Jim-Pops wrote:
Amazing, I would never have believed you could get this much out of the original. Shooting RAW saved your picture, I'm fairly sure jpg would never have done this good and would have had a lot of noise.
Sure. I agree shooting RAW makes a big difference. Usually when I'm shooting wildlife (birds in particular) I shoot this lens wide open. As a result, I get the main subject in sharp focus and everything else out of focus, the amount of which depends on how far away things are from the main subject. Here, in this example, I accidently shot the birds on f/11. I never do that. I was very surprised that so many are in reasonably good focus after processing. So, was I able to achieve a useable photo (with f/11 and ISO 160) simply because I shot in RAW or are there other factors involved such as ISO invariance? Could this have been done with a camera that is not considered "ISO invariant"? Are there other possible factors I haven't considered?