Options
70-200 + 2x Extender = fantastic wildlife shots
My company has "wetlands" that are landscaped around the corporate headquarters, where I work. Been there 3 years and had never actually walked outside other than too and from the parking garage. Anywho...in an effort to get healthy, I've been walking during my lunch hour...and today I took my camera along with me.
Since I wanted to shoot the wildlife, I brought my 20D, Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX and Sigma 2x APO converter. Didn't bring my monopod. All these shots are handheld at 640mm 35mm equiv. I set the ISO to 400 to allow me f5.6/f8 aperatures with shutter speeds over 1/1000 -- in what I thought would be a mostly vain effort.
Even with all the reach, the wildlife was still mostly too far away. The photos I have in my gallery have been severely cropped, most of them anyway.
All that said, I'm THRILLED with the results. I shot RAW and used Rawshooter Essentials to process and I couldn't be more enthused at the output.
Gallery
These goslings were not that far away, only about 15 yards.
Here's one of the "real far away" shots. And a moving bird at that. And a black bird at that. So no, it's not a "real sharp" photo, but I'm pleased with it nonetheless. I like the composition (after cropping, of course)
This next one I'd count as "sharp".
Again, adjusting one's expectations -- hand held, moving, far away, 2x converter slowing down the AF and costing 2 stops of light, and severely cropped. It's this type of photo that, IMO, gives lie to the "2 more megapixels doesn't matter".
Ok...so the photos are not ready for National Geographic. But ever since I got my 300D, I've been envious of the "bird photos" that folks have gotten...folks like Danielle. These aren't up to her quality either, but one has to start somewhere.
Lee
Since I wanted to shoot the wildlife, I brought my 20D, Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX and Sigma 2x APO converter. Didn't bring my monopod. All these shots are handheld at 640mm 35mm equiv. I set the ISO to 400 to allow me f5.6/f8 aperatures with shutter speeds over 1/1000 -- in what I thought would be a mostly vain effort.
Even with all the reach, the wildlife was still mostly too far away. The photos I have in my gallery have been severely cropped, most of them anyway.
All that said, I'm THRILLED with the results. I shot RAW and used Rawshooter Essentials to process and I couldn't be more enthused at the output.
Gallery
These goslings were not that far away, only about 15 yards.
Here's one of the "real far away" shots. And a moving bird at that. And a black bird at that. So no, it's not a "real sharp" photo, but I'm pleased with it nonetheless. I like the composition (after cropping, of course)
This next one I'd count as "sharp".
Again, adjusting one's expectations -- hand held, moving, far away, 2x converter slowing down the AF and costing 2 stops of light, and severely cropped. It's this type of photo that, IMO, gives lie to the "2 more megapixels doesn't matter".
Ok...so the photos are not ready for National Geographic. But ever since I got my 300D, I've been envious of the "bird photos" that folks have gotten...folks like Danielle. These aren't up to her quality either, but one has to start somewhere.
Lee
0
Comments
I like your shots Lee but that first one is just fantastic.
AJ
The goosling shot is wonderful.
Looking forward to seeing some more shots from your wetlands.
Harry
http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
What did that sigma lens cost? I have the 20D and now looking for a zoom lens after I recover from the expense of the camera
“PHOTOGRAPHY IS THE ‘JAZZ’ FOR THE EYES…”
http://jwear.smugmug.com/
Then cropped with jpegcrops -- no photoshop or other image editor.
Lee
Thanks,
Lee
Lee
Lee
“PHOTOGRAPHY IS THE ‘JAZZ’ FOR THE EYES…”
http://jwear.smugmug.com/
My Galleries
Flicker
G+