Photography

zzyzx said:

Cameras have a red dot site built in.

Click to expand...

No, they have a viewfinder or LCD screen built in. If there is a bird up there, and your camera is pointed at a piece of empty sky, it is difficult to get it aimed quickly. With a red dot sight, you see the aim point and the bird at the same time. It allows for almost instantaneous aiming.

I have no problem instantaneously aiming my camera. I start out with one eye open and the other eye on the LCD screen. The advantage to using the built in system is that it will also tell you when you are in focus.

Started shooting at age 6 with my Mom's Kodak No. 3 Box Camera using 116 film. The original models sold for $1.00 whereas she purchased hers in the early 20's for $1.25. But as to my getting hooked on photography -  that started during my Navy days. Somewhere between Norfolk, VA and Barcelona I purchased an Argus C3 from the ship's store. During that tour w/the 6th Fleet in the Med I along with several shipmates took tons of slides. When underway again we would set up a projector to view and critique each others stuff.

But it wasn't until the 80's that I got serious about really learning the art with the purchase of a Minolta 35mm with a standard lens. That lead to medium format, the building of my own darkroom, and fully equipted shooting studio. I specialized in some family but mostly individual portraits - plus was the leading ramp photographer for Barbizon in San Francisco. I got that job because I was only one they tried that understood balanced light between flash and ambient.

But now I am digital shooting w/a Canon XT and a 50D -- plus have 4 lenses (3 Canon, 1 Tamron). And though I occasionally do work for others, shoot mostly for my own enjoyment. Am having fun exploring other areas of images such as night work and BIF. A link to my portfolio is posted below.

Welcome to the forum, Chris! I hope you will post some of your work. 

Bob Buchanan said:

Started shooting at age 6 with my Mom's Kodak No. 3 Box Camera using 116 film.

Click to expand...

Wow, I didn't start shooting until I was 8 years old. No wonder you are better than me

Here I am at age 14 with my Brownie. Crazy even then

artonauk said:

I too enjoy using Nikons. How are you find the D800 Chet?

Click to expand...

I have only shot about 200 photos with it. I'm still experimenting with setting up the shooting memory banks andd trying out different settings. What I seen so far is really great. The 36.5 megpix sure gives you a lot of room to heavily crop and still get a decent photo. Would I buy it again, you bet I would!

Tom - neat dog!

Pierat said:

Tom - neat dog!

Click to expand...

Thank you, Pierat. Her name was Daisy and she was a wonderful dog. During the 50s Lassie was a very popular TV series and I am sure that is what prompted my parents to get her. The ironic thing about that is that we moved to California in 1959 and the very first celebrity I met was Jon Provost, the child in the then current Lassie series. He was a good friend of my best friend. Here I am at age 5 with Daisy as a pup.

zzyzx said:

Cameras have a red dot site built in.

Click to expand...

I'm unable to shoot birds in flight (except for hummingbirds) at all, because of a catch 22 problem:
Autofocus won't focus unless you are pointed at a subject. You can't see the bird if the camera is out of focus. Usually, I end up focused at infinity, and can't keep the bird in the finder.
I just bought a red dot sight and the hotshoe attachment accessory, and from what I can tell, it allows a great field of vision, and a precise aiming, that should (in theory) let me stay on the bird as it flies.
It's a small investment, compared to my other equipment, to try it out. A $1500 telephoto lens you can't use because you can't see through it because it isn't focused is frustrating. I've tried prefocus where I expect the bird to be, but this has not helped. Perhaps others have faster reflexes than I do.

You can see recent panoramic landscapes and humminbirds, etc at gregscott.artistwebsites.com

Greg - It is very easy to track and focus on birds in flight if you simply keep your other eye open until you have got the lens locked onto the bird. I use a 200-500mm and I usually start tracking around 300 mm. Once I have locked on I will zoom out to 500mm if it is warranted. But the key thing is that following BIF is a skill that must be learned, whether you use a red dot finder or not. The best way to learn the skill is to hang around a beach with a lot of gull in flight. They are large birds that are slow flyers and easy to track.

The best way to learn the skill is to hang around a beach with a lot of gull in flight.

Click to expand...

Great tip Tom, I'll have to remember that one. The only time I tried to take pics of birds at a beach, they were sandpipers scurrying around on the sand so fast they were impossible (for me) to track.

I can't track those sandpipers either. I keep trying and every once in a while I get lucky but they are too small, too far away and too erratic in their movement to keep in the frame with a long telephoto lens.

If you are struggling to shoot birds in flight then you need a gimbal. This allows the camera to be firmly attached to a tripod but with the ability to easily move and track whilst shooting.

Regards

Chris

G2EWS said:

If you are struggling to shoot birds in flight then you need a gimbal. This allows the camera to be firmly attached to a tripod but with the ability to easily move and track whilst shooting.

Regards

Chris

Click to expand...

I have found that even a Wimberly (gimbal) is often not fast enough, and does not allow for much panning.  Although, not as steady, you can't beat a shoulder stock for speed. See http://www.bushhawk.com/bushhawk/bushhawk-shoulder-mounts.

They are a little pricy, but they do turn up on ebay occasionally. Be aware that because they use the camera's remote shutter release, they are camera specific, but it is possible to convert them from one camera brand to another.

I know a lot of bird photographers and I have seen a lot of bird photographers and virtually none of them use a tripod for birds in flight. They are just too restricting. It is a lot easier to turn and shoot than it is to walk around a tripod to turn and shoot. And they are way too heavy to cart around.

The few times I have seen a photographer attempting BIF with a tripod they were sitting in one spot waiting for something to show up. I prefer to go out hiking and looking.

Shoulder stock looks very interesting but I have never seen one used before.

As to not seeing bird photographers use a tripod, that is very strange. I often go with some professional bird photographers and what I mean is they are people who earn a living out of taking bird shots and they all use a tripod. In fact I have never seen one not use a tripod!

Good tripods are not that heavy. I have walked many miles with mine along with the gimbal. If you use the Wimberley gimbal properly which in the UK has a list price of about ?550 the last time I checked, then you are just not restricted if you plan your shots. If you think of being in a hide which is the only place you are going to get a shot of some birds you have a restricted field of view anyway.

I use a Gitzo GT3530LS carbon fibre tripod with the Gimbal when shooting birds or sports. Then change to a Manfrotto 405 geared head for landscape.

Best regards

Chris

G2EWS said:

As to not seeing bird photographers use a tripod, that is very strange. I often go with some professional bird photographers and what I mean is they are people who earn a living out of taking bird shots and they all use a tripod. In fact I have never seen one not use a tripod!

Click to expand...

I do not doubt you know some bird photographers who use a tripod. This tells me several things about them. They are probably either still using film (doubtful) or they have recently converted to digital (last 7 or 8 years) and still don't understand digital.

There are two main reasons to use a tripod. Either the shutter speed is too slow or the lens is too heavy. BIF is usually shot outdoors in bright sunlight. That means you can use 1/1000th of a second or faster which means you don't need a tripod. So they are probably using a tripod because they are shooting with a 500mm or 600mm lens that opens to f/4. That is the wrong tool for the job. Number one is they are radically expensive. Number two they can't be used hand held and number three f/4 is bad news for shooting BIF. Birds are hard enough to track and photograph as it is. If you tried it at f/4 your depth of field would be so narrow that getting the entire bird in focus becomes impossible. At most you hope to get the head in focus. Not only are these shots hard to do, they really don't look good with 90% of the bird out of focus. Most of my BIF shots are around f/8. My 500mm lens is f/6.3 max aperture, which means I will have great depth of field in most all of my shots and the lens is light enough to hand hold. And my lens costs 1/10th the price of an f/4 and the images are just as sharp. I would bet that if I were to spend an entire day shooting BIF side by side with a tripod based professional photographer that I would get about 10 times the keepers.

Good tripods are not that heavy.

Click to expand...

When I was in college my photography professor told me that if you can pick a tripod up with one hand it is too light. Well that was 40 years ago and now they have all these exotic materials to make tripods lighter. The downside is that they cost about $1000 and then add another grand for the head. That is a lot of money to pay and I just don't see the advantage. Look through my web site and you will see I have gotten tons of great BIF shots without spending an extra $2000 for a tripod that will greatly decrease my output.

Hi zzyzx,

Thanks for your response.

All I can say is you must be an extraordinary photographer! 

I'm afraid I need to spend a lot of money to get the best kit to give me the best chance I can. I have followed all the great names in wildlife photography because I can afford to and they are well how can I say it great!

I take it you must earn your living out of photography if you take shots that well. Imagine if you spent money on the best kit like I have how good your photography would be then! Me, I am just an amateur learning every day. To take a bird shot in a hide waiting for 5 or 6 hours without a tripod and gimbal seems impossible to imagine.

Yes your college professor is well out of date. Tripods like mine are what the professionals use for a reason. They are very solid and lightweight.

Will look at your photos when I get a chance.

Best regards


Chris

G2EWS said:

I take it you must earn your living out of photography if you take shots that well. Imagine if you spent money on the best kit like I have how good your photography would be then!

Click to expand...

I am no longer professional at all. I do work for the Grand Canyon, but that is strictly volunteer work. They use my photos at ranger talks, for posters, online ads, etc. Here is a poster from last year.

My photography would not improve one bit if I got the "best kit". I already have the "best kit" for shooting wildlife IMHO. I can't beat a Sony a55 and a Tamron 200-500. It is not the equipment, it is the photographer.

zzyzx said:

I am no longer professional at all. I do work for the Grand Canyon, but that is strictly volunteer work. They use my photos at ranger talks, for posters, online ads, etc. Here is a poster from last year.

My photography would not improve one bit if I got the "best kit". I already have the "best kit" for shooting wildlife IMHO. I can't beat a Sony a55 and a Tamron 200-500. It is not the equipment, it is the photographer.

Click to expand...

Hi Tom?,

Very good, well done.

I do agree that it is the 12" behind the camera that is the most important of course.

I do wonder why the best photographers in the world bar none spend a lot of money on the best cameras if it does not improve their ability to take photos? But as I say, you must be an exceptional photographer.

As part of the Royal Photographic Society we organised a talk recently by the very talented Jason Bell:

http://www.jasonbellphoto.com/#/home/

He is an amazing photographer and was contacted by Hollywood to take shots of various up and coming films. The new superman being released next year for example. They flew him and his team over from the UK along with some cameras that make my ?40k's worth seem like toys.

So the point is, if you are so good, then get hold of the people in Hollywood, I am sure they will be happy to use your services instead of paying Jason so much money and going through so much expense to get him there.

Best regards

Chris

Easy Tom! : Let it go!

Steve :-X