 and 25 feet. The 400mm lens I use wont focus if subject is closer than about 12 ft. All of these have been cropped from the original image. I have a 22 megapixal camera, and to my simple way of thinking, I can crop half of the image away and still have moor usable info left in the image than my first 6 megapixal Canon Rebel.

These were taken this morning while on another mission. Light was still pretty good, but may go back soon earlier in the morning.
zoom'n in I can maybe figure out what that last bird pictured, has in his beak. Looks like a bug of some kind ? You sure know how to put that camera to its full potential. That's got to be fun.
 

old digger

Gold Member
Jan 15, 2012
7,502
7,298
Montana
Detector(s) used
White's MXT
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
Awesome pictures! :thumbsup: Love the blue hue in the Marsh Hen.
 

BosnMate

Gold Member
Sep 10, 2010
6,916
8,441
Detector(s) used
Whites MXT, Whites DFX, Whites 6000 Di Pro
Primary Interest:
Other
Does mega mean million? My camera has 16.9 million pixels, with 16.2 being effective, and I can see the difference in the sharpness of focus between your pictures and mine. I have a 300
mm lens, and bought a doubler for it, which so far I haven't been able to get to work all that well. I was pretty naive when I bought it, figuring it would make my lens a 600 mm, which I still
suppose it does, but it also doubles the effort to use it. For one thing a tripod is a must, and the lens is so heavy a cheap tripod doesn't do the job. So far I haven't tried to take and bird
pictures with it. It's not something that you can use to do snapshots, photos would have to be planned ahead of time and everything set up in a blind. I enjoyed your pictures, real
National Geographic stuff.
 

OP
OP
ronwoodcraft

ronwoodcraft

Bronze Member
Jul 14, 2007
2,138
6,518
Idaho
Does mega mean million? My camera has 16.9 million pixels, with 16.2 being effective, and I can see the difference in the sharpness of focus between your pictures and mine. I have a 300
mm lens, and bought a doubler for it, which so far I haven't been able to get to work all that well. I was pretty naive when I bought it, figuring it would make my lens a 600 mm, which I still
suppose it does, but it also doubles the effort to use it. For one thing a tripod is a must, and the lens is so heavy a cheap tripod doesn't do the job. So far I haven't tried to take and bird
pictures with it. It's not something that you can use to do snapshots, photos would have to be planned ahead of time and everything set up in a blind. I enjoyed your pictures, real
National Geographic stuff.
Thanks Bosnmate, Not sure what mega means. My last camera had 12 and the one I use now has 22. Not much difference in image quality, but I can crop away a large portion from the images I use now, and still have a decent picture.
I have a 1.4 teleconverter that I don't use anymore. I've had it for a long time and used it a lot. It works good for more range, but is very slow to focus and requires more light.
Have you tried using the manual mode on your camera? To avoid blur from camera shake, with a 300mm lens you need at least 1/600 shutter speed, and at 600mm at least 1/1200. Shutter speed, aperture, and ISO are all inter related. You can start by setting your cameras ISO at 400, and aperture wide open ( smallest F number ). Now focus on something with decent lighting conditions. You should have a graph in your viewfinder where you can move the wheel that adjusts your shutter speed to the middle of the graph, and check what your shutter speed is. It will probably be a lot faster, but if it's not at least 1/600 with your 300mm lens, then the only thing you can do is boost ISO.( The higher ISO will give your pics more noise. )
Hope this makes since. It sounds complicated, but with some practice it will begin to become second nature, and in the end Lighting conditions makes all the difference.
 

OP
OP
ronwoodcraft

ronwoodcraft

Bronze Member
Jul 14, 2007
2,138
6,518
Idaho
Does mega mean million? My camera has 16.9 million pixels, with 16.2 being effective, and I can see the difference in the sharpness of focus between your pictures and mine. I have a 300
mm lens, and bought a doubler for it, which so far I haven't been able to get to work all that well. I was pretty naive when I bought it, figuring it would make my lens a 600 mm, which I still
suppose it does, but it also doubles the effort to use it. For one thing a tripod is a must, and the lens is so heavy a cheap tripod doesn't do the job. So far I haven't tried to take and bird
pictures with it. It's not something that you can use to do snapshots, photos would have to be planned ahead of time and everything set up in a blind. I enjoyed your pictures, real
National Geographic stuff.
Another way that may be easier is to use your cameras shutter speed priority mode. Don't know what Nikon calls it, but for some reason Canon calls it TV mode. You just set what shutter speed you want, and the camera automatically chooses the aperture and ISO for you.
 

OP
OP
ronwoodcraft

ronwoodcraft

Bronze Member
Jul 14, 2007
2,138
6,518
Idaho
zoom'n in I can maybe figure out what that last bird pictured, has in his beak. Looks like a bug of some kind ? You sure know how to put that camera to its full potential. That's got to be fun.
Thanks again, Here's a bigger crop of the same picture to show the bug.
 

Attachments

  • 035cr.jpg
    035cr.jpg
    177.3 KB · Views: 54

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Top