Photo Enthusiast Confused Processing Birds in Flight

My subdivision is protected from flooding by a levee which provides a great opportunity to photograph birds. On the right days, with camera in hand, I look for opportunities. Custom settings fix 1) f-stop (8.0), 2) exposure (1/1000), 3) focus mode (focusing constantly on moving objects), and 4) drive mode set to Burst (M). The camera determines the ISO sensitivity. Today, that sensitivity was ISO 800, not too high. All I can do as the photographer is follow the bird and press the shutter.

 

My Lumix GX85 (Micro 4/3) shoots at 16 megapixels yielding 4592px x 3448px (uncropped) and 1235px x 927px (cropped). But both images below are exported to jpeg yielding 1000px x 751px. Here is my confusion: As I develop the image I do the white balancing, exposure, color, tone controls etc. Then I go to adjust the Detail. The noise is what it is, burned into the image. I work on the noise reduction and then the sharpening, but I just never get what I want. Why? Is it the lens, the camera, the software or me? Now the attached images may not help because they are for viewing (72 px per inch).

 

Unless you can get quite close, IMO, the lens makes a big difference. I struggled with the same issue and some of the time still have the same problem. Get as close as you can with a long sharp lens. This one a while ago with the D 7200 and an old AF Nikkor 75-300 4.5 5.6. Micro Old, inexpensive and razor sharp from Bugs to birds. 99% of the time I shoot single frame, not bursts. When you get the lens / camera combo right, and I didn't believe this previously, you're two thirds of the way there.The better the image you start with, the easier, better the PP - this had very little.

It's hard to tell by the 2nd image - but you either missed focus on the head or there is some motion blur (probably both). 1/1000s can be too slow - try using 1/2000s. Also f/8 on a m4/3 sensor camera isn't necessary from a DOF point of view - especially if you are as far away as you appear to be - open up to f/5.6 or even f/4 (if your lens allows it). Which lens is it? And as Sandy says - get closer (and/or get a longer focal length).

It's hard to tell by the 2nd image - but you either missed focus on the head or there is some motion blur (probably both). 1/1000s can be too slow - try using 1/2000s. Also f/8 on a m4/3 sensor camera isn't necessary from a DOF point of view - especially if you are as far away as you appear to be - open up to f/5.6 or even f/4 (if your lens allows it). Which lens is it? And as Sandy says - get closer (and/or get a longer focal length).

Thanks, I'll try your suggestions and dream of a longer lens.

I read here that that the Lumix GX85 has a 'kit lens' of 12-32mm. The GX85 has a 'crop factor' of 2 so the GX85 + kit lens has a range equivalent to 24-64mm on a FF camera. This is a wide-angle to mid-range lens. Fine for landscapes and portraits but not so good for Birds.

 

With this lens, you can't optically 'zoom in' on birds. In the original photo you posted the bird takes up roughly 5% of the photo. The amount of detail - however close you crop in PP - will never be higher than the resolution in the original photo.

 

So yes, to get more detail in Bird shots you'll need a tele-lens like something on this list. It's often worth keeping an eye out for used lenses, for example at camera stores or on E-bay.

I agree with Dieter. Looks like the focussing point was on the rear wing. BIF are difficult even with FF cameras and long lenses. Keep practising:).

I read here that that the Lumix GX85 has a 'kit lens' of 12-32mm. The GX85 has a 'crop factor' of 2 so the GX85 + kit lens has a range equivalent to 24-64mm on a FF camera. This is a wide-angle to mid-range lens. Fine for landscapes and portraits but not so good for Birds.

 

With this lens, you can't optically 'zoom in' on birds. In the original photo you posted the bird takes up roughly 5% of the photo. The amount of detail - however close you crop in PP - will never be higher than the resolution in the original photo.

 

So yes, to get more detail in Bird shots you'll need a tele-lens like something on this list. It's often worth keeping an eye out for used lenses, for example at camera stores or on E-bay.

 

I used the Panasonic 45-150mm lens. The first attached image was not cropped and lens was at 135mm. I’m eyeing their 100-300mm but I’d like to experiment with shutter speeds and aperture first.

I agree with the above. Use a longer lens or get much closer, use a larger aperture and (I know it's not easy) focus on the bird's head. The hummingbird below was shot in 2007 with a Nikon D50, a NIkon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR AF-S lens at 1/4000 sec, F/5.6. Your GX85 should easily outperform the now ancient Nikon D50. The 45-150mm lens is somewhat short for bird photography.

Edited December 16, 2018 by Hector Javkin

I read here that that the Lumix GX85 has a 'kit lens' of 12-32mm. The GX85 has a 'crop factor' of 2 so the GX85 + kit lens has a range equivalent to 24-64mm on a FF camera. This is a wide-angle to mid-range lens. Fine for landscapes and portraits but not so good for Birds.

 

With this lens, you can't optically 'zoom in' on birds. In the original photo you posted the bird takes up roughly 5% of the photo. The amount of detail - however close you crop in PP - will never be higher than the resolution in the original photo.

 

So yes, to get more detail in Bird shots you'll need a tele-lens like something on this list. It's often worth keeping an eye out for used lenses, for example at camera stores or on E-bay.

Oops, I missed your link. Thanks!

I agree with the above. Use a longer lens or get much closer, use a larger aperture and (I know it's not easy) focus on the bird's head. The hummingbird below was shot in 2007 with a Nikon D50, a NIkon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR AF-S lens at 1/4000 sec, F/5.6. Your GX85 should easily outperform the now ancient Nikon D50. The 45-150mm lens is somewhat short for bird photography.

[ATTACH=full]1275575[/ATTACH]

thanks!

It's hard to tell by the 2nd image - but you either missed focus on the head or there is some motion blur (probably both). 1/1000s can be too slow - try using 1/2000s. Also f/8 on a m4/3 sensor camera isn't necessary from a DOF point of view - especially if you are as far away as you appear to be - open up to f/5.6 or even f/4 (if your lens allows it). Which lens is it? And as Sandy says - get closer (and/or get a longer focal length).

LUMIX G Vario 45-150mm, F4.5-5.6

You actually need separation of focus between subject and background, which is why people are suggesting a longer lens. The compression that comes with the longer lens creates a shorter depth of focus (well, it's ONE thing that does that.) Also...lighting plays into this...also, aperture plays into this.

In addition to the suggestions above, try using manual focus on a few bursts. It may help you obtain focus on the bird and not the background. Given that there is not much separation between the bird and the background, in AF, it takes practice and skill to make sure the camera,s af system is doing what you want it to do. That is why others have recommended a longer focal length lens.

 

When I was shooting slide film in my Nikon body I used a manual focus 500mm f4 lens for bird pictures. With that setup I had to focus by hand. Now that I have a AF 500mm f4 with Nikon digital body, it takes practice and skill to keep that focus point on the bird. In some circumstances I focus manually when it is too hard to make that happen.

In addition to the suggestions above, try using manual focus on a few bursts. It may help you obtain focus on the bird and not the background. Given that there is not much separation between the bird and the background, in AF, it takes practice and skill to make sure the camera,s af system is doing what you want it to do. That is why others have recommended a longer focal length lens.

 

When I was shooting slide film in my Nikon body I used a manual focus 500mm f4 lens for bird pictures. With that setup I had to focus by hand. Now that I have a AF 500mm f4 with Nikon digital body, it takes practice and skill to keep that focus point on the bird. In some circumstances I focus manually when it is too hard to make that happen.

 

How is it possible to manual focus on a BIF? Sure that works well for stationary objects but I would have no way to focus manually on a rapidly moving bird.

How is it possible to manual focus on a BIF?

If you can estimate distances, you set focus for that distance, and an F stop with some depth - then as you frame and pan try to adjust focus "on the fly". As it was done in days before AF.

For BIF, what Sandy said is what I did most of the time. In addition, if the lens and camera is mounted on a gimbal head, and if you use a remote trigger to trigger the shutter, and if the flight path is pretty predictable, you use one had to focus the lens and the other to move it and fire the trigger on the remote.

 

Many of the shots of birds that fly on a straight path, like from one perch to the food source, you preset your focus by focusing on the expected flight path, then turn off AF, and shoot in continuous high when the bird approaches the area where you have pre focused. If your lens is an f4, you usually set it for f5.6 or f6.3 to give you a little more depth of field.

 

I learned how to do this from my friend Alan Murphy. He has a whole series of e books on how to do all kinds of bird photography. He is one of the few who teaches others how he gets such great shots. .

 

www.alanmurphyphotography.com

 

Alan Murphy