brad_n

May 28, 2009

I've gotten this water effect before but never so dramatically. Only general PP, no special NR or filtering. I'd really like to be able to do this 'at will". EXIF Data: K20D, DA*300, Flash with better beamer, 1/350 sec at f4.5, EV 0, camera NR off. It was 9:30AM and since I know exactly the spot that I shot from, the sun was behind me and low. Distance probably 30 ft.

Common Merganser

This was supposed to be a flash shot but the flash didn't fire. K20D, Sigma 50-500 at 420mm, ISO 200, 180sec at f6.7. Same location, 10AM, sun low and behind me. Was I the one complaining about the sharpness of the Sigma 50-500?

Double-Crested Cormorant

May 21, 2009

The 14.6 Mpix of the K20 is fine until you start shooting birds. Then, somewhat due to the lack of super lenses, you are forced into doing a lot of severe cropping. FF does no good but more pixels on the same size sensor and better noise elimination algorithms will help. Also useful is high USEABLE ISOs. I won't shoot birds over ISO 400 on the K20D.

Canon has the 300 f2.8 and the 100-400 f4, plus a 400 and 600.

Nikon has probably the best birding lense ever made, the 200-400.

If I could afford the lense I would find a way to buy the body - even if it was a generation old like a D40.

May 21, 2009

I see little about the K7 that would make me "upgrade" from my K20. No more pixels. No more ISO speed. I will not benefit from the faster shutter no matter how impredssdive it is. I would like the faster continuous frames. Movies are a gimic. Haven't decided about HD yet.

Having heard rumors of a 24 or 30 MPix sensor, I am very dissapointed in the K7.

I am hugely disappointed in the lack of super telephotos and super zooms from Pentax and its about ready to drive me to Canon or Nikon for my birding needs.

May 15, 2009

Paul,

Nobody knows what "weather resistant" means on a camera because they don't test to a standard like they test marine electronics. My local dealer, who sells Canon and Pentax, says that Canon's idea of weather proof is minimal and cannot compare to pentax. He sells alot more Canon than Pentax.

This is why I bought the K10D when I finally went digital. It has 200 seals and costs (then) $900. The Canon and Nikon sealed cameras started at $3500!

I shot out of a boat in saltwater all summer. After 2 seasons, both the K10D and K20D look and work flawlessly. To the contrary, I use a Sigma 55-300 and it is getting etched from the salt water and the operation is not smooth. I haven't used my DA* lenses in these conditions.

None of my gear has been dropped in the water but its got plenty of drenching splashes of salt water and rain.

Weather sealed cameras and DA* lenses are a good example of how Pentax has made all the manufacturers step up their game!

May 15, 2009

Jacques,

I went on a bit a a rant there and never addressed your DOF question. In my experience:

(1) As you go to smaller F-stops, AF does not work as well. Also, when you add the TC you need to open up to 5 or 6 if you expect AF to work as well as without the TC. This is a mystery to me. I thought that you viewed the image and it metered the light with the appature open and it then stopped down just before it let the shutter go. What am I missing?

(2) With smaller F-stops the telephoto effect kicks in making further subjects appear on top of the near field subjects. F8 seems to be a good compromise.

May 15, 2009

Jacques,

I've been exactly where you are in your frustration. I almost exclusively use the DA*300 plus optional Tamron 1.4 TC for birding. I always start with the K20D set to ISO 400, F8, Av mode and adjust as required but I really want F8 and I really do not want to have to resort to ISO 800. Reason: the 300 is short for birding and I always end up with some photos that might be salvaged with some severe cropping. At ISO 800 the noise really becomes a problem unless you can really fill the frame with your subject. Finally, unless I'm chasing warblers around the woods, which must be a funny sight with me wildly swinging this camera around here and there as fast as I can, I always use a tripod or monopod. If money wasn't an issue I would step up to one of those monster Gitzo models at $800 because it always seems to be windy at the ocean and at 6'5" everything else is really too short for me. (Gitzo makes some XLS models).

About the <a href="http://www.birdsasart.com/accs.html#BEAMER">Better Beamer</a>. I have found this to be the most useful device that you can possibly imagine for $44. I focuses your flash for 300mm and larger lenses which they claim gains you 2 2/3 f-stops. That seems about right to me but I haven't actually tested it. Here's situations where it helps: (1) can gain you up to an hour of shooting at sun rise and dusk (2) when shooting agains a blank sky (especially white egrets and such) it lights up the object allowing the sky to be dramatically darker (3) in the trees and woods it can improve the bird/background separation and give it some pop (4) Backlighting is an especially tough problem with birds and the better beamer will give you the reach and intensity to apply adequate fill-light.

Check out <a href="http://www.birdsasart.com/">Birds As Art</a> which is operated by Canon Professsional Photographer Arthur Morris. Support him even through he is completely owned by Canon. Curiosly, he sells a piece of used Nikon equipment now and then from his personal stash. He sells equipment and accessories at 10% under B&H and its all been carefully selected and is mostly very expensive. Sign-up for his news letter. Every week or two you'll get an email that I guarantee will include the best bird photos that you have ever seen. And, this will really make you drool, he has a constant parade of photo expeditions that you can join if you are well healed: Alaska for Eagles and Salmon, Canada for Ganats, and Gallapolis Islands. Hurry! He just announced a new opening in the 2011 Gallapolis trip at $7000 plus airfaire. Notice the 2011 part?

Difficulties: For the Flash you must use HSS which means that you are in Tv or Manual Mode, I try to keep the shutter at 180-250 because you start losing light intensity above that. Plus, I've always been an Av kind of guy so this has taken a surprising amount of effort to master. I "choose" Tv mode but I think Manual would have been a better, more useful technique to learn. Seems really simple.

For the FGZ 540 order the FX-2 size. You will probably find that the head points a little downward from the weight and need to fix that. I rolled up a short piece of sticky-backed velcro and wedged it between the head and base. Works great I leave it on all the time.

WARNING: The fresnel lens on the better beamer WILL MELT YOUR FLASH and it doesn't take very long. It happened to me when I tracked a bird near and through the sun!

The deep blue water is due to lighting up the egret with the flash/better beamer.

Backlit Great Blue Heron.

Backlit Green Heron.

Bald Eagle. Dramatic blue due to flash fill.

May 13, 2009

Am I remembering correctly? Didn't that houndstooth model appear in an early James Bond movie?? I can almost visualize the scene.

May 11, 2009

Hin,

They are "Terns". I don't have my book handy so I can't tell you the specific variety. I share in your frustration: they are very fast. They will, I'm sure you know, actually dive into the water and a photo of one flying out is highly desirable. For that shot, I have resorted to pointing my camera at a likely spot in the water and waiting. I am still waiting.

Your pics say that you did very, very well with this challenge!

I am certain there are Kingfishers in your area. Try them. You will pull out your hair!

May 6, 2009

Hin,

I warn you, caturing birds can become a major addiction AND an expensive one. I know, I have it.

I hesitate to say that MY techniques are better than someone elses. All I can say is what works for me. My primary set-up is the K20D w/ DA*300 on tripod with or without the Tamron 1.4 TC. BIFS are by far the hardest subject so I'll stick to that.

1. Because I don't own a 500mm lens, I tend to severely crop my shots. I try use ISO 400 whenever practical. I shoot RAW and have both Photoshop, Lightroom, and an NR program called NeatImage. My best quality process is: No camera NR, no NR in LightRoom, NeatImage in Photoshop. Reluctantly, I occassionally do a two pass NR: one lightly on the subject and one more severe on the background. OF course you can't submit those to National Geographic.)

2. Learning to get the most out of the AF when shooting BIFS is hard. For BIFS, I default to f8 and that seems to give very sharp photos, consistent AF performance and proper DOF. When shooting against a plain featureless sky I use auto for autofocus and center-average exposure. (Note: I was told that spot focus worked more consistently with long lenses so I used that for a long time. The big problem there is that the near-side wing tends to be out of focus. Since I changed to auto I have not had any problems and the wings tend to be in focus much more often.

3. When shooting against a high feature background such as the woods, I change to spot metering and spot AF.

4. IF you shoot RAW: I always start DRange 200% and with +1/2 Ev. Given the time, I'll change it to 0 or -1/2 EV according to the amount of white in the bird. Sometimes I forget. Its surprising but its rare that I blow out the whites to the point that they can't be brought back in RAW.

5. When waiting for birds to appear, get in the habit of "pre-focusing" your lens on something a similar distance away. Its can greatly improve AF speed and avoid AF hunting.

Here's one of my best GBHs. I could have used a little more DOF for the far wing, but the rest is dead on sharp.

April 17, 2009

Daniel,

JSoory, that was just a poor attempt at being funny. The $5k remark was not directed at you but rather myself and my constant feeling that I need something really big and expensive. The nice thing about GBHs is you don't need that fancy expensive gear since they are so large and slow and low to the ground. Concerning the lens: your are right AND you win hands down. It may be because I wear those varilux bifocals, don't know, but I have trouble focusing manually. I nearly always use autofocus for BIFS when they are far enough from the background. In the woods I use "manual assist" letting autofocus get me close and then manually tuning it in.

Yesterday was a stellar bird day for me - I am lucky to live in a great place for birding! From 6:30AM until 10:30 AM: 4 GBH (sometimes 4 simultaneously!), 4+ Osprey, 2 snowy egrets, 1 great egret, 2 adult black-crowned night herons plus 1 juvie, 2 RTH, 2 Bald Eagles, 1 Merlin, and several dozen cormorants. Now I didn't get photos of them all and all of the photos I took are not keepers, but it sure was exciting.

April 16, 2009

Daniel,

Very Nice pics of two of my favorite birds.

I must say that I think your GBH technique is way too complicated. Here is how to do it: position yourself near a bunch of GBHs and wait for them to do something interesting (virtually anything they do is interesting) or sometimes they'll just sit there doing nothing and that can look really interesting too. Take a picture. Bird photography could not be easier or result in more interesting pictures, you don't need a $5000 lens for great pics and, at least in NJ, they stay all year!

That's why the GBH is my favorite bird.

If I wasn't so tired I post some of the 80 of so GBH and GBH BIFS I took this am.

April 15, 2009

I am developing an interest doing some macro work: flowers and bugs. Not a lens in my bag is Macro! I'd like one general purpose macro lens (Is that a silly question?) that doesn't break the bank. Is there really any reason to have AF for Macro work? There's a wide range of lens lenths that are available with Macro. Is that a factor for the macro aspect?

April 15, 2009

Just saw these on Craigs list. Area Code near Philly. Anyone know anything about these?

<a href="http://newjersey.craigslist.org/pho/1101675860.html">Pentax-M 135/3.5 $100</a>

<a href="http://newjersey.craigslist.org/pho/1101669723.html">Tokina 50-250 f4-5.6 AT-X $80</a>

March 30, 2009

Really nice shots Daniel! Beats my best red-tail pics - I just haven't been able to get that close.

March 11, 2009

Javier, the detail in your last one is spectacular!

Here's a female and juveniles. I these were taken with the Sigma 50-500.

March 10, 2009

Flipping through my collection of bird photos, I realized that almost everyone has a picture of a Mallard. Though common, their coloring is spectacular. Mine are taken with a K20D and DA*300 with no post color adjustments.

I'm showing this one because of that beautiful bit of violet that is usually hidden.

March 8, 2009

Michael,

NJ has a very successful Eagle restocking program. They leave the one best egg in the nest and take the others to a hatchery. In the last survey (2003) there were 200 nesting pairs of bald eagles in NJ mostly near the Delaware Bay. Most experts that I've spoken to guess that there are really twice that many now. PS only two pairs of golden eagles who are up in the northern Stokes forest area.

If you can make it to the Smithville NJ area you should really go to the Brigantine Forstal Bird Sanctuary where there is an 8 mile drive through the saltwater marshes. Many of my Heron and Egret shots are from there plus Harriers, Merlins, Ducks, Geese, Cormorants, Terns, and Gulls.

Check out my <a href="http://www.smile-123.com/Nature/696501">Bird Gallery</a>.

March 7, 2009

Robert - Thats a beautiful bird. I've never heard of one.

Eric - I'm near Princeton New Jersey. The Eagle shots are from Carnegie Lake. The Hawks are from either my backyard or just spotted driving. The Harrier is from the bird sanctuary in Brigantine. At the lake, we have a pair of adult Bald Eagles and at least two immature eagles (the ones without the white head and tail). Eagles are tough to get a good shot of as they are quite shy. They sit in dead trees about 300yds across the lake for hours at a time without flying. When they do swoop down for a bite to eat they tend to fly away from you. Adults are very proficient fishermen, only rarely requiring more than one attempt to get their prey. The young ones are poor fishermen and will often come back 3 out of 4 times with nothing for their efforts - therefore a little easier to get a shot of.

This is my first year photographing eagles (I didn't know there were any here) and watching the courting season this last few months has been really exciting. I've seen a lot that I don't have pics of.

There are also several eagles at Brigantine but they fly out the sea for their fishing making it tough to find them at all.

March 6, 2009

Huh, the photos showed in the preview. Is my html wrong?

March 6, 2009

I've had some luck recently with raptors. Still I'm spending about 20 hours for every keeper eagle photo. All were taken with the K20D, DA*300. Most also included the Tamron 1.4 TC.

<img src="http://www.smile-123.com/photos/483715372_sUYHn-L-1.jpg"> Welcome!

<img src="http://www.smile-123.com/photos/483714544_3THKr-L-1.jpg"> A not too good shot of a Northern Harrier.

March 6, 2009

After someone in this column said that their Tamron 1.4x Pz-AF MC4 worked fine with SD lenses, I did some investigation. I cleaned the contacts and the Tamron TC works fine with the DA*300. I usually shot birds at F8/400 but I've found that the auto-focus works better one or two stops wider.

February 14, 2009

Daniel,

Its a Tamron 1.4x Pz-AF MC4.

Before I found that (they are out of production, apparently sold to Pentax) I could olny find a Kenko 2x, Bowers 2x, and Pheonix C/D7 AF at my local dealer. All of them worked with AF on non-SDM lenses. NONE of them worked AF on SDM lenses. I compared all three and found the Pheonix to be sharper than the other two and bought that. I just can't live without AF.

I've had my DA* 300/F4 for nearly a year. My local US dealer also stocks a DA*100 and DA*200. The 100 and 300 have both received rave remarks in this forum. I don't recall seeing any mention of the DA* 200 here but I am sure that it too is suppurb. PS They are in the US Pentax catalog on-line.

I also noticed that the Tamron increases contrast. You can see that above in the test photos.

February 14, 2009

Thanks to Ben I now have a Tamron 1.4 TC. As expected, AF works but doesn't use the SDM. I took two shots with and without the TC: AF mode, ISO 400, f8, tripod. The goose was about 75ft away and I cropped them both for full frame. I did exactly the same PP in Lightroom.

OK. These pics won't win any awards but geese will stand still for a long time.

With Tamron 1.4 TC:

Just DA*300

If you compare the detail in the fine brown feathers and the upper backgrounds, you can easily see some degradation caused by the Tamron TC. But...not bad at all. Which brings us to the question, are you better off cropping for that extra lens length? In this case I'd say yes. But if the subject isn't in focus cropping isn't going to help. This is a large subject at a reasonable distance. With smaller subjects or longer distances I have no doubt that the a good TC is a significant advantage.

One signficant drawback to the Tamron TC and any existing TC is that AF is very slow. I tried to capture some BIFs, like a GBH that flew straight at me and over my head, and not one shot was in focus. I think that I can alleviate this problem somewhat by adjusting my technique to compensate.

February 3, 2009

Jacques,

Maybe we're both crazy! I became totally dissatisfied with my Sigma 50-500 about the same time that I upgraded to the K20D. I also bought the DA*300 soon after and have been attributing all this to comparing the Sigma to that supurb lens. I sent the Sigma back to the factory for recalibration but there was no improvement. I also tried to calibrate the Sigma at 300 and 500 but with little success.

Maybe I should get out the K10 and do a side by side comparison.

Any suggestions about calibrating a zoom? Short, middle, long?

February 2, 2009

PS The "stork" is a Brown Pelican. You should also have White Pelicans there, something we don't get.

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by brad_n