Lens or Camera...where to start?

Dr_Jones · 12-02-2009, 05:53 PM

So im crossing Boston Common on Sunday and i see a hawk perched on a steeple (park and tremont) about 100' up and maybe 150' to 200' away. Had my second hand 70-200 f/4L and set the camera up for fast shutter (faster than 1/1000th) and reasonably wide depth of field (online calculator is telling me about 70' deep).

I try to use the center point 1 shot AF to get the bird crisp but im really disappointed with how soft all the shots turned out...the bricks on the building seem reasonably sharp but not so much on the bird. The bird dives legs extended talons out and grabs a pigeon off of the sidewalk. i follow him all the way down...i did not have time to get the AF in servo and not one shot has the bird crisp.

This is a second hand camera and a second hand lens? how would you diagnose the weak link...or is it just that the range is too long to expect sharpness for 200mm...or is my technique incorrect (stop down a bit and use a background object reasonably close to the bird get focus). This Fa-qer was really moving...

rodi · 12-02-2009, 08:23 PM

what's the camera? and that shouldn't be a lens that is THAT soft at wide-open. it's probably the camera or its AF. or your technique?

Dr_Jones · 12-02-2009, 09:07 PM

looks like i get the boner of the month award.

i should have added a fourth possibility...software.

Although im sure a good portion of it is technique...the noise reduction levels in the version of DPP that came with the camera defaulted at 10/20. Dropping it down improves the IQ tremendously.

The world is right again...the image quality of a 40d is infact better (barely...but thankfully not worse)than 350d.

vachss · 12-03-2009, 04:10 PM

100 feet out is pretty far to expect to get much bird detail out of a 200mm lens - even on a crop body. Figure even a big bird is maybe a foot tall so that means the image is about 200mm x ( 1 foot / 100 feet ) = 2mm tall on your 15 x 22 mm sensor.

Having your subject that small in the frame means that:

1. It's tough to get the AF point reliably on the target.
2. It's tough to get enough pixels to provide enough detail.

A high pixel density sensor like that on a 50D or 7D will help with the latter, but you really need to start throwing on a longer lens to help with both 1 and 2.

My recommendation is to run away and not think of shooting birds anymore. That way lies madness... (very expensive madness).

scollins · 12-04-2009, 02:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vachss

My recommendation is to run away and not think of shooting birds anymore. That way lies madness... (very expensive madness).

Or switch to shooting birds with a..........

.........SHOTGUN!

12-02-2009, 05:53 PM	#1
Dr_Jones Major 74 Rep 1,027 Posts Drives: Join Date: May 2008 iTrader: (0)	Lens or Camera...where to start? So im crossing Boston Common on Sunday and i see a hawk perched on a steeple (park and tremont) about 100' up and maybe 150' to 200' away. Had my second hand 70-200 f/4L and set the camera up for fast shutter (faster than 1/1000th) and reasonably wide depth of field (online calculator is telling me about 70' deep). I try to use the center point 1 shot AF to get the bird crisp but im really disappointed with how soft all the shots turned out...the bricks on the building seem reasonably sharp but not so much on the bird. The bird dives legs extended talons out and grabs a pigeon off of the sidewalk. i follow him all the way down...i did not have time to get the AF in servo and not one shot has the bird crisp. This is a second hand camera and a second hand lens? how would you diagnose the weak link...or is it just that the range is too long to expect sharpness for 200mm...or is my technique incorrect (stop down a bit and use a background object reasonably close to the bird get focus). This Fa-qer was really moving... __________________ Just like Indiana...I love my whip
	Appreciate 0 Tweet Quote

12-02-2009, 08:23 PM	#2
rodi . . . 188 Rep 2,391 Posts Drives: your FACE! Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Atlanta proper iTrader: (-1)	what's the camera? and that shouldn't be a lens that is THAT soft at wide-open. it's probably the camera or its AF. or your technique? __________________ 2009 135i \| space grey \| sport \| navi \| hifi \| heated dinan stage 2 software \| bmw performance exhaust kw v2 \| hotchkis front sway \| vmr v710
	Appreciate 0 Quote

12-02-2009, 09:07 PM	#3
Dr_Jones Major 74 Rep 1,027 Posts Drives: Join Date: May 2008 iTrader: (0)	looks like i get the boner of the month award. i should have added a fourth possibility...software. Although im sure a good portion of it is technique...the noise reduction levels in the version of DPP that came with the camera defaulted at 10/20. Dropping it down improves the IQ tremendously. The world is right again...the image quality of a 40d is infact better (barely...but thankfully not worse)than 350d. __________________ Just like Indiana...I love my whip
	Appreciate 0 Quote

12-03-2009, 04:10 PM	#4
vachss Captain 56 Rep 815 Posts Drives: Z4 Coupe Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ventura County, CA iTrader: (1)	100 feet out is pretty far to expect to get much bird detail out of a 200mm lens - even on a crop body. Figure even a big bird is maybe a foot tall so that means the image is about 200mm x ( 1 foot / 100 feet ) = 2mm tall on your 15 x 22 mm sensor. Having your subject that small in the frame means that: 1. It's tough to get the AF point reliably on the target. 2. It's tough to get enough pixels to provide enough detail. A high pixel density sensor like that on a 50D or 7D will help with the latter, but you really need to start throwing on a longer lens to help with both 1 and 2. My recommendation is to run away and not think of shooting birds anymore. That way lies madness... (very expensive madness).
	Appreciate 0 Quote