ccook2004 Loc: Rockledge FL

This heron photo appears a little out of focus on the head and top of neck. I think the shutter speed was too high as I expected him to fly away and that would be the shot. He didn't fly. What do you think.

Photo info.
Canon 7D Mark II
Canon EF 100 mm f2.8L
ISO 800
f2.8
s 1/8000
Lighting was slightly overcast

(Download)

Fred Harwood Loc: Sheffield, Mass.

F2.8 means shallow depth of field. Also, the focus seems to be on the twigs behind the head, a difficult autofocus shot.
Yes, f/8 or 10 would have increased DOF.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

It appears that your camera focused on the green leaves behind the heron's head.

(I see Fred beat me by 10 seconds )

ccook2004 Loc: Rockledge FL

Thanks So if I had focused on his head at 2.8 the leaves would have been out focus instead?

ccook2004 Loc: Rockledge FL

Yes he was fast. But very helpful to have your opinion too. Thanks

Fred Harwood Loc: Sheffield, Mass.

The leaves would look like his head, fuzzy, and his head would be sharp. However, f/2.8 gives less focal depth than f/6, or 8, or 10. I seldom shoot with a wide-open lens; many lens are sharpest several stops higher.

sholland98 Loc: Benbrook, Texas

Always focus on the eye 👁 and shoot a short burst. Then pick the best eye for keeper. I never shoot wild life <1/1000 and faster is usually better. I also shoot wide open, let ISO auto adjust and run speed up for acceptable ISO if required by too much light. I also use BBF. Hope this helps and feel free to ask questions.

MadMikeOne Loc: So. NJ Shore - a bit west of Atlantic City

Use single point AF & put the focus point right on the eye. The fast SS has nothing to do with your out of focus situation. This is not a case of motion blur.

ccook2004 Loc: Rockledge FL

If I do this, will the body be out of focus?

ccook2004 Loc: Rockledge FL

Thank you

MadMikeOne Loc: So. NJ Shore - a bit west of Atlantic City

If the body is on the same plane as the eye, both should be in focus. The f2.8 gives an EXTREMELY narrow DoF. IMO, you could go down (aperture size-wise) to at least f5.6. Of course that will require an increase in ISO or a decrease in SS all else being equal. A combination of an adjustment in both ISO and SS can also be used. My usual subjects are birds (in flight as well as perched or on the beach), and one of the most frustrating and challenging things to achieve is getting more than one subject in the frame in focus if the subjects are not on the same focal plane. Even moving down to a smaller aperture does not always get the job done, especially in cases of sub-optimal lighting. If you only have one subject in the frame, are shooting with a wide aperture, and parts of said subject are on different planes, only the part of the subject and the parts on that same focal plane as your focus point will be in focus. As little as an inch or two off as far as the focal plane goes can render parts of your subject OOF. A few months ago, I was out shooting a family of Oystercatchers on the beach and was struggling with getting the parent and both chicks in focus. Even though they were very close together, they were not nicely lined up in the same focal plane. I was shooting at f5.6 and 500mm. Even going down to a smaller size f stop didn't help because of the focal length of my prime lens and my distance from my subject. I had to settle for the adult and one chick in focus and the other chick (just very slightly forward of the other 2) slightly OOF.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Clara, take a look at this depth of field calculator. I plugged in 25 feet distance, though I'm terrible at estimating other people's photos this way

But, at 25 feet, you have twice the depth of field if using f/5.6 rather than f/2.8

https://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

You have some very expensive gear; controlled tests and comparison of your results will be worth your efforts!

Ourspolair

You can put it into Canon DPP and see exactly where the focus point was. I did not do that, but it seems clear that the focus is on the quartz crystals in the rocks at the bird's "feet" just from enlarging the image to DDL.
f6.3 would probably have done the trick, and I expect that the "eye focus" mode /method would have got you the results you were looking for. Using a fixed aperture for widlife seems to be popular, with appropriate speed and leaving the camera to automatically adjust the ISO, but always try to focus on the eye nearest to you like in any portrait. I am sure you will get lots of feedback. Good luck, stay well and keep on shooting.

ccook2004 Loc: Rockledge FL

Thank you,

ccook2004 Loc: Rockledge FL

Checking it now, thanks