.....Shots taken 40 feet away.

Hummingbird with killer bee photo bomb

[clackers]

Seems to be noisy and losing detail at ISO 2500, Lmcfarrin, but I like the shots.

I thought #2 was my favourite with more of the hummingbird presenting itself, but you're right, the bee in #3 makes that one special - well done!

BTW, I have two 1" cameras.

[BigMackCam]

These are great photos in terms of the action captured

I agree with @clackers that there's rather a lot of noise and detail smudging. Having said that, I suspect these are straight-out-of-camera JPEGs and quite heavily cropped, yes? Shooting RAW and using something like Lightroom for post-processing could work wonders here. It would make short work of the magenta and green colour noise in the shadows, and allow for more gentle luminance noise-reduction, which would retain more detail.

Thanks for sharing

[Lmcfarrin]

Thanks for the responses. I'm not using a pro level post processing program, and these shots are 40 feet away. As I have been using this camera to photo hummingbirds at this distance the photos keep improving. Basically, a so called consumer level camera is grabbing images rumored to not be expected. That said, put this camera in the hands of someone more technical, more knowledgeable than me, and a pro level post processing program - you have pro level equipment for $1300 vs. ($7000, lens alone) to pull shots off at that distance to not only freeze the wings, but see details as small as a bee at 40 feet.

I'll take what's in the image over the noise at that distance.

---

Last edited by Lmcfarrin; 08-25-2017 at 04:37 AM.

[normhead]

40 feet away is a long way away for hummers. 25 feet away.. Tamron 300 2.8 with HD DA 1.4 TC on a K-3.

Get closer....


8 feet away.


On a small sensor you don't need ƒ8, try ƒ4. That will let you reduce your ISO but maintain your shutter speed.

[Lmcfarrin]

Outstanding shots! The camera has technical limitations and I can't configure past F8 at that distance. Also, I'm not a pro, I've just started in May, 2017 shooting birds in motion. My excitement is knowing ONE camera system with ONE lens can do what other cameras can at a reduced price (although not as well, but good enough), but those cameras will require numerous lenses and will be more costly. I love Pentax, have silver K-3 II and a K-5, but no other camera I'm aware of can compete with this SINGLE LENS and SINGLE CAMERA system features and versatility.

I'm not a Sony Fab Boy. I'm respecting their innovation and hopefully Pentax will too. Otherwise, at the rate Sony is advancing, my Pentax cameras and numerous lenses will become orphans.

[normhead]

Outstanding shots! The camera has technical limitations and I can't configure past F8 at that distance. Also, I'm not a pro, I've just started in May, 2017 shooting birds in motion. My excitement is knowing ONE camera system with ONE lens can do what other cameras can at a reduced price (although not as well, but good enough), but those cameras will require numerous lenses and will be more costly. I love Pentax, have silver K-3 II and a K-5, but no other camera I'm aware of can compete with this SINGLE LENS and SINGLE CAMERA system features and versatility.

I'm not a Sony Fab Boy. I'm respecting their innovation and hopefully Pentax will too. Otherwise, at the rate Sony is advancing, my Pentax cameras and numerous lenses will become orphans.

I'll try and get a few images with my XG-1 some time later today. I'm out this morning.

There has to be a way to lower your ƒ-stop. My XG-1, a small sensor camera shoots at ƒ4.3. ƒ8 on a small sensor camera is going to lose resolution due to diffraction not just from the high ISO.

[Lmcfarrin]

... try those shots at 40 feet.

I'll mess with camera and see about F4.

[clackers]

. My excitement is knowing ONE camera system with ONE lens can do what other cameras can at a reduced price (although not as well, but good enough).

Well, good enough to ID a bird, I agree, but beyond that, LMcF, I think you can see that Norm's shots are ... well, very different.

I mean, if you were the editor of a wildlife magazine you'd have no problem publishing his, right?

[Lmcfarrin]

Right. His images are outstanding. I'm at no Mans Land limits of this camera. I'm optimistic if i move into 25 feet I could do much better. I'll continue my education and hope to get mine to hisvlevel. As stated, I'm not a pro but I can ID a bird at 600mm then ID an ant in macro and never change my lens.

[bluestringer]

I set my feeder up outside my shed, and shoot from inside through a window at about 6-10 ft. The window gives me a hiding spot. I set up the camera on a tripod and use flash.

[Lmcfarrin]

Well, good enough to ID a bird, I agree, but beyond that, LMcF, I think you can see that Norm's shots are ... well, very different.

I mean, if you were the editor of a wildlife magazine you'd have no problem publishing his, right?

.. as I said good enough - good enough to attract the attention of a family and inspire an 11 year old to do the same or better. Its natures interaction within the photo, thats my purpose for sharing. The 11 year old and her family don't care about noise.

[clackers]

It's not just the noise, Lawrence, to be honest. I was trying to emphasize the positive in my first post.

The details have been destroyed on the bird and there are blown highlights on it because the 1" sensor's dynamic range isn't up to it.

I'm sure you can see it just doesn't look like other people's photos.

But I'm glad they have helped a young person develop an interest in this great hobby of ours anyway. They're much better off creating pictures than playing Xbox.

I have a good understanding of that sensor's advantages and limitations. I own more of them than you!

I also own a Canon bridge camera that has a massive 65x zoom range, lousy IQ but fine for IDing. No mythbusting achieved with it, either.

[Rondec]

Those are OK photos, but I agree with Clackers, I don't think they bust any myths. They show what you get when you push the max of your gear. This was shot with a K5 and a 55-300 lens. Probably the sort of set up you could purchase used now for 350. Technically, the 300mm isn't ideal for birding as it isn't quite long enough, but it does work...

I have recommended Bridge Cameras to plenty of people. In particular, they need a lot of light to give good results. The idea that you are going to come anywhere close to the output of even an older APS-C camera with a consumer lens with it is probably not true. But people don't shoot them because they give awesome results, but because they are an all-in-one solution. You could get an 18-300 super zoom for your APS-C camera, but it would have a lot of limitations too -- slow on the long end and with lots of weak areas, distortion, etc.

In the end, regardless of gear, the best way to get good bird photos is to get close and use good technique. Using a 600mm lens is no substitute. It's why Norm shoots from a blind and why his bird images are such good quality.

[savoche]

A small camera with a "good at everything, great at nothing" lens is sometimes the best camera. Small means it's probably with you, versatile lens means you get the shot. Heck of a lot better than not getting it

The tricky bit is to learn to work around its weaknesses. Given enough light they usually do quite well, though. I use my phone when I have to, and the little Olympus Tough will survive anything and still give ok-ish images. Having RAW mode will give you a lot more to work with when trying to save some detail when the ISO starts climbing.

One might even say that getting good results with a small sensor is more demanding. A larger sensor gives you a lot more room for correcting your errors when post processing.