Panning shot of a Seagull: Well, I've been out practicing a little bit. I plan to go back, but this is what my first attempts at panning look like with my new lens. Sigma 150-500...

Nightski

Well, I've been out practicing a little bit. I plan to go back, but this is what my first attempts at panning look like with my new lens.

Sigma 150-500 F/5.0-6.3 @500mm

IS0 400
F6.3
1/640 second exposure

Seagull in flight

(Download)

birdpix Loc: South East Pennsylvania

Very nice shot of a white seagull against a dark, OOF background. Well focused. Cropped so that it has room to fly into. I see progress being made here, Sandra! Congrats!

Nightski

Thank you, Birdpix. That means a lot coming from you. I can't wait to get back there. I want to get some splash down shots. I did get a couple of blurry ones. It's hard. I was starting to pick up a sort of rhythm before I had to go. I think lots of practice is needed. Then probably every birds flight pattern is different. :roll:

Erv Loc: Medina Ohio

I would say your practice is almost perfect Sandra. I was wondering if you could have better DOF if you upped the ISO and got to go up to F8 or higher? The eyes are tack sharp but not the tail area.
Erv

Nightski wrote:

Well, I've been out practicing a little bit. I plan to go back, but this is what my first attempts at panning look like with my new lens.

Sigma 150-500 F/5.0-6.3 @500mm

IS0 400
F6.3
1/640 second exposure

xxredbeardxx Loc: San Clemente CA.

Nightski wrote:

Well, I've been out practicing a little bit. I plan to go back, but this is what my first attempts at panning look like with my new lens.

Sigma 150-500 F/5.0-6.3 @500mm

IS0 400
F6.3
1/640 second exposure

Nice detail in your bird shot.
This is so very hard to do. At least for me it is.
I think 1/640 is a bit slow for this, but it sure did the job
in this case. You may want to try 1/800 or even
1/1000.

I am so lens envious. I want that lens, very much.
Every time I'm almost there I break the piggy bank
for something else.

Nightski

xxredbeardxx wrote:

Nice detail in your bird shot.
This is so very hard to do. At least for me it is.
I think 1/640 is a bit slow for this, but it sure did the job
in this case. You may want to try 1/800 or even
1/1000.

I am so lens envious. I want that lens, very much.
Every time I'm almost there I break the piggy bank
for something else.

I did sacrifice speed for a lower ISO. It was a conscious gamble. I would have liked to have more DOF. I think the wings may have been sharper ... or maybe that higher shutter speed would have made them sharper. I'm just starting out in this genre of photography. Until now I've gone for birds that are fairly still.

Look for deals on Ebay for that lens. They are there. :-)

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

Nightski wrote:

Well, I've been out practicing a little bit. I plan to go back, but this is what my first attempts at panning look like with my new lens.

Sigma 150-500 F/5.0-6.3 @500mm

IS0 400
F6.3
1/640 second exposure

Nice panning job, Sandra! The eye, beak, and head plumage are sharp. The 1/640 shutter didn't quite stop the wing's motion blur at its point of maximum downthrust speed. Due to the motion blur, it's difficult to determine if the wing tips were also on the ragged edges of the DOF. But your panning action could not be improved!
Obviously, practice pays off!
Way to go!

Dave

Nightski

Uuglypher wrote:

Nice panning job, Sandra! The eye, beak, and head plumage are sharp. The 1/640 shutter didn't quite stop the wing's motion blur at its point of maximum downthrust speed. Due to the motion blur, it's difficult to determine if the wing tips were also on the ragged edges of the DOF. But your panning action could not be improved!
Obviously, practice pays off!
Way to go!

Dave

Thank you for the encouragement, Dave. I suppose it will take a bit to figure out that sweet spot between shutter speed and DOF.

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

Nightski wrote:

Thank you for the encouragement, Dave. I suppose it will take a bit to figure out that sweet spot between shutter speed and DOF.

Ab-so-tively! Birds wings in strong flight move fast. We don't ever naturally see then stopped in time. I prefer the bird's body sharp, its upper wings sharp, and could not care less about a bit of motion blur at the wing tips...indeed, I prefer that to an image that looks like a masterpiece of the taxidermist's art mounted in a flight position and hanging from the ceiling in a museum diorama. Just personal opinion, and certainly in marked disagreement with the "Stop all motion at all costs" school of BIF photography . A bit of wing tip blur permits me to hear ...no, it demands that I hear the rush and vibration of air between the primary feathers.

Dave

xxredbeardxx Loc: San Clemente CA.

Uuglypher wrote:

I prefer the bird's body sharp, its upper wings sh... (show quote)

How funny you say it like that Dave. You should write books.
Thats the perfect description.
I feel the same way about my surfer shots. I went from 1/1000 to 1/800 for the same reason.
I want to feel the wave "swoosh' in the shot. Haa. If there is such a word.
Thanks for explaining so clearly how I feel about that.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Nightski wrote:

Well, I've been out practicing a little bit. I plan to go back, but this is what my first attempts at panning look like with my new lens.

Sigma 150-500 F/5.0-6.3 @500mm

IS0 400
F6.3
1/640 second exposure

Nicely composed by positioning the subject where you did. The exposure provides a very nice contrast between the subject and the background. Lastly, the focus is quite sharp.
--Bob

Graham Smith Loc: Cambridgeshire UK

Nightski wrote:

Well, I've been out practicing a little bit. I plan to go back, but this is what my first attempts at panning look like with my new lens.

Sigma 150-500 F/5.0-6.3 @500mm

IS0 400
F6.3
1/640 second exposure

I like this Sandra, the focus on the eye is good, your panning worked well. As Dave said blur on the wing tips add movement and life to a BIF. Your positioning of the bird in the frame gives it room to fly.

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

xxredbeardxx wrote:

How funny you say it like that Dave. You should write books.
Thats the perfect description.
I feel the same way about my surfer shots. I went from 1/1000 to 1/800 for the same reason.
I want to feel the wave "swoosh' in the shot. Haa. If there is such a word.
Thanks for explaining so clearly how I feel about that.

My pleasure, RedBeard!
It's nice to know there are "kindred ears" out there receptive to the resonance of my personal thoughts and words. Absent those who understand them, ones words are of no meaning.
I'm glad you are there!
And I'm glad you chose to mention the "swoosh" and splash of flowing and falling water. I love the sight and sound of moving water, as opposed to its being brushed out into a milky, blurred flow of folds of silent satin cloth.
Best regards, xxRBxx
Good to hear from you.
Dave

Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.

Nightski wrote:

Well, I've been out practicing a little bit. I plan to go back, but this is what my first attempts at panning look like with my new lens.

Sigma 150-500 F/5.0-6.3 @500mm

IS0 400
F6.3
1/640 second exposure

:thumbup: :thumbup:

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

Nightski wrote:

... first attempts at panning look like with my new lens. 1/640 second exposure

Your shooting technique looks pretty good there.

Increasing the ISO to gain a little shutter speed would have brought more noise into your background.