Kestrels in flight - Problems with sharpness! (Page 2): Thanks !

prcb1949 Loc: Ex Zimbabwe - Now UK

imagemeister wrote:

Your biggest problem is under exposure and the other problem is you are too far away for your focal length. As mentioned, expensive softwares application can help. If you shot raw, that can also help.
.

Thanks !

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

prcb1949 wrote:

Took the following shots this morning against very grey skies. I have done some PP on each of the originals. I am also including some image info as per windows 10 photo editor.

Your exposures were off. You need to meter any green tree or grass under the same lighting conditions as the bird is being exposed for. Most green objects reflect 18% of the light reaching them, same as a gray card, so metering a green tree or grass will give you a very accurate exposure reading.
Use manual, then raise your camera to the sky and shoot the birds.
Your most likely using auto and your camera meter is reading the sky and saying to itself, " boy that is bright, I need to stop down". Then you get underexposed images.
Use my method and your bird shots will improve.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

For a bird that's flying, they look pretty sharp.

Orphoto Loc: Oregon

The head and leading edge of the wings are very crisply sharp. Autofocus engaging on the bird is not the issue. I suspect aperture is wide open....but ordinarily that would provide adequate depth of field at this distance.

What if the autofocus system is front focussing? In other words the calibration is off and all that clear air in front of the bird is in focus while the back end of acceptable focus zone is catching the front of the bird only. Test this theory by taking stationary subjects on the ground and looking to see if the focal zone is shifted.

Theory #2, even though hovering, right wing is fluttering rapidly and you just need a faster shutter speed to freeze it.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Others have noted the images are underexposed. No one seems to have analyzed the EXIF for why. If using Aperture Priority, consider adding at least +1 on the Exposure Compensation and letting the ISO ride in AUTO-ISO.

(Download)

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

tgreenhaw wrote:

Although ISO 800 shouldn't be noisy, adjusting the exposure in post processing is bringing it out. The Noise is impacting sharpness.

I recommend using a program like Topaz AI to sharpen and remove noise before adjusting the exposure. Here is a quick example of what I mean.

The noise is due to under exposure. Even with gray skies shooting against the open sky I’d go 2/3 to a full stop +EC. Even with current state of the art noise reduction with enough noise you’ll lose some detail. Still a lot can be done there with the right tools. I wonder what camera and lens the OP used. Sensor size and vintage play a part.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

Rongnongno wrote:

If they were my shots, I would not even dare to post them in the bird gallery, where they belong.

I I would say the belong in the photo analysis forum. I believe there is one.

prcb1949 Loc: Ex Zimbabwe - Now UK

Rongnongno wrote:

If they were my shots, I would not even dare to post them in the bird gallery, where they belong.

You’re such a ray of sunshine 👏

prcb1949 Loc: Ex Zimbabwe - Now UK

billnikon wrote:

Your exposures were off. You need to meter any gre... (show quote)

I was shooting on Aperture priority. But thanks for the advice I’m looking forward to getting back there and try that out!👍

prcb1949 Loc: Ex Zimbabwe - Now UK

Orphoto wrote:

The head and leading edge of the wings are very cr... (show quote)

Thanks for your input will take these thing into consideration when out again!

prcb1949 Loc: Ex Zimbabwe - Now UK

tgreenhaw wrote:

Although ISO 800 shouldn't be noisy, adjusting the exposure in post processing is bringing it out. The Noise is impacting sharpness.

I recommend using a program like Topaz AI to sharpen and remove noise before adjusting the exposure. Here is a quick example of what I mean.

Thanks 👍

prcb1949 Loc: Ex Zimbabwe - Now UK

CHG_CANON wrote:

Others have noted the images are underexposed. No one seems to have analyzed the EXIF for why. If using Aperture Priority, consider adding at least +1 on the Exposure Compensation and letting the ISO ride in AUTO-ISO.

Ok - thanks for that it’ll be a week or so before there is a possibility of getting back there but looking forward to it.

prcb1949 Loc: Ex Zimbabwe - Now UK

SuperflyTNT wrote:

I I would say the belong in the photo analysis forum. I believe there is one.

Ok duly noted and thanks!

prcb1949 Loc: Ex Zimbabwe - Now UK

jerryc41 wrote:

For a bird that's flying, they look pretty sharp.

Thanks 👍

prcb1949 Loc: Ex Zimbabwe - Now UK

SuperflyTNT wrote:

The noise is due to under exposure. Even with gray skies shooting against the open sky I’d go 2/3 to a full stop +EC. Even with current state of the art noise reduction with enough noise you’ll lose some detail. Still a lot can be done there with the right tools. I wonder what camera and lens the OP used. Sensor size and vintage play a part.

Was using a D500 and a Sigma 150-600 Contemporary.