Monday in Nature, 19 April 2021

Basic Guidelines: In the strictest sense, nature photography should not include "hand of man elements". Please refrain from images with buildings or human made structures like roads, fences, walls. Pets are not permitted. Captive subjects in zoos, arboretums, or aquariums are permitted, but must be declared, and must focus on the subject, not the captivity. Images with obvious human made elements will likely be deleted from the thread, with an explanation to the photographer. Guidelines are based on PSA rules governing Nature photography which also cover the Nature Forum. Keep your image at/under 1000 pixels on the long axis for in-line viewing. Note that this includes photos hosted off-site at Flicker, Photobucket, your own site, etc.

Each member please post no more than just one image to this weekly thread per week. If the information is available, many members appreciate information on your approach to making the image and the names, both common and scientific, of the subject(s). However, while encouraged, these are not required as a component of your contributions.

Things are picking up at the Bear River MBR, with more American White Pelicans, ducks and gulls of various flavors, Ibis, and Clark's and Western Grebes making their spring appearance, including these American Avocets (Recurvirostra americana).

BTW: I've been wrestling with whether to adopt "title case" (capitalization) for common bird names, or "sentence case", as I've seen common names rendered in both ways in various locations. After doing some research I've determined to adopt title case, as has been adopted by many respected ornithological publications and organizations, and to ignore Wikipedia's use of the sentence case. Note that this is applicable to birds only, with mammals, Reptilia, fish, and insects being relegated to a lesser status in which their common names remain, as a default, written in lower case. Each poster is welcome to make their own determination in this regard, but I encourage the use of naming formats as adopted by recognized authorities (of which I do not count Wikipedia as being). Note that it is appropriate to use sentence case when identifying a non-specific species, as in "gulls" versus "California Gull".

Anna's hummingbird, male

^ nice male ring-necked ducks in breeding colors ^

Red-tailed Hawk, juvenile

[ATTACH=full]1384546[/ATTACH]

Sandy, are those ring-necked ducks?

Ring-necked Duck Overview, All About Birds, Cornell Lab of Ornithology

Unless it is PhotoShopped, not easy to get both within the depth of field.

Sandy, are those ring-necked ducks?

Ring-necked Duck Overview, All About Birds, Cornell Lab of Ornithology

 

Unless it is PhotoShopped, not easy to get both within the depth of field.

Haven't looked the ducks up yet - just got them this afternoon. No Photoshop - D810 AF S Nikkor 200- 500 5.6 E ED with TC 14 E II, F 14 @ 1250 of a second HH.

Haven't looked the ducks up yet - just got them this afternoon. No Photoshop - D810 AF S Nikkor 200- 500 5.6 E ED with TC 14 E II, F 14 @ 1250 of a second HH.

Thanks. Apparently f14 helps.

Sandy, I like the ducks! Love your image. Looks like you're starting to get a bit of diffraction at f/14? Like you I'm trying to get best results from my D810+TC1.4+Nikkor 200-500mm/5.6, similar to what you are using, but only getting really good results as an exception rather than as a rule. I just ordered a D500, which I plan to pair with my 200-500. Anxious to see what kind of results I get, as compared to the D810 combination noted or on the D7100 (with its tiny buffer). Guessing I still need to work on my technique as well. Happy trails...

Sandy, are those ring-necked ducks?

Yes - as I indicated in my post;)

American Alligator

Apparently f14 helps

The Exif data put the distance at about 130m with a DOF at f/14 of some 30m. Using the lens wide open (which would be f/8 with the TC attached) results in a DOF of 15m - still more than sufficient to get the two ducks within the DOF. Even at f/4 (which would require the Sigma 200-500/2.8), the DOF would still be about 8m. Even if one accounts for the fact that roughly half the DOF would likely be in front of the foreground duck and thus "wasted".

Looks like you're starting to get a bit of diffraction at f/14?

Not surprisingly. What I find surprising is the focus distance to begin with - I'd never attempt a shot at that distance and I doubt I'd get a result like Sandy did.

EDIT: according to this: Nikon Nikkor AF-S 200–500 mm f/5.6E ED VR review - Image resolution - LensTip.com I'm actually wrong - the resolution of the 200-500 at 500mm is actually slightly better at f/11 than at f/5.6 (which would be f/16 and f/8 with the TC mounted). Though the camera used had only 24MP instead of the D810's 36MP. Nonetheless, diffraction robs resolution when stopped down to f/16 and beyond. The TC will likely affect the results at all apertures in the same way, so the general trend should persist. I'd expect the TC to lower the values by about 5lp/mm - and the higher MP number of the D810 might shift results by about one f-stop (towards lower values, aka, more open apertures).

Yes - as I indicated in my post;)

I didn’t even notice that your post was talking about the species in Sandy’s post.

Just water.

Interesting info on the "title case" David - I wondered about its applicability in the scientific name in parentheses that follows and found this reference:

"The binomial name consists of a genus name and specific epithet. The scientific names of species are italicized. The genus name is always capitalized and is written first; the specific epithet follows the genus name and is not capitalized. There is no exception to this."

I didn’t even notice that your post was talking about the species in Sandy’s post.

:(

Hey, that's my zinnia by Tom Yin, on Flickr

While shooting a monarch butterfly on a flower, a bee came along and stung the butterfly in the rear.

Robin (Turdus migratorius) nesting