Photography

brandon mulhern · Status: Offline

Photography

JOHN TYMON · Status: Offline

Graham Gill wrote:

I'm expecting that if Sigma are doing a very expensive (Toyota-like) recall like this then they must have identified the problem and have a solid fix.

Looking at my recent tern shots, the closer ones autofocus OK but the more distant ones don't. And you have to be lucky if you are shooting against trees, clouds or water. I see that the Canon EOS 7D now has 19 autofocus points and an improved AI Servo mode and 2 processors to cope with it all, which should improve the keeper rate.

Of course if I go for one of these (rather than my normally adequate 350D) then I will need to upgrade my PC and storage and ... explain to my wife that it's just an obsession.

I don't suppose I get anywhere near 50% as keepers. I check them all at 100% and a) delete if not sharp, b) keep for ID purposes if adequate but not quite sharp, or c) keep forever if sharp and the eye has a glint of light in it. The ratio is roughly 50:40:10 but it can be worse than this depending on the conditions. I'm hoping the Sigma fix improves the 50% a's.

I think if the sigmas were perfect ,no one would buy the nikon/canons at £6000.I have always found it a great lens if you are close up,say within 20 feet,but the further away you are aiming the worse the image quality,but i have had some beltin shots at 300 meters-i.e The Osprey on here,but its a bit hit and miss,and i don't think its focus points,as I know people who have Nikon 300 s and its no different.
Sigma Lenses are a great compromise on the more expensive brands,unfortunately with the fix it has to be within certain production numbers,and mine falls the wrong side of it,which presumebly means,mine is ok,but it has the same issue,that all these big sigma lenses have apart from the 500 prime,which is superb,but £4000+

Graham Gill · Status: Offline

I'm expecting that if Sigma are doing a very expensive (Toyota-like) recall like this then they must have identified the problem and have a solid fix.

Looking at my recent tern shots, the closer ones autofocus OK but the more distant ones don't. And you have to be lucky if you are shooting against trees, clouds or water. I see that the Canon EOS 7D now has 19 autofocus points and an improved AI Servo mode and 2 processors to cope with it all, which should improve the keeper rate.

Of course if I go for one of these (rather than my normally adequate 350D) then I will need to upgrade my PC and storage and ... explain to my wife that it's just an obsession.

I don't suppose I get anywhere near 50% as keepers. I check them all at 100% and a) delete if not sharp, b) keep for ID purposes if adequate but not quite sharp, or c) keep forever if sharp and the eye has a glint of light in it. The ratio is roughly 50:40:10 but it can be worse than this depending on the conditions. I'm hoping the Sigma fix improves the 50% a's.

Anthony Dixon · Status: Offline

Agree with John, you really do get what you pay for.
The Sigma is a decent lens in good light...Not very good in more challenging conditions.
It does 'hunt' a bit, but if you allow yourself a couple of seconds to get the subject in focus then the results can be pleasing.

I've had some excellent results with birds in flight when the light has been good, pretty useless though when shooting into grey skys and clouds.
When you have a little time to focus and compose a shot then I can't complain at all about the results.

Anthony

JOHN TYMON · Status: Offline

Graham Gill wrote:

I have seen a few posts about Sigma lenses so thought this extract from the Sigma website (www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/returns/) might interest some of you. Amazon had alerted me.

Auto focusing issue affects limited number of Sigma telezoom lenses

After thorough investigation, we have ascertained that some APO 50-500mm F4.5-6.3 DG OS HSM, APO 120-400mm F4.5-5.6 DG OS HSM and APO 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM lenses, produced recently, may have a potential autofocus defect.

This issue could possibly occur in some lenses within the following range of serial numbers:

--- APO 50-500mm F4.5-6.3 DG OS HSM
--- Serial Numbers between 10633051 and 10972000

--- APO 120-400mm F4.5-5.6 DG OS HSM
--- Serial Numbers between 10574001 and 10972000

--- APO 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM
--- Serial Numbers between 10674301 and 10972000

And yes, I've got one -- I used it to take 1200 photos in Wexford recently. The delete key on my computer has taken a bit of hammer since then! I'll let you know if there is an improvement in my tern photography when it comes back from Japan. If there isn't, I'm going to re-read my Eric Hosking book.

Don't expect miracles,i had my 150-500 fixed last year and serviced due to front focus issues,and it has got gradually worse again,I recon if i get 50% in focus now,ive done well.To be honest its the trade off for anyone like me who cannot afford £6000 for a Nikon lens.The sigmas are a tenth of the price,so I cannot expect much more.
The focus issue is even present on the new 50-500 os that came out a month ago

-- Edited by JOHN TYMON on Thursday 8th of July 2010 07:07:17 PM

Graham Gill · Status: Offline

I have seen a few posts about Sigma lenses so thought this extract from the Sigma website (www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/returns/) might interest some of you. Amazon had alerted me.

Auto focusing issue affects limited number of Sigma telezoom lenses

After thorough investigation, we have ascertained that some APO 50-500mm F4.5-6.3 DG OS HSM, APO 120-400mm F4.5-5.6 DG OS HSM and APO 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM lenses, produced recently, may have a potential autofocus defect.

This issue could possibly occur in some lenses within the following range of serial numbers:

--- APO 50-500mm F4.5-6.3 DG OS HSM
--- Serial Numbers between 10633051 and 10972000

--- APO 120-400mm F4.5-5.6 DG OS HSM
--- Serial Numbers between 10574001 and 10972000

--- APO 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM
--- Serial Numbers between 10674301 and 10972000

And yes, I've got one -- I used it to take 1200 photos in Wexford recently. The delete key on my computer has taken a bit of hammer since then! I'll let you know if there is an improvement in my tern photography when it comes back from Japan. If there isn't, I'm going to re-read my Eric Hosking book.

Tony Coatsworth · Status: Offline

Calumet - just off the A6

I think they have a guy who comes in 2 or 3 mornings a week - something like £20 for a full clean

http://www.calumetphoto.co.uk/ctl?ac.ui.pn=compinfo.CompStoreLocDetail&ac.comp.locID=UK_MA2

Adrian Drummond-Hill · Status: Offline

Matt Potter wrote:

Does anyone know a decent shop where I can get my camera cleaned? I think i have some dirt on the senors and for the life of me I cant get rid of it? Or if anyone knows how to clean this area I would be greatful!

Cheers

Matt

I'm not sure if links work here but try this one.

http://www.cleaningdigitalcameras.com/

or

http://fixationuk.com I've used these to repair a lens and they were excellent.

-- Edited by Adrian Drummond-Hill on Wednesday 16th of June 2010 10:25:55 AM

-- Edited by Adrian Drummond-Hill on Wednesday 16th of June 2010 10:31:50 AM

Matt Potter · Status: Offline

Does anyone know a decent shop where I can get my camera cleaned? I think i have some dirt on the senors and for the life of me I cant get rid of it? Or if anyone knows how to clean this area I would be greatful!

Cheers

Matt

Adrian Drummond-Hill · Status: Offline

Get yourself down to Pennington Flash and practise on the Canada Geese and gulls around the car park area. You'll be able to try different settings as there's always something flying in or out.

Anthony Dixon · Status: Offline

Steve, I think everybody bins more shots than they keep when shooting birds in flight...I'd be surprised if even the most experienced professional has a much better than 1 in 10 ratio of keepers!

Keep at it make, it does get better with practice.

Anthony

Steve Collins · Status: Offline

Thanks for all the interest and your responses!
I think the problem starts with the excitement of the bird and then not enough attention and adjustment to detail.
I was using my canon 100-400 at 400mm focal length and I always leave it on aperture priority to try to get the fastest shutter speed. Thats f5.6 unless I change it. I was on either ISO 200 or later 400
It was a bright blue sky so consequently the shutter speed was as fast as 1/2000 or 1/1000. However it dropped to 1/400 or lower when the bird dropped lower with trees in the backgroud.
I was at the screen looking across to the trees along the railway line. I'm not good at distance but the bird was a lot nearer the trees than to me.
I'm probably thinking it's to do with the autofucus mode and also not being fine enough at distance and picking up the background and not the bird.I think that becuse it seems the bird is not in the focal plane or not enough depth of field.
But the reality is that it's probably the shutter speed dropping and I need to adjust to get round the bird's movement and camera shake. It would be nice to have a setting that's a decent average to cope so possibly push the ISO up and use shutter priority or manual!
I obviously need more practice and experiment as I binned most of yesterdays lot but did get a couple. I suppose the excitement of the bird gets to me as after all I fall into the birder more than a photographer category.
Cheers
Steve

Adrian Dancy · Status: Offline

Steve how far away was the bird from you and how far were the trees/background from the bird and what focal length were you using? Was it sunny, cloudy/ bright or was the light dull?

What ISO did you use and what shutter speed?

-- Edited by Adrian Dancy on Sunday 13th of June 2010 11:37:31 AM

Anthony Dixon · Status: Offline

Steve Collins wrote:

Hopefully I've got a photo when trying to photo the Marsh Harrier today but having real difficulty getting birds in focus (yes even the big birds!) in flight with trees etc in the background- it always seems to focus on the background. Any tips anyone with the settings etc? I seem to get contact with the bird with the autofocus but perhaps it's just too far away as so many of the bird are blurred!
Steve

Never easy focusing on birds when flying through cluttered backgrounds such as trees...Takes a lot of practice!
Clouds and grey skys can be tricky too!

I use appature mode for all my bird in flight shots...Usually anything between f4-f6.3 depending on what lens I'm using and I get the desired shutter speed by bumping up the ISO.

Anthony

Paul Wilson · Status: Offline

JOHN TYMON wrote:

think Paul was saying use manual settings and he is correct,for birds in flight you need to be using an appature of at least f8-f11,and a shutter speed of at least 1000th of a second,i bet you were using a low iso,giving you a appature of 5.6 or 6.3 and a slow shutter.so your flight shots would not br sharp

I was actually saying use manual focus - half jokingly, but in many situations it works fine

JOHN TYMON · Status: Offline

think Paul was saying use manual settings and he is correct,for birds in flight you need to be using an appature of at least f8-f11,and a shutter speed of at least 1000th of a second,i bet you were using a low iso,giving you a appature of 5.6 or 6.3 and a slow shutter.

so your flight shots would not br sharp

Dennis atherton · Status: Offline

two Tips i can give you though you might need the manual to find them on your camera, for focusing use centre point focusing so as just to focus on the center dot and then try and get the bird in the middle of it, it will stop the focus chasing other things, like trees and other things in the background, also use auto tracking focus, servo mode on a Canon to help keep the bird focused in the center dot as it is moving, in servo or auto tracking focus it will constantly keep trying to keep the bird in focus if you are using ceter point focusing and are actually managing to keep the moving target in the center point, hope this helps, good luck

Dennis

Steve Collins wrote:

Hopefully I've got a photo when trying to photo the Marsh Harrier today but having real difficulty getting birds in focus (yes even the big birds!) in flight with trees etc in the background- it always seems to focus on the background. Any tips anyone with the settings etc? I seem to get contact with the bird with the autofocus but perhaps it's just too far away as so many of the bird are blurred!
Steve

Paul Wilson · Status: Offline

Manual

Steve Collins · Status: Offline

Hopefully I've got a photo when trying to photo the Marsh Harrier today but having real difficulty getting birds in focus (yes even the big birds!) in flight with trees etc in the background- it always seems to focus on the background. Any tips anyone with the settings etc? I seem to get contact with the bird with the autofocus but perhaps it's just too far away as so many of the bird are blurred!
Steve

Dennis atherton · Status: Offline

I just wish i had more patience to waiting for them to send me another

JOHN TYMON · Status: Offline

Dennis atherton wrote:

If anyone Can Canon can,

They Can send you a faulty brand new lens that is!!!

Hopefully they Can also send me a new one soon,

The lens is back at Warehouse express now, hoping for a new one any day, it is covered under the 30 day guarentee for a new replacement but just waiting for it to get sorted,

I guess that it is now 1 nil to Nikon, Quaility control at Canon not what it should be

Tha will be reet soon as the new lens comes-you'll soon pass me ,has you have much more patience than me.

Dennis atherton · Status: Offline

If anyone Can Canon can,

They Can send you a faulty brand new lens that is!!!

Hopefully they Can also send me a new one soon,

The lens is back at Warehouse express now, hoping for a new one any day, it is covered under the 30 day guarentee for a new replacement but just waiting for it to get sorted,

I guess that it is now 1 nil to Nikon, Quaility control at Canon not what it should be

JOHN TYMON · Status: Offline

Dennis atherton wrote:

Oops, Hello Brandon, i am a Canon man also, are there more Canon men or women than Nikon?

It might be an interesting new topic thread to start, lots of passionate people on both sides or as JT likes to say that i have gone to the darkside

I always like the darkside of the force anyway, i thought that Darthvader was just missunderstood

If anyone can Canon can! use the force............

COME INTO THE LIGHT BROTHER DENNIS YOU WILL BE SAVED

LIGHT SABERS AT 3PM FOR THEE AND ME

THEN WE WILL SORT THE MEN FROM THE BOYS-NIKON RULES

AS THA GEET THI CANON LENS BACK YET

AFTER IT LASTED 3 DAYS

CRACKIN QUALITY CONTROL AT CANON

NIKON RULES

--

-- Edited by JOHN TYMON on Thursday 10th of June 2010 03:29:00 PM

Dennis atherton · Status: Offline

RE: Cameras..

brandon mulhern · Status: Offline

RE: Photography

Adrian Drummond-Hill · Status: Offline

When I'm home, I put some of my pictures in the local camera club competitions. It's a great learning curve hearing what some of the judges think of your pictures. I remember one saying that with bird pictures, the eye should be in the middle of the picture. Personally I like some space in front and do use the rule of thirds when necessary. However, I would recommend joining a camera club to get some expert critique of your work.

Simon Gregory · Status: Offline

I agree in part but I think basic composition rules will work to I.M.O, sometimes people think there doing stuff wrong (poeple who are new to it like me) with there cameras and there not its just the limits of there gear, my camera struggles on grey days with zoom fully extended beacuse it gives daft shutter speeds like 1/15s or 1/30s soon as something moves its blurred and its well annoying

JOHN TYMON · Status: Offline

Simon Gregory wrote:

Learn about composition rules (RULE OF THIRDS ETC ) no good having a load of expensive gear if you dont know fundementals you will just be taking the same pics that are 10 megapixels big or even bigger if they are raw files.
I'm still learning with my panasonic 432mm quiv. DMC FZ7

-- Edited by Simon Gregory on Wednesday 9th of June 2010 07:30:42 PM

Don't think rule of thirds works with birds ,great for landscapes ,birds ,mostly in my experience,don't allow for composition,its fire and hope a lot of the time.The main thing with bird photography,is knowing your subject,if you can second guess through experience what the birds next move is,that is the most important rule to get good bird pics.Spend time watching first,for years even before getting too seriously into taking pictures of them

Simon Gregory · Status: Offline

Learn about composition rules (RULE OF THIRDS ETC ) no good having a load of expensive gear if you dont know fundementals you will just be taking the same pics that are 10 megapixels big or even bigger if they are raw files.
I'm still learning with my panasonic 432mm quiv. DMC FZ7
Take lots of pics I have to take 15+ of the same thing to get 1 decent out of my camera ISO will be better on proper dslrs.
This allows flexibility on cloudy days gettin the shutter speeds up at full zoom etc.

-- Edited by Simon Gregory on Wednesday 9th of June 2010 07:30:42 PM

-- Edited by Simon Gregory on Wednesday 9th of June 2010 07:36:02 PM

brandon mulhern · Status: Offline

keep meaning to add to this thread and thank all the contributing photographers who submit their work for our perusal in the photography section, I have noticed the quality of the images in there is improving with each month, I also feel similar to Dennis and John although initially i took photo's of everything I saw so as to identify them at a later time but as you take more pictures you find yourself looking for that "holy grail shot" not of a rarity but of detail not seen in a photo before!

I also feel that the availability of cheaper slr's and lenses has made it a little easier, i sat next to john a few weeks ago at penny and listening to his nikon taking 6 or more frames a second honestly made me and my 1000d feel inadequate! Also standing next to jon taverner with his 500mm monster snapping the turtle dove gave me the same feeling!!!
Anyone who wants to donate a canon 7d or nikon 300s the pm is up there somewhere!!>>!!

IanPlant · Status: Offline

For me it's the camera as my wife who is disabled always asks me what i have seen plus it's cheaper to pick up a good lens of ebay I picked up a 400mm tokina fixed focal fd lens for £20 added to that a 2x converter for a fiver and i near have 1000mm lens as i have a canon 350d you times it by 1.6 because of the sensor size. I also have a 3x converter as well if need be my other is a canon 100-300 AF with a focusing ring on it

JOHN TYMON · Status: Offline

birder taking photographs for me

Craig Higson · Status: Offline

So is it birders becoming photographers, or vice versa??

Dennis atherton · Status: Offline

For me it is the fun of the challenge of trying to get a good shot of a rare bird or instead trying to get a more common bird and show it close up to show the delicacy of the feathers to show the beauty rarely seen, a gadwall for me is one perfect example, quite a dull grey bird with not much going on until you see it close up and it is stunning to see all the patterns,
Also the fact you can take as many pictures as you like, for every 100 shots i shoot i usually only keep 2, maybe 1, sometimes 0

And once you have your equipment there is virtually no extra cost, unless you are like some of us nutcases on here that are never happy with our equipment, never happy with our shots, always a branch in the way, slightly out of focus, hands up you all know who you are

John tymon wrote "unless you wanted to sit on an estury up to the waste in mud,to get a decent dunlin shot",

PS, John Ty just made me laugh because that is what i just did this weekend, although the mud was not that deep at elton to photograph the Dunlin, check out the recent county photos waders section if you dont beleive me

JOHN TYMON · Status: Offline

For me its the availability of equipment,the cost which once you have a kit your happy with(this never happens mind

)its free,and when you started when i did and books by eric hoskins,showing a blue tit at the nest were fantastic,now any decent amature can produce pictures that even 10 years ago were a dream to most,unless you wanted to sit on an estury up to the waste in mud,to get a decent dunlin shot,now with cropping,you can sit in a big comfy hide and fire away,and come up with shots like the ospray yesterday.
Also instead of having thousands of slides,prints,in a case hidden away at home,that only see the light of day when your relatives lob em in a skip when your 6 feet under

you can send them via e-mail to all the people you meet along the way,and make them happy,they have now got a shot of that once in a lifetime ospray carrying a 2lb roach ,near to a small coal town in Lancashire(Greater Manchester),
And a site here that we can display them on thanks to Ian,where thousands can view them and make them happy.

Which in the end for me is the main thing,i like to see people smile when they see my pictures

Steve Suttill · Status: Offline

As one who regularly gets shown photos by people who say "what bird is this then?"

, I know it's not that easy. If you ask them about song, calls or behaviour, they usually say they can't remember and "it doesn't really matter does it?

Can't you tell just from the picture?".

There are species that I would know straight away in the field (sometimes without seeing it) but, faced with a photo, I start to get doubts as one who relies primarily on jizz rather than the "new approach". That's why I never enter Ian's cunning, devious mystery photo competition

Steve

jason fisher · Status: Offline

you for got the option of it being an invaluable id tool. for me the collins stays in the house.

if there's anything i'm ususre about, i whack of a few pics stick em on the pc then start comparing with my id guides at home and on the web. thus i get a better look at it in the first place through the bins and camera and i can do the paper shuffling at home.
and the results are always better than anything i could possibly attempt to draw my self, were i to make notes in a book. (i'd have trouble drawing a brick never mind a bird)

some times by a complete fluke i even manage to get a decent pic of one that i can look back on.

Adrian Drummond-Hill · Status: Offline

I'd agree, it's a combination of things. You can pick up a camera and lens for a reasonable price if you buy second hand. The fact you don't have to develop and print is a big bonus and also means not tying up the bathroom at home. (my mother used to go nuts) The digital age has made the hobby much easier and affordable for people to get pictures acceptable to themselves, although for anything that can be blown up to a decent size, you still need to cough up a fair amount of your hard earned cash. Processing is now done on the computer but again, you still need a good programme and some knowhow to produce a decent image.

I'd imagine a lot of photographers are just after a record shot to prove they've seen the rare bird or two and the keener ones are still in the minority.

Mike Price · Status: Offline

I would say D, for me at least not having to develop photographs means its far more affordable, any lack of skill/experience can be made up by shooting lots of shots with the law of averages saying I will sooner or later get something worth keeping (also I can instantly review it to see if I have achieved such a result and or correct it) plus the equipment is reasonably affordable

Craig Higson · Status: Offline

I recently mentioned in another post about the number of photographers I had seen one day in Bunting Hide at Pennington. It was also quite enlightening today at Abram to see just how many folk were there with cameras as opposed to scopes. It started me thinking. Ten years ago photographers were a much rarer sight than they are today and I'm wondering why the big boom. Is it

a) the fact that its cheaper - not the equipment, but the fact that you can rattle off Xno of photos without worrying about wasting film.

b) its easier because you can instantly review results and see where you're going wrong and so get more proffesional results.

c) the fact that bird information is so much more freely available. 10-15 years ago you either rang birdline or had a pager so unless you were a pretty keen birder that sort of thing wouldnt have been something your average photographer did (or was it).

d) a combination of the above

e) none of the above

Can someone enlighten me??