robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

I can picture those "I gotta try it now!" shots being taken before the packing materials had finished settling in the recycle bin. Remember when you were a kid and got "that toy"? Wrapping paper flying, box bouncing and you were caressing or playing with it before the air cleared. We can be just that way with our new camera gear. And it feels great.

Jim Bob

Yeah. You're probably right. Great insight. For me however, I would be posting what I considered some of my better images with my new stuff rather than "ho-hum" material. But I realize I'm weird that way.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

That is why they make these - http://www.ebay.com/itm/361657899371?_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT -

Jim Bob

Again, I'm with you. Some days I can do OK with those bigger zooms, especially in good light and with that Nikon 200-500, for some reason I can sometimes get acceptable images in less than ideal light. I'm convinced that lens has extraordinary optical stabilization since I get better hand-held results with it than either with the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary or the Tamron 150-600 version 1. But put any of them on a tripod and my hit rate dramatically increases. Bet the same thing will apply to this new Sigma. Hence the perplexing quandary about no lens collar.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Pretty good, actually. But it's hard to tell. I am taking shots that I wouldn't even have attempted when I used my 600mm F4 in a gimbal on a tripod. Keeper rate is not a measure - whether or not you get the shot you want is, however. My results are not a flash in the pan or isolated lucky shots. I have yet to use this lens on a tripod and totally enjoying the freedom. Where I shoot makes it hard to do BiF - everything is very close - Central Park, Bronx River, Prospect Park, etc - by the time the camera focuses on a BIF, it's headed away from you and all you get is a butt shot. And tiny birds like warblers, vireos, buntings, finches, wrens, thrushes etc are really hard to get even when they are not flying around. Birds in flight I find easier and less challenging than the little guys, btw. Next month I will be going to shoot the breeding grounds for Oystercatchers, Sandpipers, Piping Plovers, Common Terns and Black Skimmers - so there will be some good opportunities to get some birds in flight with the long lens. I am purposely leaving the big lens and tripod home, just for fun.

Oh, and it's not about boasting, here, it's about providing a second opinion on the definition of "sheer folly" and exactly what can be done handheld. I do completely understand that it doesn't work for you, but based on what I see during prime migration season, like the month of may, tripods and monopods are clearly in the minority. Most use 300 f2.8 with TCs, 400mm F5.6, 100-400 F5.6, and a few sturdy people actually use the newer and lighter Nikon FL lenses - the 500 and 600 F4 - all hand held. We all do it.

Jim Bob

Gene, you are probably an exceptional photographer with enviable skills. But for the rest of us mere mortals hand-holding those bad boys is a surefire guarantee to quality inconsistency.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

Your right, that sure is weird. Why would anyone buy a new lens and then post their best pictures when ho-hum images are "good enough" for most people. We are living in a world where mediocrity is becoming the standard many people aspire to. Just take a look at all the noisy, poorly exposed, poorly composed images that are posted here and have praise heaped upon them.

Jim Bob

Geesus. In a few pithy comments you have summed up the world in which we live. God help us all.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

Maybe we just need another flood so mankind can have a reboot. There would be some great photo ops.

Jim Bob

Point well taken. I have to laugh to keep from crying.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Jim, I am hardly an exceptional photographer, but thanks for the thought.

What I am is a pretty average photographer of 50 yrs, with decent skills, and a never ending thirst for knowledge and how to improve what I do. Seriously. Not being falsely modest. I do meet truly exceptional photographers all the time, and love the opportunity to learn at least one thing (hopefully more), from each of them. And as generous with their knowledge at they can be, I try to do the same here and in other areas. I teach and mentor beginners and working pros alike, and doing that helps me pay for new equipment without involving our household budget and "permission" from the wife.

What I do with a long lens is far from magic or exceptionally skillful. I just stand like a person on a rifle range, with my body aligned to the direction I am shooting (not facing front, but with my left shoulder pointed at my target), my left elbow is dug into my ribs, my left had supporting the lens from below, right finger pressing the shutter, and like Imagemeister says - using head and face to further stabilize the camera. If the subject is a perched bird, I breathe normally and wait until I exhale, pressing the shutter at the end of the exhale. If I am panning for a moving subject, I rotate at my hip to follow, not upsetting the equilibrium of my upper body. The quieter your upper body is, the better your "keeper rate" will be. A quiet upper body is something I taught intermediate and expert skiers to get them to stop crashing and make cleaner turns. It also works well for photography.

I recognize I am using the wrong camera for this - a D800 is hardly a "go to camera" for shooting active subjects. But I do get what I set out to get, most of the time, anyway. I'd say my keeper rate ranges between 10% and 30% or higher, depending on what I am shooting and where I am. With perched birds I can hit as high as 70% in good light, or as little as 10% in poor light, where the camera has trouble acquiring focus. The first image, the cowbird, was one of those - ISO 1000, but the best I could do was 1/30 sec. I totally relied on the bird not moving and the OS on the lens doing it's thing. I fired off 8 shots - I got 4 without movement from my camera, but in the other 4 the bird moved. Of the 4, the best composition was the one I posted, I have already deleted the others - so for this particular bird my "keeper rate" was 1 in 8, though 3 where technically ok, just not aesthetically to my liking. It varies like this all the time. Recently I was out west, and spent some time at Yolo Bypass nature reserve, and shot 75 pics of burrowing owls. All of them were in focus. But I only really liked about 6. Technically, my keeper rate was 100% - but from an aesthetic point of view, less than 10% were shots I was totally happy with.

silveragemarvel Loc: Keller, Texas

My post yesterday was moved by admin to the photo gallery. Here are some photos with some thought to exposure control. Same animals they tend to hang out on my property. I believe mrjcall wanted me to try f8.

Shot hand held

(Download)

Tripod, no OS, remote shutter release

(Download)

My setup

(Download)

Plieku69 Loc: The Gopher State, south end

Reading your comments with interest. I am in the market for just such a lens and do not wish to "pay" for a Canon. I have three Sigma's and all are excellent. As I read the marketing material they claim the weight is low enough to not need a collar. But, I used to write advertising copy, so I understand it's worth.
There is a Sigma demo coming to my local camera store in August, I guess I will be patient till then.
Ken

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Love your gimbal. I've been using the same one since 2006. I've taken 1000s of pics using it. Flawless, cheap, can probably hold 100bs without giving it a second thought.

I adapted it to use Arca Swiss plates by attaching an Arca-Swiss compatible clamp.

http://www.hejnarphotostore.com/product-p/f63.htm

The bolt pattern perfectly fits the pattern in the Manfrotto plate, and you can use three screws to attach it.