Tall Grass

Comments welcomed.

Very nice photo and composition!

(I wished we had those animals in the neighbourhood...would love to take such photo's! :)

Nice almost monochromatic picture !

 

Best regards

Ellen I am fortunate that I live in a place with an abundance of wildlife. It beats the big city any day. Thank you very much for stopping by and commenting.

Thank you very much Patrick. I appreciate you taking time to look and to comment.

Another early morning, Larry? :) I like the way his head is down - he looks like he's stalking a female :) I also like the almost monochromatic approach here - though I wonder if perhaps you're not just the slightest bit too hot on the grass. It's not blown at all, but it does seem too bright in places. Still, you do a great job catching these guys. Well done!

Thank you. You know what they say about the early bird. :)

 

According to the information in the RAW file it was taken 7:26:18 which would have made it about 15 minutes after sunrise.

 

Dried grass like this photo has is always a problem for me. I can't think of anything that is a bigger pain when processing. It drives me crazy. I don't know if other people have the same problem. If not maybe its my aging eyes.

lol

Well, at that time of the morning you were definitely getting the full bore effect, and that grass can be difficult. I seem to handle it well, but I'm not sure the credit goes to me. My camera isn't fully manual, so I can only choose shutter speed or aperture, and the camera chooses the rest. So I have it set so I choose the aperture most the time. When I get this sort of grass, I act as though I'm taking a picture of the brightest part, let the camera judge the shutter speed for that, then I move the camera to the shot I want. It seems to work really well in toning down the grass. Alternately, I've stepped down a 1/4 to 1/2 stop, and made adjustments in post if I needed to. Those two things work best, but it's still something of a crapshoot since my lcd screen makes everything look great even if it won't be out of the camera.

The only shooting modes I ever use are full manual or aperture priority. On a very rare occasion I might use shutter priority although to be honest I can't remember the last time I did so. It just doesn't fit with the kind of stuff I shoot. You could remove the other programmed modes entirely and I wouldn't know they were gone.

 

I never pay much attention to the way an image looks on the LCD screen of my camera because it can be misleading. But I pay very close attention to the histogram and make exposure adjustments based on that. When I am shooting against grass like this I have learned the hard way to underexpose by 2/3 of a stop. That keeps the grass from blowing out but I still struggle with it in post processing. I don't why either because I am pretty comfy with Photoshop.

heh - thanks for the "what I do" tip - I've been noting such from everyone who's work I enjoy. Eventually I'm going to be able to put it to use when I get a better camera :) The company I work for says the bonus this year will be pretty good - I'm mentally budgeting a camera out of that. I live in a constant state of Want, Larry - it's a tragic thing. ;)

Since you mentioned buying a new camera I thought I would give you my take on it. A year or two back somebody in the EOS forum asked for equipment suggestions. He wanted to get into wedding photography and had $1500 to spend. Somebody advised him to go out and buy a 20D and get the kit lens. I did and do consider that to be extremely bad advice.

 

At the time Canon had rebates going and the guy could have picked up a 300D for $600. I advised him to do that an spend the other $900 some good lenses. No matter how much you have to spend, I will give you the same advice. Forget the fancy features. Spend your money on good glass. You won't regret it.

 

Next to the photographer, the lens has always been the most important element in the photographic chain. Digital has not changed that. In fact you probably need better quality lenses with digital than you did with film.

 

All the fancy bodies will be obsolete in just a few years. Ten years down stream most of them will likely be taking up space in the local landfill. Good lenses on the other hand can last you a good portion of a lifetime.

 

Case in point, about a year and a half ago I sold a bunch of Canon FD equipment. A good deal of it was L series glass. I had owned and used all of it for better than 20 years. I would not have considered selling any of it if FD lenses could be migrated to a digital platform. With rare exceptions they cannot. To make a long story short, I sold almost every item for as much or more than I originally paid. An FD 24mm f1.4L that I originally paid $400 for sold for $800. I could give you other examples but thats enough. Like I said, if you buy good quality optics and take care of them, you won't regret it in the long run.

When I get to that stage, I'll know who to ask about good quality lenses. Makes sense to me, even though I'm far from that stage. I love bright yellow grass. Even when I get it dark enough in the camera, I have a hard time not making it too bright in levels. This looks great to me! I must be fun to see so many of these beautiful animals when they're still alive :)

Kim sounds like we have exactly the same problem with grass. Re the animals it really is a treat to have reasonable access to areas they inhabit. I am very grateful for the national park system. Although to be honest you don't have to go to the park to see wildlife. It helps but is not essential. I have seen bulls this size within a mile of my house and I live 30 miles from RMNP.

Lovely light and sense of movement throught out the shot.

Larry - thanks for the advice!! I'd seriously considered getting the 20d if the funds showed up, but I've always been a trifle vacilating about it. Considering it has the same sensor as the Rebel XT, I just can't see where roughly 600 bucks in extra value comes in, and told myself if I was prepared to spend that much I should get the XT and then invest in a good telephoto lens. It'd come out about the same $wise. Now I hear backup on that... makes me feel better about it I've done some reading, but I'm pretty ignorant on what makes a good lens. I need auto-focus, so it's got to be compatible with that, but beyond that I don't know what to look for, or what brand... preferably something that will fit the XT and other cameras should I expand/upgrade at some point. What's USM when it's applied to lenses? (instead of PS) Get it or not? Do all lenses have that awful horizon distortion? etc etc...

Thank you Leann. :)

Kathy

 

USM when used in reference to a Canon EF lens stands for Ultra Sonic Motor. It does not have anything to do with sharpening. It's the motor that drives the autofocus.

 

Just for grins I went out to B&H's website and checked some prices. Canon is giving rebates at the moment. That can make a substantial difference in what you pay. The items that qualify and the amounts are shown at the following link.

 

http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/00/10/00/13/61/24/100013612409.pdf

 

As you notice if you buy two items you get double the rebate on EACH item. If you buy three you get TRIPLE the amount on EACH item. I took advantage of this last year and its well worth while.

 

Anyway I digress. Assume you have $1500 to play with. You could go buy a Canon 20D with no lens for $1300. If you add the kit lens of 18-55mm it will run $1400. The 20D would qualify you for a $100 rebate so you are out $1300. The 18-55 is not in the same league with Canon's L lenses by any stretch of the imagination. But its not bad either. You can get decent results if you step it down. I own one. I don't use it a lot but it sure comes in handy when I don't want to lug a bunch of heavy and or expensive glass around.

 

Alternatively you could buy a Rebel XT for $790 and a EF 70-200mm f4L for $579. Both of these qualify for rebates. If you bought both you would save $150 on the XT and $50 on the lens. You would be out a total of $1,169. You still have $331 to spend. You could buy a Canon 1.4 teleconverter for $279. With the $52 you have left over you could buy a high quality Multicoated Hoya UV filter to protect your lens.

 

The EF 70-200 f4L is arguably the best bargain in the Canon L series. Optically its about as good as you are going to get. It yields sharp images with great contrast and color. It also performs very well when coupled with the Canon 1.4 teleconverter.

 

The XT has a crop factor of 1.6. What that means in plain English is when you mount the 70-200mm on it, you have the equivalent field of view of a 112-320mm on a full frame camera. If you couple that with the 1.4 TC you end up with a 98-280mm f5.6 on a full frame body. But on the XT the equivalent field of view would be the same as a 157-448mm f5.6. That is some serious telephoto. Its also a better deal than the 20D option IMHO. Not that I wouldn't LOVE to have the 20D mind you. But if you have budget constraints (who doesn't?) this would make more sense to me.

 

 

 

Holy cow! I'm taking you with me when I go shopping! I'm assuming the 790 is body only, right? So you think skip the kit lens completely? I suppose if I'm buying the 70/200 I don't really need the 18 (or is it 28?) -55... you have the gerbil running like mad n the wheel, Larry :) I may not be able to wait until March.... my bank hates you already and I haven't even done anything yet. Thank you so much for the advice and shopping tips though - it's going to be a real help!

$790 is just for the body alone. If it were me and I had the money I would buy the EF-S 18-55mm to go with it. It gives you the equivalent field of view of 28-88mm if memory serves. Its about $100 if you buy it at the time you buy the body. The last time I looked its about $160 if you buy it separately. Thats for the non USM model. If you just have to have USM add about $30. Personally I wouldn't bother.

 

I think you get good value for your money with this lens. Its not an L series but at around f8 it is quite good. And lets face it, you can pick it up for $100 which is a fraction of what an L series competitor would cost. (When you get your 2007 bonus then you can think about the 24-70 f2.8L.)

Off the camera/lens subject for a moment...Larry, it's usually a lot harder to find such wildlife when you're not in a Park...or when you don't have the time to spend hours hunting for elk like this. We did have a small bull moose wander into our backyard a few years ago (3 miles from town), and there are deer, but nice bull elk?...you're spoiled! There are lots of them around in the mountains here, but it takes time and work to see them. I'll just enjoy your photos for now!

I plead guilty. I am spoiled. And so glad of it. :)

Kim - I live here too, though RMNP is 3.5-4hrs from my house, and I've only seen the elk a few times, in horrible past-sundown light, behind trees, never looking at me, and shedding. So what I'm thinking will be easiest, is just to stalk Larry -- he's got to be easier to find, less dangerous, and probably doesn't move as fast. :) I'm just guessing on the less dangerous part...

Hi Larry, I always come to your portfolio when I want a dose of beautiful nature shots. You NEVER disappoint. Wonderful shot. All the best.

I am too old and feeble to be dangerous these days. My knees are so bad I move pretty slow too. You wouldn't have much trouble outrunning me.

 

On a serious note, I can tell you exactly when and where to go if you want to see big bull elk. Don't tell anybody else but come December and January you can almost always find the big boys at Endovalley in RMNP within a half hour of sunrise. If you aren't sure where that is, go in the Fall River entrance and proceed to the Old Fall River Road turn off. Thats roughly 1 1/2 miles or so into the park. Old Fall River road will be closed just past the Alluvial fan. But you can drive a half a mile or so up it before you come to the barrier. That general area is where the BIG boys hang that time of year.

 

I have seen as many as 50 bulls congregate in the meadows at Endovalley and West Horseshoe in the Winter. Most of the ones you see there are six or seven points. My theory is the big ones chase the little ones off.

 

About 30 to 45 minutes after the sun comes up the bulls generally head back into the trees. If you can manage to get there early its normally well worth it.

 

One of the nice things about it is that in the winter there are fewer people in the park. Especially right around sunrise. The tall gray haired fellow you DO see will probably be me.

Thank you Jamie. I truly appreciate that. :)