Birds Juvenile Flamingo feeding

[Unframed Dave]

• ILCE-1
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/5
• 1/1600 sec
• ISO 400

 

[Wildebeest]

Hmm...how much more would you have to close the aperture to get full DoF?
Would ISO noise become a problem?
I have never shot with a lens that long, so I am asking because I don't know.

 

[Unframed Dave]

Hmm...how much more would you have to close the aperture to get full DoF?
Would ISO noise become a problem?
I have never shot with a lens that long, so I am asking because I don't know.

I don't really know either. It's not something I've tried. It's a wildlife specific lens and you pretty well always want to separate your subject from the background. I might try stopping it down on something static and see what it does at a typical wildlife distance.

 

[THXGEEK]

As I'm looking at the picture, I think I see an elongated hole in the upper beak.. Am I seeing that correctly?

 

[Unframed Dave]

As I'm looking at the picture, I think I see an elongated hole in the upper beak.. Am I seeing that correctly?

Yes, entirely normal.

They all have it, I'm afraid I'm not quite sure of it's function and Google is a bit vague. I'd always assumed it was a nostril, but now I'm not sure.

Anyone?

 

[THXGEEK]

Interesting. I'd never noticed that until now. I checked with The Google's AI and got the following:

"The nare (nostril) of a flamingo is a small opening located dorsally (on the top side) near the base of its large, specialized beak. It is often obscured by feathers or difficult to spot clearly in general photos"

Hey, what do you know? I learned something new today!

 

[Unframed Dave]

Interesting. I'd never noticed that until now. I checked with The Google's AI and got the following:

"The nare (nostril) of a flamingo is a small opening located dorsally (on the top side) near the base of its large, specialized beak. It is often obscured by feathers or difficult to spot clearly in general photos"

Hey, what do you know? I learned something new today!

Every day a school day!

 

[THXGEEK]

Every day a school day!

As long as there are no Pop Quizzes!

 

[Chris 3754]

I don't really know either. It's not something I've tried. It's a wildlife specific lens and you pretty well always want to separate your subject from the background. I might try stopping it down on something static and see what it does at a typical wildlife distance.

Would like to see some comparison shots if you try this.

 

[Wildebeest]

I don't really know either. It's not something I've tried. It's a wildlife specific lens and you pretty well always want to separate your subject from the background. I might try stopping it down on something static and see what it does at a typical wildlife distance.

Next time, I'd try to get rid of the focus blur.

 

[Unframed Dave]

Next time, I'd try to get rid of the focus blur.

There isn't any. It's absolutely sharp. When images are uploaded to the site, they are compressed. Makes some photos look absolutely awful.

 

[Wildebeest]

There isn't any. It's absolutely sharp. When images are uploaded to the site, they are compressed. Makes some photos look absolutely awful.

I am talking about the feathers on the neck. Not sharp.
But if it is good enough for you, OK.

 

[Unframed Dave]

I am talking about the feathers on the neck. Not sharp.
But if it is good enough for you, OK.

I see your point, and you've got me questioning things, which is good. I'm now unsure whether there is blurr or it's because the feathers are wet. The behaviour of flamingoes feeding means that the head and neck are almost always totally submerged.

This is pretty close to 2000 x 2000 pixels and so, should be uncompressed.

• ILCE-1
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/5
• 1/1600 sec
• ISO 400

This shot of a Ruff was only a record shot, but taken at the same time and almost the same settings (the only difference being a shutter speed of 1/2000 vs 1/1600). Distance and light were pretty much identical. It appears perfectly sharp.

• ILCE-1
• ISO 400

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Hmm...how much more would you have to close the aperture to get full DoF?
Would ISO noise become a problem?
I have never shot with a lens that long, so I am asking because I don't know.

On a 600 f4, probably 6.3-7.1 would be enough. On my 200 600 I shoot at 7.1 as a default because it's a perfect DOF. On the 400 800 I need more, f9 or 10, this is because of compression of perspective.

 

[iamdlewis]

Since DOF is determined by Focal Length, Aperture and distance to subject it is a little difficult to say what setting you would need to be at to say what would give you the DOF you want. So mess around with this: https://www.photopills.com/calculators/dof