Achieving this level of sharpness (Page 6): Yes…but the advantages of the mirrorless body will give you more potential keepers than a DSlR will. And it is easy to get the whole bird in...

neillaubenthal

Yes…but the advantages of the mirrorless body will give you more potential keepers than a DSlR will. And it is easy to get the whole bird in focus with a 600…depends on light and aperture. DSLRs still make great images…but you will get more keepers with the newer tech…better frame rate and AF and sensors provide that…and the mirrorless part is only a small part of the advantage…better tech provides most of the advantage.

User ID

therwol wrote:

Go out and look. They're gone! I stole them and shipped them to California!

(They're actually Band Tailed Pigeons. They showed up around my house last year for two days and then disappeared.)

Migration path ?

User ID

neillaubenthal wrote:

Yes…but the advantages of the mirrorless body will give you more potential keepers than a DSlR will. And it is easy to get the whole bird in focus with a 600…depends on light and aperture. DSLRs still make great images…but you will get more keepers with the newer tech…better frame rate and AF and sensors provide that…and the mirrorless part is only a small part of the advantage…better tech provides most of the advantage.

A loud AMEN for frame rate ! There are a few mentions of "pose" in this discussion. Human reflexes being what they are, "pose" derives from frame rate. And even dialed down to an SLR-like frame rate, an EVF presents a more steady image with moving subjects. Crank it faster and acoarst no comparison is possible. And then theres Pro Capture (AKA Preburst).

MJPerini

SuperflyTNT wrote:

Sometimes that almost white background makes the shot.

Love the frog, love the background, it is white-ish has just enough detail to make it feel real.
What put me off in the other pic was he complete paper white looked a bit like a studio white background, with an eagle in flight. But as I said it is just a preference

therwol Loc: USA

User ID wrote:

Migration path ?

From the Pacific Northwest to Central California in the fall.

https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Band-tailed_Pigeon/maps-range#

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

MJPerini wrote:

Love the frog, love the background, it is white-ish has just enough detail to make it feel real.
What put me off in the other pic was he complete paper white looked a bit like a studio white background, with an eagle in flight. But as I said it is just a preference

Actually snapping turtle

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Tomfl101 wrote:

It doesn’t seem possible to have such high contrast and sharpness without post processing here. The background is completely void of detail while the eagle is well saturated. I’m skeptical.

Your comment was a reply to mine, in which I said, "Did Mr. Wells suggest he did no editing to the shot, and that he photographs in jpg only, no raw?"

To clarify, my question was rhetorical

I'm not skeptical, I'm positive the opening photo is processed and also that it's exactly how the photographer wants it to look.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Bushpilot wrote:

I wish folks were as concerned about composition and impact as they are about sharpness.

Your wish will never come true in UHH's main discussion forum.

There are, however, small groups of like-minded photographers in other sections of this site (I will share my buddy list with you, if you'd like

), and of course on other forums.

Artcameraman Loc: Springfield NH

I like your photo. Would like to see the RAW image to give a reply. Cheers.

Jerry Bruzek

CHG_CANON wrote:

Short answer: of course. Better processing of your... (show quote)

Great advice. Thank you!

therwol Loc: USA

Artcameraman wrote:

I like your photo. Would like to see the RAW image to give a reply. Cheers.

Who are you replying to? Use Quote Reply when replying to someone. Then the original post will appear above your reply.

User ID

Artcameraman wrote:

I like your photo. Would like to see the RAW image to give a reply. Cheers.

"See" ??!?!?! the raw "image" ??!?!?! Cannot show you my raw image cuz theres no image to see. IOW just no point in asking for it.

Raw files are invisible, and are most certainly NOT images. What school of "UHH expertise" were you proposing to offer if only you could "see the RAW image (sic)" ?!? The processed jpeg image is what you get to see, and what youll hafta deal with. Since you like it so well Ive reattached it below.

(Download)

cindo51

This is the first I’ve heard of Topaz Denise. I’ve been using the denoise in LR classic…
Is it better? And I’m assuming that the original photo has to be raw

Mark Sturtevant Loc: Grand Blanc, MI

Sharpness is often over-rated. Other things also make a good picture
And I say that even though I always run my keepers thru a sharpening filter.

User ID

Mark Sturtevant wrote:

Sharpness is often over-rated. Other things also make a good picture
And I say that even though I always run my keepers thru a sharpening filter.

A sharpening filter has long been SOP for any digital image made through an AA filter. IOW, theres nothing peculiar about your practice.