Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Wildlife Photos

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 30, 2005, 11:19 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,748
Default

I spent the afternoon sitting in front of a wren's nest watching mom and dad feed the chicks. I have a pile of photos so I decided to process a few tonight quickly and post. This was an excellent bird to watch, and both mom and dad shared the burden equally. Here is the first group of wren shots:

Technical: shot with 300/4 (no pod), 50-500 (on tripod), and 200/1.8 (on tripod and off), all high ISO as this nest was not in a well lit area (800 to 1200)


Landing strip



In the nest; she would remain just long enough to warm the chicks up, then zoom away for more bugs



Another landing for feeding





These birds keep the nest clean by picking the waste from the rear end of the chick with their beak and taking it far away to be eliminated. Now that's clean! I think they are orthodox :lol:



And away it goes, a designated distance from the camp



And a spider feed



Normcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jun 30, 2005, 3:59 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
bmullen@comcast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 4,435
Default

Pretty amazing stuff, Norm.
bmullen@comcast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 30, 2005, 6:54 PM   #3
DBB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,483
Default

Yeah, really!

Not only does it not get much better, I don't think it CAN get much better.

But wait for my post of Godzilla feeding its young in mid-Manhattan, by cracking open the Bronx Zoo, and stealing the Elephants. Just wait...

dave
DBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 30, 2005, 8:46 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 750
Default

I thought I had some good nest photos till I saw these. That first shot is a killer and then I saw the third shot and it was even better.

You have done it again with these shots Normcar. You definitely have a knack for coming up with the fantastic shot. Fantastic stuff!!

The last shot is very nice as well. I do have a very minor nit. My eye want there to be a couple more inches to the bottom to see the bottom of the nest. Still a super portrait of the Mom with Groceries.




zoomn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 1, 2005, 12:44 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,748
Default

Thanks mullen, dave and zoomn, those are very generous compliments that I appreciate a whole bunch. Zoomn, here's all that I have on the shot, as it's pretty much full frame below. By the way, it was the Bigma that took this and the other close up. One example of how the lens can compete with the very best lenses on the market, side by side (including primes). I shot on a tripod and that makes all the difference with the Bigma. The Bigma on a tripod IMO is as good as they come:


Attached Images
 
Normcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 1, 2005, 5:02 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
woodmeister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 838
Default

You've done it once again norm. Not only are the photographs technically excellent,
the collection is a wonderful essay of a mom feeding the kids. I think the wider crop
of the last shot is more effective than the tight crop.
woodmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 1, 2005, 11:21 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 384
Default

Outstanding as usual Normcar. Stunning. How you get the birds in flight as sharp as you do amazes me. A question if you don't mind? I shoot with a Nikon D70. I'm looking to purchase a tele lens soon. I've pretty much narrowed it down to the following...Nikon 300 4.0, Sigma 100-300 4.0 or the Sigma 50-500. These are within my budget. Any thoughts...anyone. Thanks and keep the photos coming. Woody
woodysworld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 1, 2005, 12:09 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,748
Default

woodysworld wrote:
Quote:
Outstanding as usual Normcar. Stunning. How you get the birds in flight as sharp as you do amazes me. A question if you don't mind? I shoot with a Nikon D70. I'm looking to purchase a tele lens soon. I've pretty much narrowed it down to the following...Nikon 300 4.0, Sigma 100-300 4.0 or the Sigma 50-500. These are within my budget. Any thoughts...anyone. Thanks and keep the photos coming. Woody
Hi Woody, you have a great choice lineup there and it would depend on how many lenses you already have and what you are shooting. I am assuming that you are shooting wildlife, and probably small birds, and I am assuming that it is going to be one of your only lenses. In that case, I would narrow it down to the lens where you have the least number of weak areas, areas being: distance, light, zoom, sharpness andgeneral photo quality, andstabalization. I don't factor weight because each of these lenses is slightly on the heavy side and it doesn't make a heck of a pile of difference.

The 300 is comparativelyweak on: distance and zoom.

The 100-300 is comparatively weak on: distance and zoom.

The Bigma is comparatively weak on: light.

All three lenses offer sharpness and general quality but the 300 prime is probably slightly sharper, since that is the nature of primes (assuming that the Nikon has good reviews). I'm not sure whether or not the Nikon has VR, but if it does then it's VR is a plus over the other two.

The Bigma and the 100-300 match the 300 on stabalization if you are using a tripod or good monopod, so you should consider that the potential for that exists if you have either Sigma lens. I don't like using extenders if at all possible and with the Bigma I am able to keep one off for the most part. With the 100-300and the 300 you will need to attach extenders from time to time, it's a given. And I don't personally like the Sigma ones. I would recommend Kenko Pro if you plan to purchase an extender. I would recommendnot using one if you get the 50-500. My bend on it is that the 50-500 provides so much good quality reach on it's own that if you need more the bird is probably too farfrom you anyway. So walk closer.

If this is one of your only lenses then I think that you should eliminate the 300 prime because you are too restricted. This leaves you with either Sigma. I would personally choose the 50-500 because I want that 500mm and zoom range without the need for extenders. I can live with the idea of needing a tripod for low light. I personally don't think it's heavy but I'm used to carrying around the 200/1.8, which weighs over 6 pounds.

Conclusion: either Sigma, but I'd choose the 50-500if it was my only lens. However,take the 300 if it has VR, works well with an extender, and you can live with the restriction or have other lenses to carry you in this matter. Those are a alot of ifs, though.

Getting lenses is a serious and expensive matter, so take everything that I say with a grain of salt. I've been a bit long winded here because I want to include every facet that may come up. It's not an inexpensive investment.

In any event, if you buy one and don't like it, take a bit of a loss and sell it on FM's buy and sell forum :-)
Normcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 1, 2005, 2:37 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 384
Default

I certainly appreciate your taking the time to answer my broad question. I have the kit 18-70 Nikon afs, Nikon 50 1.8, which I love for flowers, people and pets shots, an old Tamron adaptall SP 80-200 2.8 manual focus with a 1.4 X matching extender. I have gotten some very sharp pics with it, but it has seen better day and so have my eyes. Auto focus would be a big plus for me. I also have the Kenko auto extension tube set which works very well with the 50 1.8 for macro, which I also love. I've been drooling over the Sigma 50-500 for months. You posting some very sharp photos using that lens really got me thinking. I would have to purchase extenders if I picked the 300 or 100-300mm. I have a decent tripod and am not afraid to use it. I again thank you for your taking time to give me advice. You are a heck of a photographer and I always look forward to your posts. Looks like the Bigma is the way I'll go. Woody
woodysworld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 1, 2005, 2:37 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 384
Default

I certainly appreciate your taking the time to answer my broad question. I have the kit 18-70 Nikon afs, Nikon 50 1.8, which I love for flowers, people and pets shots, an old Tamron adaptall SP 80-200 2.8 manual focus with a 1.4 X matching extender. I have gotten some very sharp pics with it, but it has seen better day and so have my eyes. Auto focus would be a big plus for me. I also have the Kenko auto extension tube set which works very well with the 50 1.8 for macro, which I also love. I've been drooling over the Sigma 50-500 for months. You posting some very sharp photos using that lens really got me thinking. I would have to purchase extenders if I picked the 300 or 100-300mm. I have a decent tripod and am not afraid to use it. I again thank you for your taking time to give me advice. You are a heck of a photographer and I always look forward to your posts. Looks like the Bigma is the way I'll go. Woody
woodysworld is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:35 AM.