Nature Sigma 100-300 / Birds

Sigma 100-300 / Birds · 07:52 AM

I have mixed feeling about this first one. I kind of like the second blurred seagull in the frame but at the same time I find it distracting.

Both are crops.

**dadipentak** · 01-10-2010, 07:55 AM

Very nice work! I understand your ambivalence about the 2nd gull though--it is a distraction.

netuser · 01-10-2010, 08:27 AM

Great light on the second one.
#1 is kind of both ways, its distracting but also gives perpective and context.

gdog · 01-10-2010, 08:45 AM

Nice shots, in my opinion you should loose the crop a little so the second seagull to fit in better and give perspective. Always my opinion and nothing more.

OrenMc · 01-10-2010, 09:12 AM

Thanks for the comments!
So okay, here is a photo cropped without the second gull and a photo with no crop.

The one thing I don't like about the full image is the gull miniaturized. I just need more reach

8540tomg · 01-10-2010, 10:10 AM

Originally posted by OrenMc

Thanks for the comments! [snip]

The one thing I don't like about the full image is the gull miniaturized. I just need more reach

All bird shooters share your pain. 300mm is entry level for this sort of work. I started at that focal length and found it wanting. I added a 400mm and while it is better it isn't long enough for many shots. I imagine 600mm would be ideal ~ well you can see where this is going. It seems no lens is ever long enough when it comes to birding.

Tom G

jsherman999 · 01-10-2010, 10:12 AM

I like the second-bokeh-seagull-included version - gives the image just a bit more distinction.

Chwisch87 · 01-10-2010, 10:25 AM

The blurred second seagul could be PP out?

slowpez · 01-10-2010, 10:36 AM

I like these Oren and I'm divided on leaving blurred bird in. Both pictures have their place I think. I think you and you're 300 did well.

**dadipentak** · 01-10-2010, 11:37 AM

Originally posted by jsherman999

I like the second-bokeh-seagull-included version - gives the image just a bit more distinction.

I'm with Jay on this.

OrenMc · 01-10-2010, 11:39 AM

Originally posted by 8540tomg

All bird shooters share your pain. 300mm is entry level for this sort of work. I started at that focal length and found it wanting. I added a 400mm and while it is better it isn't long enough for many shots. I imagine 600mm would be ideal ~ well you can see where this is going. It seems no lens is ever long enough when it comes to birding.

Tom G

Thus the reason my next lens purchase will be a 300/2.8 that I will use 1.4x & 2x TCs reaching 420/4 and 600/5.6. I am trying to have a little patience here so I can get good price.
I just want to be set up for when I go to visit my son and grandkids in Wyoming. That area is well populated with eagles and hawks and not to mention wildhorses and other wildlife.

thanks again for all the comment.
It looks like the bokeh gull version gets more votes and I think I agree also.

OrenMc
	View full profile
	Contact via private message
	Find other posts by OrenMc
	Find threads started by OrenMc
	Find threads in which OrenMc has posted

01-10-2010, 11:37 AM	#10
dadipentak Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Baltimore, Maryland Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,590	Originally posted by jsherman999 I like the second-bokeh-seagull-included version - gives the image just a bit more distinction. I'm with Jay on this. Last edited by dadipentak; 01-10-2010 at 02:33 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Nature Some Backyard Birds with new Sigma 100-300mm F/4	rcn82	Post Your Photos!	2	01-18-2010 10:43 AM
Tamron adaptall 300/2.8 or Sigma 100-300/4	pinholecam	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	11-07-2009 05:52 AM
Tamron 300/2.8, Sigma 100-300 F4, 1.7 AF TC images: A link to the DPR froum.	pcarfan	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	0	02-07-2009 08:48 PM
Wildlife & sports tele: DA*300 vs Sigma 100-300 f4	dspdx	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	08-28-2008 09:27 PM
Sigma 100-300 APO vs New Pentax 300	dylansalt	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	07-24-2008 05:44 AM

01-10-2010, 07:55 AM	#2
dadipentak Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Baltimore, Maryland Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,590	Very nice work! I understand your ambivalence about the 2nd gull though--it is a distraction.

01-10-2010, 08:27 AM	#3
netuser Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Azores Islands, Portugal Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,236	Great light on the second one. #1 is kind of both ways, its distracting but also gives perpective and context.

01-10-2010, 08:45 AM	#4
gdog Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Lydia Kavala Photos: Gallery Posts: 125	Nice shots, in my opinion you should loose the crop a little so the second seagull to fit in better and give perspective. Always my opinion and nothing more.

01-10-2010, 09:12 AM	#5
OrenMc Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,901 Original Poster	Thanks for the comments! So okay, here is a photo cropped without the second gull and a photo with no crop. The one thing I don't like about the full image is the gull miniaturized. I just need more reach

01-10-2010, 10:10 AM	#6
8540tomg Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Waterloo, Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,461	Originally posted by OrenMc Thanks for the comments! [snip] The one thing I don't like about the full image is the gull miniaturized. I just need more reach All bird shooters share your pain. 300mm is entry level for this sort of work. I started at that focal length and found it wanting. I added a 400mm and while it is better it isn't long enough for many shots. I imagine 600mm would be ideal ~ well you can see where this is going. It seems no lens is ever long enough when it comes to birding. Tom G

01-10-2010, 10:12 AM	#7
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	I like the second-bokeh-seagull-included version - gives the image just a bit more distinction.

01-10-2010, 10:25 AM	#8
Chwisch87 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Atlanta, GA Photos: Gallery Posts: 317	The blurred second seagul could be PP out?

01-10-2010, 10:36 AM	#9
slowpez Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: South Carolina, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 18,462	I like these Oren and I'm divided on leaving blurred bird in. Both pictures have their place I think. I think you and you're 300 did well.

01-10-2010, 11:39 AM	#11
OrenMc Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,901 Original Poster	Originally posted by 8540tomg All bird shooters share your pain. 300mm is entry level for this sort of work. I started at that focal length and found it wanting. I added a 400mm and while it is better it isn't long enough for many shots. I imagine 600mm would be ideal ~ well you can see where this is going. It seems no lens is ever long enough when it comes to birding. Tom G Thus the reason my next lens purchase will be a 300/2.8 that I will use 1.4x & 2x TCs reaching 420/4 and 600/5.6. I am trying to have a little patience here so I can get good price. I just want to be set up for when I go to visit my son and grandkids in Wyoming. That area is well populated with eagles and hawks and not to mention wildhorses and other wildlife. thanks again for all the comment. It looks like the bokeh gull version gets more votes and I think I agree also.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search