Dieter Schaefer

Three more images - Brandt's Cormorant from the cliffs of La Jolla and an osprey form Portland, Maine Hoping the ospreys will return in April to the same nest. The juvenile shown in this thread will not be back in 2024 - her first return to the vicinity of their birth place will be in Spring 2025 - provided, of course, she made it to their destination South (could be as far as Central America or even the Northern parts of South America) and survived their time there and the return trip. She hung around the nest the longest - her brother left a good two weeks earlier than she did. Her mother about a month earlier; her dad stayed until she had left - providing her with food until the last minute. I never observed the female juvenile catching any fish - which wouldn't bode well for her trip South unless she learned very quickly.

Osprey announcing to the world that it just managed to stick the landing.

To post from flickr, just grab the image URL from the URL field and post it here - none of their "share options" works here at PN. The BBCode use to be the one to use, but it is not recognized on PN.

Your assumption is correct, I got the 800PF in late June; the trip to La Jolla was in January. Something that long could be useful there to catch pelican approaching over the ocean or to work from the sidewalk towards the far cliffs. Can't recall if I used the TC-14EIII with the 500PF at all while on La Jolla.

Two major events for me this year - trip to La Jolla for pelicans and cormorants and observing an osprey family over a few months at a marina in Portland, Maine. For the latter, it turned out that the 800PF was perfectly suited; in La Jolla I had to "make do" with the 300PF and 500PF. Brandt's Cormorant Osprey

This is the additional weekly image thread for the Nature Forum. While images posted to this thread should still be nature in theme, it may contain a small amount of human-made objects and therefore less restricted than the Monday in Nature threads. Please see this discussion for more details: Alternative weekly thread in Nature forum Each participant please post no more than just one image per weekly thread. Many members will appreciate any information you are willing or able to provide regarding location, shooting process, exposure settings, equipment, and information on the subject(s), including scientific and/or common names. Osprey Wishing everyone a Happy New Year!

This is the additional weekly image thread for the Nature Forum. While images posted to this thread should still be nature in theme, it may contain a small amount of human-made objects and therefore less restricted than the Monday in Nature threads. Please see this discussion for more details: Alternative weekly thread in Nature forum Each participant please post no more than just one image per weekly thread. Many members will appreciate any information you are willing or able to provide regarding location, shooting process, exposure settings, equipment, and information on the subject(s), including scientific and/or common names. Osprey

This is the additional weekly image thread for the Nature Forum. While images posted to this thread should still be nature in theme, it may contain a small amount of human-made objects and therefore less restricted than the Monday in Nature threads. Please see this discussion for more details: Alternative weekly thread in Nature forum Each participant please post no more than just one image per weekly thread. Many members will appreciate any information you are willing or able to provide regarding location, shooting process, exposure settings, equipment, and information on the subject(s), including scientific and/or common names. Osprey

Nope. Loggerhead Shrike, aka Butcherbird: https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Loggerhead_Shrike/species-compare Northern Harrier: https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Northern_Harrier/id

The AF-S 80-400 had been my main birdphotography lens since I bought it in February 2014 and until I got the 200-500 in November of 2015 - so for just a bit short of 2 years. Mostly used on a D300 initially, then on a D7100. The lens replaced the old AF-D 80-400 and the AF-S 300/4 that I used mostly with the TC-17EII; optically, the AF-S 80-400 was a step up from both of the earlier options. I kept the lens even after I acquired the 200-500 to be used mostly for general photography on a D810 - though it has not seen much use in that capacity. My wife now uses another AF-S 80-400 for all kinds of photography on a D500 and appears to be happy with the general performance. Compared to the 200-500, the 80-400 has the advantage of smaller size, lesser weight, and wider zoom range but the disadvantage that it trails the 200-500 in optical performance. I don't think a 200-500 can replace a 80-400 - they are too dissimilar. A major drawback on the 200-500 for me always has been the large turning angle of the zoom ring to got from one end of the range to other. And the - compared to the 80-400 - slower AF. An AF-S 80-400 can nowadays be had for under $1000 used; I certainly would not pay the almost $1900 Nikon still asks for a refurbished one or the $2100 or thereabouts a new one still tries to demand. The rather low used prices show that the lens has fallen out of favor and/or there is an oversupply of used ones. I don't think the 80-400 can replace a 70-200/2.8 if one really needs the larger aperture. It certainly is a more compact, more comfortable solution than hauling both a 70-200/2.8 and a 200-500. In my case, I am much more likely to have a 70-200/4 and a 300/4E in my bag; in addition to a TC-14E or TC-14EIII if I know I need more reach. Not quite as convenient as a one-lens approach, but certainly optically better at the longer focal lengths. And it terms of weight, it's pretty much a wash. I am afraid my 80-400 will look at a future of acquiring dust on the shelf.

Osprey above

This is the additional weekly image thread for the Nature Forum. While images posted to this thread should still be nature in theme, it may contain a small amount of human-made objects and therefore less restricted than the Monday in Nature threads. Please see this discussion for more details: Alternative weekly thread in Nature forum Each participant please post no more than just one image per weekly thread. Many members will appreciate any information you are willing or able to provide regarding location, shooting process, exposure settings, equipment, and information on the subject(s), including scientific and/or common names. Osprey - when one is hoping for it to land towards the camera but the bird (and the wind) don't oblige

This is the additional weekly image thread for the Nature Forum. While images posted to this thread should still be nature in theme, it may contain a small amount of human-made objects and therefore less restricted than the Monday in Nature threads. Please see this discussion for more details: Alternative weekly thread in Nature forum Each participant please post no more than just one image per weekly thread. Many members will appreciate any information you are willing or able to provide regarding location, shooting process, exposure settings, equipment, and information on the subject(s), including scientific and/or common names. Osprey - again. Most of my bird photography this year at a new-to-me location was centered around an osprey nest located at a marina in South Portland.

This isn't an either/or proposition. Of course, I like to get as close as possible - but the limiting factor often is not the camera noise but other restrictions that prevent me from getting closer. First and foremost, of course, the wellbeing of the animal or bird - don't get so close as to disturb it by your presence (often there are laws involved as well). Then there's physical boundaries that prevent one from getting closer (the osprey family I frequently made images of this year had their nest in the middle of a little cove in the ocean with a minimum distance of 90 ft and over 250ft from other vantage points; a bald eagle nest is 175 yards distance from the closest vantage point at the boundary to private property and the favorite perch tree is 475 yards out - both too far for me to expect good quality images). For the ospreys, even with the 800PF, images were regularly cropped - so a higher pixel density would be welcome. Tried some photography with the 800/1.4x combo (1120mm at f/9). Z9 AF still performed reasonably well but at that focal length, finding (and keeping) a moving/flying bird in the viewfinder becomes tricky (to some extent also at 800mm). One reason I preferred the D850 over the D500 when using the 500PF was the wider FOV that made finding/tracking flying birds a lot easier - all without any pixel-density penalty. Thus given the choice between a 26MP DX body and a 60MP FX body, I prefer the latter. The FX-equivalent for a 40MP DX sensor is 90MP - I expect that such a sensor will arrive on the scene someday.

The 600PF came as quite a surprise too... I may have to revise my price estimate for the hypothetical Z500 - which I envision as basically a Z8 with a smaller DX sensor - so even a $3k price point appears possible. How many units do you think Nikon is going to sell of such an expensive body burdened with the stigma of a smaller sensor?

Certainly. I'd say the obviously best time to have released a high-end DX camera would have been together with the 180-600. Yet not even a rumor about a high-end DX body has surfaced AFAIK..

I think the trouble with a potential Z500 is that it would be a niche camera, geared towards those that use longer lenses. Just like with the F-mount DX, Nikon does not seem to put much effort into Z-mount DX lenses making it hard/impossible to build a high-end system around a potential Z500. So instead of purchasing a $2k+ Z500 and a $3k FX body to go along with a general-use FX lens system, one might as well budget more for a high-MP FX body like the Z8 or Z9 to begin with. Anyone having any information how well the D500 actually sold?

I don't think I actually care anymore. I highly doubt that Nikon will bring a DX body to the market that has features similar to the Z8/Z9 as it undoubtedly would have to have a price point of at least $2k, probably even $2.5k. To me the "mini-D5" D500 was a good choice since I didn't consider the D5/D6 as an option based on the low MP count alone. In a direct comparison between the D500 and the D850, however, I found that I actually preferred the D850. Aside from the slightly faster fps of the D500 and the larger AF area coverage in the viewfinder, the D850 actually had a D500 de facto built in. By the time a Z500 would appear on the scene, Z8 used prices will have dropped to a level sufficiently close to be a real alternative.

One reason I am not considering the Z8 yet 😁 Not sure I need one anyway 🤨 Rather wait what a Z9II will look like 🙂

Indeed - got my days totally mixed up! Osprey

Osprey

This is the additional weekly image thread for the Nature Forum. While images posted to this thread should still be nature in theme, it may contain a small amount of human-made objects and therefore less restricted than the Monday in Nature threads. Please see this discussion for more details: Alternative weekly thread in Nature forum Each participant please post no more than just one image per weekly thread. Many members will appreciate any information you are willing or able to provide regarding location, shooting process, exposure settings, equipment, and information on the subject(s), including scientific and/or common names. Osprey

+1 +1

Thanks for starting the thread Mary Doo. Because of the photo.net hiccup last week, Monday in Nature 6 November 2023 did not happen and I felt it unnecessary to start two threads on the same day when photo.net finally was online again last Friday. Osprey

Although size is hard to judge, this one appears to be a larger than what I expect a sharp-shinned to be.