Night Heron Fest

bfjr · July 19, 2005

Since our esteem Moderator (you know who you are

) said it was OK !!
Here goes with some recent NH's

did he say NH Fest :uhoh

who said that ??

I'm too young gotta leave

Wait for me, I'll play

Just my luck stuck on this stick when the photogs show up

Hey wait don't leave.....:D here's one more :lol4

ginger_55 · July 19, 2005

Ben, I love the "peeking up" shots! Of course any NH shot is a good shot.

Except for the ones I screwed up the other night: well it was almost after dark. Bill was on the phone to me, I shot too fast..........after dropping the phone on the ground.

I swear, in addition to that deer, I saw just about every kind of bird I would have hoped for, except the Wood Stork.

I found out about a "new" area, but it is not that close.

ginger

Ben, did you put your bird on Jeff's bunch of vegetation?

Andy · July 19, 2005

wtg !!!!!!!

Harryb · July 19, 2005

Not bad Ben. Good captures. Now all you need is the 500mm lens to get in a tad closer.

ginger_55 · July 19, 2005

Good doG, the birds are close to HIM.

Send me the 500, please.

gotta run.........

g

Khaos · July 19, 2005

Very nice Ben.

jwear · July 19, 2005

you know about my shots:cry good one of us got something very nice

does PS have a grey removal tool or a June gloom touch up brush

bfjr · July 20, 2005

ginger_55 wrote:

Ben, I love the "peeking up" shots! Of course any NH shot is a good shot.

Except for the ones I screwed up the other night: well it was almost after dark. Bill was on the phone to me, I shot too fast..........after dropping the phone on the ground.

I swear, in addition to that deer, I saw just about every kind of bird I would have hoped for, except the Wood Stork.

I found out about a "new" area, but it is not that close.

ginger

Ben, did you put your bird on Jeff's bunch of vegetation?

Hi ginger
No Jeff put his bird on my vegetation :lol4

bfjr · July 20, 2005

andy wrote:

wtg !!!!!!!

hey Andy
thanks for stopping by, but I thought you were on vacation

get off the computer and go play in the water

bfjr · July 20, 2005

Harryb wrote:

Not bad Ben. Good captures. Now all you need is the 500mm lens to get in a tad closer.

Hey Harry I got 300 now and a tc17 will put me in that magic range, right ??!!

ginger_55 · July 20, 2005

A tc will give you a headache you haven't thought of. Two, as a matter of fact.

I have a 300 Canon, Prime, and a 1.4 TC that I leave on the lens. This is the headache:

it will lower your DOF, more than your f stop would ordinarily give you: a tech thing there and I don't understand tech things, but My Moose guy says it, and it is soooo true.

and it will slow down your AF, less light, you know. Your lens will hunt more with the TC than without it.

Smile, welcome to the world of "working with" problems in photography. Or spending a gazillion dollars to eliminate the problems. Would I like to be able to just get a 500, or a 600. I still need, I do, I NEED to be able to handhold, so it would have to be in that range, plus image stabilization. IS is why I still have the 300 rather than the 400, I am scared to be without the IS. I handhold just about everything.

But I just thought you could use the info re TCs right off, so you can explain to people why you got a bad shot, at those few times you might actually get a shot that is less than you might have wished............and other people don't have those problems as they don't have OUR problems......so, now you know.

ginger:D

bfjr · July 20, 2005

Khaos wrote:

Very nice Ben.

Morning Khaos
and thanks for stopping and commenting

bfjr · July 20, 2005

ginger_55 wrote:

A tc will give you a headache you haven't thought of. Two, as a matter of fact.

I have a 300 Canon, Prime, and a 1.4 TC that I leave on the lens. This is the headache:

it will lower your DOF, more than your f stop would ordinarily give you: a tech thing there and I don't understand tech things, but My Moose guy says it, and it is soooo true.

and it will slow down your AF, less light, you know. Your lens will hunt more with the TC than without it.

Smile, welcome to the world of "working with" problems in photography. Or spending a gazillion dollars to eliminate the problems. Would I like to be able to just get a 500, or a 600. I still need, I do, I NEED to be able to handhold, so it would have to be in that range, plus image stabilization. IS is why I still have the 300 rather than the 400, I am scared to be without the IS. I handhold just about everything.

But I just thought you could use the info re TCs right off, so you can explain to people why you got a bad shot, at those few times you might actually get a shot that is less than you might have wished............and other people don't have those problems as they don't have OUR problems......so, now you know.

ginger:D

Morning Ginger
thank you for the heads up about TC. I have been studying along with learning to handle raw

Whew lots to do but as far as I'm concerned so much fun

I'll pass a tip along to you as well. The truth be know you have to use a tripod/monopod something for support when you start reaching out mm wise like we do with wildlife. Every photog worth his salt does and recommends so, they can't all be wrong!! I have seen the effects of both on my own work and it's tripod or at least monopod always for me!!

Harryb · July 20, 2005

bfjr wrote:

Hey Harry I got 300 now and a tc17 will put me in that magic range, right ??!!

Nah!!! I use the 500mm with a 1.4 TC and its still a tad short.

bfjr · July 20, 2005

Harryb wrote:

Nah!!! I use the 500mm with a 1.4 TC and its still a tad short.

You your breakin my bank here Boss

Just a tad short ???? :wow

Jeff and I saw a guy Sunday had a Canon (we forgave him

) with 600 on Gitzo with wimberly setup, very very very cool and some mucho $$$$!!!!

Harryb · July 20, 2005

bfjr wrote:

You your breakin my bank here Boss
Just a tad short ????

Yep. The basic rule of thumb when shooting wildlife is that your lens will always be 200mm shorter than what you really need.

Night Heron Fest

Comments