• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

kestrel

Lorenz Koch

New member
i have a pair of these falcons breeding im my backyard.
here's a photo i took this evening:

falk_im-_baum.jpg


cheers
loko
 

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
Nice light Lorenz… but I wouldn't like to be a little mouse in your backyard!

What lens did you use?

Did you call him so he turns his head?
 

Lorenz Koch

New member
hehe.. or much more light.. i wouldn't dare show it at 100% because of that.
i used a remote release and mirror lockup to minimize vibrations...

i could have pushed the iso further... but then the noise takes over which results in a different kind of unsharp picture.
 
While a remote release is often a good idea, with long lenses some photographers will squeeze carefully with one hand on the camera grip and one hand resting gently on the lens to dampen vibrations. It's worth testing your setup both ways with a static subject and seeing what gives you a sharper result.
 

Lorenz Koch

New member
thank you for your suggestion, david.
i will try it once - but i don't understand how it physically will give me a steadier shot.
even if i squeeze the button very gently and try not to breathe my heart still pumps and my muscles twitch in order to maintain balance.

i think that locking the mirror - waiting for the rig to steady again - and then release by cable will give superior results.

here is another shot with the cable release technique:

falcon_by_swissloko.jpg
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
While a remote release is often a good idea, with long lenses some photographers will squeeze carefully with one hand on the camera grip and one hand resting gently on the lens to dampen vibrations. It's worth testing your setup both ways with a static subject and seeing what gives you a sharper result.
I think that this is meant to dampen harmonics in the long lens tube which can be activated by even a slight breeze. Worth trying!

Asher
 
I think that this is meant to dampen harmonics in the long lens tube which can be activated by even a slight breeze. Worth trying!

Asher

Yes, exactly. Even with mirror lockup, shutter vibration can be magnified by that long lever attached to the camera body, particularly if you're using an 800mm lens with a 1.4X and 2X extenders. I've done it both ways, and it's hard to tell which is consistently better, since there are other factors that become relevant with long lenses at close subject distances like the stability of the ground. Many bird photographers, though, use this technique with long lenses, rather than a remote release.

Another alternative is to sandbag the lens and the camera, and then you can use a remote release, which is probably the best way of steadying the camera, but then you've got to carry sandbags with an already heavy lens and tripod, and it makes it more awkward to adjust the position of the camera, if you've got to worry about a sandbag falling off the lens and scaring away the bird.

I usually don't use more than 1.4X with my 600/4.5, because it's an older lens, and 2X will reveal chromatic aberration in high contrast zones with that lens, but if I were using both the 1.4X and a 2X (or two 2X extenders like Art Morris sometimes does), I'd probably be inclined to use a second support, like another tripod or at least a monopod between the camera body and the ground presuming the lens is mounted to the main tripod.
 
Top