[fwcetus]

Does this help?

Hi, Mark. Hey - it looks like you caught him/her napping - <g>.

Cooper's -
All About Birds: Cooper's Hawk
http://content.ornith.cornell.edu/UEWebApp/images/MPR_012103_100059_L.jpg

Sharp-shinned -
All About Birds: Sharp-shinned Hawk
http://content.ornith.cornell.edu/UEWebApp/images/JSC_040802_00106D_L.jpg

I stilll thinks it's a Cooper's. However, as I noted previously, (1) I'm a zillion miles from an expert, and (2) hawks can be tough...

[Marc Sabatella]

Hi, Mark. Hey - it looks like you caught him/her napping - <g>.

Actually, no - just scratching an itch. I also caught him/her standing on one foot for no apparent reason, and in another shot answering the age-old question, "does a hawk s@#$ in the woods":



BTW, I was also hoping someone could have told me the sex from these shots, but no dice?

[fwcetus]

BTW, I was also hoping someone could have told me the sex from these shots, but no dice?

Very difficult from photos. As I understand it, the "easiest" (<g>) difference between sexes to spot is size, in both Cooper's and sharp-shinned hawks. While females in many raptors are larger than males, the difference from female to male is larger in these species than in most. (While Cooper's are larger than sharp-shinned hawks, the difference between male Cooper's and female sharp-shinned is small.)

[palmor]

Nice photos Marc. I think lot of people think is that a long lens is the key to birding photography but it really isn't. Knowing the subjects and learning their behaviors will get you closer then any super long lens, not to mention much more interesting shots. This is the real hard part of birding IMO, and something that takes a lot of patience and something I still need to do a lot of learning about.

- I've yet to get results from the Kenko 1.5 TC with *any* lens that better what one could get by simply cropping. Between that and the fact that it complicates focusing, I can see myself knocking out the glass someday to make myself an extension tube.

I will disagree on this point though. The Kenko 1.5x (at least mine) is a much better option then cropping. I will say the quality of the photo greatly depends on the lens you start out with so if you've been using it with the the 55-200 or 70-300 then I'd imagine you'd be disappointed. There was an article I read a while ago (can't find it now) that did a pretty comprehensive test between TC's and cropping and the TCs came out on top every time. It was done with a good quality prime (can't remember the exact lens).

This is a 100% shot of the DA*300 and Kenko 1.5x TC. There is no way that a 100% shot with the lens alone THEN cropping it another 1.5x would give results this good.

This is completely unedited, just cropped and saved as jpg (with no sharpening) in lightroom.

1/1000s f/8.0 at 300.0mm iso200



Here is what the final shot looked like

[Jewelltrail]

Danielchtong:As it was posing for me , I took chance of getting real close with a DA200mm .

You sure do have a way with those Blue Herons. I still remember the manual focus stuff you did with them in flight last year. These too are great shots, and show Marc's point about not, necessarily, needing long glass for birding. Great shots as always Daniel: I like the second from last most.

[Jewelltrail]

Danielchtong:Wow. Never thought of 67 as a birdie lens. Did you have it on your tripod? Fentastic images

Daniel

Thanks Daniel. Yes, these 2 shots were mounted on the inexpensive Dolica tripod I recently bought--I love the pod. I also shoot, walk-around style, with 67 lenses.

[Marc Sabatella]

I will disagree on this point though. The Kenko 1.5x (at least mine) is a much better option then cropping. I will say the quality of the photo greatly depends on the lens you start out with so if you've been using it with the the 55-200 or 70-300 then I'd imagine you'd be disappointed.

I'm sure you're right. I've also tried it on my A50/1.7, and found results OK, but again, no better than cropping. With my M200/4, I didn't actually compare against cropping, but against the 70-300 - and it was not as good. But I find the M200/4 not as good as the 70-300 even without the TC. So no matter how you slice it, right now, my best long options remain the 50-200 & cropping or the 70-300.

This is a 100% shot of the DA*300 and Kenko 1.5x TC. There is no way that a 100% shot with the lens alone THEN cropping it another 1.5x would give results this good.

No doubt - that's a great shot! I kind of doubt any of my lenses would do as well even without a TC (even aside from the difference in length). But it is encouraging to know the Kenko is capable of good results!

---

Last edited by Marc Sabatella; 04-23-2009 at 11:34 AM.

[Blue]

Based on this, photo, I'd lean towards Cooper's. The size perspective is tough on these due to individual differences.

Identifying Cooper's and Sharp-shinned Hawks

I have seen Sharp-shined hawks in NW Arkansas. They aren't as common there as the Coopers.

Does this help?

[ivoire]

Even with excellent stealth technique, I find that more shots could have been captured if I had a much longer lens. I'm not a fan of TCs', even though I own 3. They do allow me to get some shots that I would have missed. I understand the argument for cropping, but it often results in a "5x7" image whereas the TC use allows decent larger size images. So, I just went and replaced the Tokina 500mm I sold a while ago. Mirror lens bokeh can be fixed in photoshop.

[Jewelltrail]

Pentax 67 165mm f2.8 @ 400 ISO---f16---1/125th---Spot Metered--Big Crop

[Blue]

. . .

BTW, I was also hoping someone could have told me the sex from these shots, but no dice?

The sex of some species of hawks are next to impossible to identify even with "in hand" techniques. For example, the most reliable way to sex red-tailed hawk is to use dna testing which is about 98% reliable.

There are some behavioral differences that can give an indication depending on the species. For example, nest attentiveness can be an indicator in that females tend to be more attentive. Male Cooper's and sharp-shined usually migrate prior to females. Size is another indicator but can be problematic unless there is a pair of the same species present. As pointed out a Cooper's male may be the same size as a sharp-shined female.

[Douglas_of_Sweden]

Doug

One of the cutest images I saw for quite a little while
Absolutely adorable.
Rare that you focused on their eyes. Normally you can take them with mouths wide open.


Daniel

Thanks!
As you can see on the other pic, they opened up quite large as soon as the parents came with food.
The nest was built inside a copy of a iron age house, so it was pretty dark. I was standing fairly close to them, but could only aim roughly towards the sound they made and the dim shape of the nest, and had to use the built in flash. Worked well in some shots (so evidently SDM autofocus works in quite bad light despite all bashing of Pentax AF system), except when fooled by some of the straws that was hanging down from the straw grass. But with the built in flash, I even had to use the red eye-removal function in lightroom

[Blue]

I love hawks and owls.

[Jewelltrail]

Blue
I love hawks and owls.

With the Tamron LD 70-300mm 5.6 @200mm Wide Open JPG out of camera

[Blue]

Jewelltrail,

I have quite a few owls around my place, great barred, great horned, barn owls and screech but mostly barred. However, I haven't figured out a good way to find them in the trees at night. On rare occasions I catch them out slightly before dark.