Bird photos: post all your bird photos here

[Ollokot]

[DavidGee]

David

[Dave Humphries]

Pat, David, nice ones!


Nikon D5000 + Sigma 18-250mm VC: 1/500s f/8 at 135mm iso200
Shot July 2009 on our hotel balcony in Tenerife (the picture was shot I mean, not the bird) 1024 x 1024px

[Peter Ryan]

[batman44]

These are some very good pictures! After seeing all of these I want a teleconverter now! My list keeps getting longer and longer!!!

Here is my contribution:
Luck was on my side last week while sitting outside on my deck "hoping" to catch the humming birds that were dive bombing each other. As soon as I got all set up outside they stopped! So I sat and waited hoping they would come back. Just as I was about to leave she came over to the flowers to the side of me. She has never been this close to me. My guess is she didn't see me sitting in the corner!

[Dave Humphries]

Very nice Kori, well done.

OK Peter, I prefer your sunset background to mine

I do have a palm tree one from Tenerife, but the 'bird' is of the non-feathered variety, so I can't post it here.

[Peter Ryan]

I do have a palm tree one from Tenerife, but the 'bird' is of the non-feathered variety, so I can't post it here.

Maybe post it under "........ & Pets".

[Crovean]

[wilgk]

Nice work Chriss

[ScoutR]

Yes Chris that is nice. I love the subdued colours and glistening sand.

Wendy

[ScoutR]

well they are not getting any sharper, but I've decided that with bird shots I have to go for the mood.
does anyone know how I might get rid of the white, feathers, reflections,bubbles and other ass't pond scum, that the birds always seem to be standing in. I've cloned some of it but I'm wondering if there is a better/easier way.

Wendy

[Peter Ryan]

well they are not getting any sharper, but I've decided that with bird shots I have to go for the mood.
does anyone know how I might get rid of the white, feathers, reflections,bubbles and other ass't pond scum, that the birds always seem to be standing in. I've cloned some of it but I'm wondering if there is a better/easier way.

Wendy

Hi Wendy,
A couple of things.

1. I really like your moody shots so you should not see these as a second rate position.
2. I am pretty sure the highlights have more to do with the angle of the sun and wind. The water behind the bird is no doubt protected from the wind and is calm. Alternatively the wind has blown all the pond flotsam over to one side.
3. I have no easy solution to removing that much glitter but I am not sure it is all that bad.
4. As for sharpness –do you use a tripod or hand hold? I generally hand hold but find many of my images are soft due to camera shake – no matter what shutter speed I use. I always find a real trade off between ISO and shutter speed to hand hold – I know I should use a trip. Trying to get something that small tack sharp is difficult.
5. I know this is your favourite/easily accessible pond but you might need to find a busier waterway to be able to get closer to the birds for really sharp close ups.

[Peter Ryan]

[ScoutR]

Hi Wendy,
A couple of things.

1. I really like your moody shots so you should not see these as a second rate position.

Thanks Peter.

2. I am pretty sure the highlights have more to do with the angle of the sun and wind. The water behind the bird is no doubt protected from the wind and is calm. Alternatively the wind has blown all the pond flotsam over to one side.

I think you are right but the birds are never standing in the calm part.

4. As for sharpness –do you use a tripod or hand hold? I generally hand hold but find many of my images are soft due to camera shake – no matter what shutter speed I use. I always find a real trade off between ISO and shutter speed to hand hold – I know I should use a trip. Trying to get something that small tack sharp is difficult.
5. I know this is your favourite/easily accessible pond but you might need to find a busier waterway to be able to get closer to the birds for really sharp close ups.

I don't use a tripod. I increased ISO for this batch, can't remember shutter speeds right now and I'm at work so I can't look it up.

I know I should use a tripod, but I doubt that I ever will unless I find one that is much easier to use than what I have now. Even then I'm not crazy about lugging it around, and it's way down on the priority list financially.

Bird shots are not really my thing, because my 200mm just does not cut it, but this lake is right on my way home from work, and it is the only place I know where I've seen the Herons and Egrets on a regular basis. Good practice for if I ever get a better lens, and for trying to get faster on the draw. I still can't get the camera to track a bird in flight. I'd make a terrible hunter, I would starve.

Thanks for the feedback
Wendy

[Crovean]

Thanks guys. I have now a new favorite lens 70-300mm ^_^

[Philjam10]

Hi Wendy: I think you're right about the limits of the 200mm for animals and birds. Strangely, I have the same feeling about my 70-300MM lens. I missed a cayote and a wolf and couldn't get near the blue herons simply because I did not have the range, and I spent a longtime looking for these guys, and remember I hike the wilderness looking for subjects. So I bought a sigma 105-500mm for my Nikon 3000, which takes a teleconvertor, which I do not have yet. They're (the lens) on sale at Henry's for $1100 CDN, and I'm pleased. I only carry my 18-55, and my Sigma now, and leave my 70-300mm at home. Here are some samples.

[Dave Humphries]

Nikon D5000 + Sigma 18-250mm VC: 1/4000s f/8 at 250mm iso400

Click image to view at 1,200px × 788px in Lytebox (F11 recommended)

[Peter Ryan]

Nikon D5000 + Sigma 18-250mm VC: 1/4000s f/8 at 250mm iso400

Click image to view at 1,200px × 788px in Lytebox (F11 recommended)

Lovely shot Dave.

[ScoutR]

Hi Wendy: I think you're right about the limits of the 200mm for animals and birds. Strangely, I have the same feeling about my 70-300MM lens. I missed a cayote and a wolf and couldn't get near the blue herons simply because I did not have the range, and I spent a longtime looking for these guys, and remember I hike the wilderness looking for subjects. So I bought a sigma 105-500mm for my Nikon 3000, which takes a teleconvertor, which I do not have yet. They're (the lens) on sale at Henry's for $1100 CDN, and I'm pleased. I only carry my 18-55, and my Sigma now, and leave my 70-300mm at home. Here are some samples.

Hi Philjam: I see you have been busy. Those are nice shots The Heron is really up close and personal.
That 500mm must be heavy to carry around. Do you always use a tripod? I'd imagine that would be a given, and would be a deal killer for me. I have a tripod, and i know I should use it but I don't think I'd ever get a shot diddling around trying to get it set up properly, and trying to track anything that was moving seems like it would be impossible.

Wendy

[ScoutR]

Nice one Dave, especially when viewed large.

Wendy