playing with my new nikkor 70-300mm vr lens

[fauxbird]

ok heres a few shots i really liked how they came out let me know what you think

1.


2.


3.


4.

[Dave Humphries]

Good lens, init? Congrats on your purchase

I love mine, it is now my standard wildlife walkabout lens, backed up by the 105mm Macro, or for travel/general use, the 18-200mm.

Nice pictures, I particularly like the third (my kinda subject) and a well timed shot.

EDIT: I spotted you originally posted this in the Photochallenges forum, I have removed the post from there as it doesn't belong, and this one exists (I easily could have moved it if asked, to save you reposting, just drop me and/or Colin a PM if it happens again)

Cheers,

[fauxbird]

yes the bokeh on this lens is just wow!,it is a heavy lens though and i now have a camera harness as that lens is just to heavy to hang and carry around on your neck ouch,oh you like my resident mockingbird and his wing dance,if you look at his beak he has a bug he has two youngsters to feed,the other shot i think he was thinking what the heck is that sticking out of your face?

[Dave Humphries]

yes the bokeh on this lens is just wow!,it is a heavy lens though and i now have a camera harness as that lens is just to heavy to hang and carry around on your neck ouch,oh you like my resident mockingbird and his wing dance,if you look at his beak he has a bug he has two youngsters to feed,the other shot i think he was thinking what the heck is that sticking out of your face?

Talking of bokeh, here's my recent example (at f/8);


Yes I saw the bug in the beak and agree with your thoughts on the last one

[fauxbird]

oooooooo now thats what im talking about,i must admit whatever the auto does is what i have my eye sight is not good enough to do manual not sure i would even be fast enough to focus it anyway at least on a moving subject,my younger brother has the D90 also and just bought this lens but i had to rub it in i got mine first and cheeper

[Klickit]

I have this lens too, but admit to struggling with it a bit. I seem to get a lot of very soft photos from it. I need to do a test for front and back focus, I think. I also find it isn't the best unless the light is very good and would be interested to see photos other have taken under less than ideal light.

Fauxbird - you have some nice images there and thanks for introducing me to the mockingbird. Funny, but I always thought they were brightly coloured for some reason.

[Ramblinman]

Fauxbird, I'm a Long Islander as well. Where did you take those pics?

[Crovean]

Man i can't just make sharp images like that on my 70-300 I need to replace it i guess.

[Klickit]

Looking at the exif, it is 1/2000th sec, mid morning and the light was obviously good.....do I sound as though I'm clutching at straws...

[Dave Humphries]

Regarding this lens; I have found that using it at f5.6 is generally a mistake, unless I really need the shallow DoF, I now shoot at f8 - f16 with it, adjusting ISO and shutter speed to provide this - or I give up

No, I don't really, I shoot anyway, but if the shots don't 'pass muster', no-one sees 'em.

I will publish some 'less good light' shots when the occasion presents itself, keep an eye on the PAD as that's the most likely place they'll turn up this month.

Cheers,

[fauxbird]

sorry im so slow answering im busy getting ready for a trip to montana next month hence why i bought the lens(yellowstone),klickit from what i understand my brother told me not to use the hood as this lens needs good light?though im also one of those strange people who dont use filters so i dont know if that makes any diffrence?ramblinman the monkey and the peacock were taken at the bronx zoo,the mockingbird was my back yard in east meadow though im pretty sure i used the hood on those but it was so sunny out i dont think it matteredi will put up a few others in less than ideal lighting.

[Dave Humphries]

~ from what i understand my brother told me not to use the hood as this lens needs good light?though im also one of those strange people who dont use filters so i dont know if that makes any diffrence?ramblinman the monkey and the peacock were taken at the bronx zoo,the mockingbird was my back yard in east meadow though im pretty sure i used the hood on those but it was so sunny out i dont think it matteredi will put up a few others in less than ideal lighting.

The lens hood does not reduce the light the camera has to make an image - therefore it should always be used on a lens like this; at distance, you're always fighting low contrast - and not using a hood just allows more oblique light to hit the front elements and all it is doing is reducing contrast further! Especially on the shots where the sun is in front of the camera; like your monkey shot, and my dragon fly one.

I think the advice "my brother told me not to use the hood as this lens needs good light" might have something to do with; "my younger brother has the D90 also and just bought this lens but i had to rub it in i got mine first and cheeper" - payback time (wicked smiley)

Cheers,

[fauxbird]

yes i thought that advice odd myself as i use my hood when its sunny but hey i never said i know much about photography because i dont,anybody can pick up a camea and get i nice shot these days as advanced as these cameras are,as for my monkey picture with the zoo your pretty much in the darkness and the monkeys are out under natural light so if its sunny its sunny cloudy its cloudy so alas you have no control over lighting.

[Dave Humphries]

~ anybody can pick up a camea and get i nice shot these days as advanced as these cameras are ~

There's certainly some truth in that, but you don't do so bad yourself, I think you under estimate your skill

and FWIW, I use auto exposure; in the form of Aperture Priority, too.

[fauxbird]

There's certainly some truth in that, but you don't do so bad yourself, I think you under estimate your skill

and FWIW, I use auto exposure; in the form of Aperture Priority, too.

well thanks i try though im learnng disabled so i dont quit understand it all(but i do always remember sun behind you not the subject and the little square focused on the eye or between the eyes LOL!)slowly im trying to learn to work some with the adobe photoshop got a few books for it but it makes my brain want to explode!

[Klickit]

fauxbird, I use aperture priority too after trying like a mad thing to always shoot in manual - after all, we're told that anyone who is anyone in the photographic world uses manual exclusively.
But I had so many miss-shots that in the end, I swallowed my pride and switched to aperture priority and my keeper rate suddenly went up. Funny, that...

[fauxbird]

well yeah so they say but for me this is a hobby,my eyesight is not perfect and i dont know if i could focus fast enough on a moving critter anyway so i say why lose a good shot,im not a proff and never will be lm just happy to get some nice shots,this photo was taken at my local parrot club(gee looks like a portrait eh

[Dave Humphries]

Hi fauxbird,

Tell me, do you have a first name I could use (you know mine).

Nice picture, a bit of fill flash has helped and yes, it could qualify as a pet protrait, even if not your pet.

well yeah so they say but for me this is a hobby, my eyesight is not perfect and i dont know if i could focus fast enough on a moving critter anyway so i say why lose a good shot , i'm not a proff and never will be l'm just happy to get some nice shots, this photo was taken at my local parrot club (gee looks like a portrait eh

Likewise, I too am no professional (and never will be) and rely 99.9% on Auto-focus because of my less than perfect eyesight too. I have to leave my glasses on while peering into V/F or the astigmatism and 4+ dioptre blurriness just makes everything unusable. With glasses; if the viewfinder lines and focus points are sharp and the subject is - woo hoo, take the shot

Kit, Chriss,

Just for you guys, a shot taken when the sun went behind a cloud today (note lack of shadows):



Nikon D5000 + Nikon 70-300mm VR: 1/1500s f/8 at 300mm, iso800
Click link to see at 1200 pixels wide

Note I bumped the ISO up another stop and have done a good job on PP despite the less than ideal landing spot - meaning the shot wouldn't have been a keeper but for the purposes of demonstration that the lens can be sharp in less than ideal lighting. That said, it is subject dependent, you need a good contrast to focus (and later, to sharpen) on and you have to get the focus point wholly on the subject, having it part on the subject and part over a background just means it focuses on the background - but that's a Nikon camera thing, not specific to this lens.

That's not to say I don't have my fair share of duds, usually soft ones, but practice makes better and I have found that having the focus mode on AF-C helps, then rattle off two shots of each, just to be sure.

Also avoid the temptation to 'over extend', most of my recent really sharp shots have been the ones where the subject almost fills the frame - like the Dragon Flies. There is a strong urge (fight it), to take pictures of say, small birds too far away, there's one on my Day 11 PAD, this is better than most, but you'll note there is no link to a bigger size - that's deliberate; it wouldn't stand enlargement, by the time I had cropped it down, it was about 1200 wide, so I processed it and further downsized to 700px before final sharpening, the result is (I hope) reasonable.

I also have a shot taken at 200mm at f5.3 (wide open), at 800 iso, through the wire mesh of an aviary, but due to the latter, it would be a surprise if it were not a little soft, I can post tomorrow if you like? (It's 2am and time for bed)

Hope that helps,

[fauxbird]

yes dave i do have a first name its suzannehmm i will have to try the af-c mode mine is on af-a what is the difference?,just so everyone knows the macaw was taken with the nikkor 18-105vr lens under flourescent lighting with a flash diffuser on as i do find animals are not always fond of the flash in their eyes just like humans i know i hate it.

[Dave Humphries]

yes dave i do have a first name its suzannehmm i will have to try the af-c mode mine is on af-a what is the difference?,just so everyone knows the macaw was taken with the nikkor 18-105vr lens under flourescent lighting with a flash diffuser on as i do find animals are not always fond of the flash in their eyes just like humans i know i hate it.

Hi Suzanne,

Sorry, I should have said, AF-C is continuous, so when you finger is half on the shutter button, if you're moving the lens around, it is usually continuously changing the focus, which you can hear and feel.
The other mode is AF-S (S for single), it focuses once and peeps, then freezes that focus until you either take the shot or release and re-half press the shutter button.
AF-A (A for Automatic), which is what I used to use a lot, this is a combination of those first two, normally single mode, with peep, but occasionally will track focus if the camera decides that is better. It actually works quite well most of the time, especially if there is a big distance between subject and background and they are different colours, but can mess up.

I appreciate your thought for the subject, close range flash like that concerns me too, as you say; we don't like it, so why should they.

Cheers,