TheDman Loc: USA

If they were taken from the same distance then you were zoomed in way closer, because in the photos on page 5 the birds take up about half the height of the image, while on page 1 they barely take up 1/10th the height.

MikWar Loc: Chicago, Western Suburbs

The pics on Page 1 were uncropped; those on Page 5 were cropped. Looking at the pics on Page 5 uncropped I would agree that I was closer to most of them. Also had better lighting in Page 5 pics.
Mike

MikWar Loc: Chicago, Western Suburbs

Now that's what I expected! I couldn't have gotten these pictures without your help!

I want to thank all the UHH members who made suggestions on how to improve my pictures using my new 100-400 lens. In particular Imagemeister, Robertjeri, Notorious T.O.D, PHRubin, Cat Marley, gessman, Bobspez, Amfoto1, and Woody4329 were persistent and patient with me. Below are some picts I took in the last two days using some of the suggestions: faster SS, using AI Servo, remove protective filter. Each of the pictures were hand-held. Most of them were tough shots - far away, flying past, in the "crap", poor lighting, jumping around. Yet they are 500% better than any previous pics.

What was the difference? Imagemeister suggested it in the third (of over 150) posts; Amfoto suggested it too; Woody4329 nailed it in his analysis of one of the original pictures of the bird on the ground. I'm 99% sure it was the protective filter. I purchased the lens with a filter package and immediately put on the UV filter. Every picture I took since Day 1 had the filter on it. And I thought just about every one of those pictures could have been better. Took off the filter 2 days ago and, Voila!

This is not to say that I couldn't get better shots (some of the ones below were "tests" to see if I could get the shot (i.e. very long distance, shooting into a mess of "crap"). I noticed how much camera shake I get - got to improve technique. I had to use manual focus in the "crap" - got to get better there. Need to figure out which lens stabilizer setting works best in different situations.

Sorry for the long post but I thought I owed it to everybody who took the time to help figure out the problem should get an explanation and a well-deserved pat on the back.
Mike

PS - I'm having rotator-cuff surgery Friday. I won't be able to lift the camera/lens for a least a month, probably 3 months. Ironic, huh?
.

White-throated Sparrow - in the middle of "crap"

(Download)

High up in a tree really far away (heavily cropped)

(Download)

Shooting into a lot of "crap". This wouldn't have turned out with the UV filter on.

(Download)

Terrible lighting conditions. Almost black down by the stream.

(Download)

Look at the middle one's tongue.

(Download)

Just a robin at sunset.

(Download)

Another one in the "crap".

(Download)

Golden-crowned Kinglet. A tiny bird jumping around in the "crap" with terrible lighting. I think I'll keep the lens.

(Download)

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

Yes Sir, Much improved...you are on your way now!!!

Best,
Todd Ferguson

TheDman Loc: USA

I'm 99.99% sure it was because you got closer, used a larger aperture, faster shutter speed, and cleaned up the busy backgrounds so the camera knew what to focus on. Those would have been exactly the same with the UV filter on.

MikWar Loc: Chicago, Western Suburbs

I'm going to test that. Take a picture with and without the filter and look for a difference. Let you know.
Mike

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Best wishes for the outcome of the surgery. I broke my right rotator-cup 14 years ago. The judgement was that surgery was not absolutely needed because the tendons and tissues were OK, just the bone break to heal and my choice was NO. When the weather makes a radical change in temp or air pressure I get aches in it.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

Much improved! You are on your way. Happy UHH was able to help.

IBM

Well you answered your own question , all you needed to do was put on the lens that worked out best , for that same shot

Woody4329

Very much improved!! The third from top seems to be very sharp. Good luck with your surgery. I hope all goes well and you have a speedy recovery>

IBM

If you know the fundamental operation of the working of your camera ,the main controls and what they do when you change
Them around , and how theyallreact with one another , when you do make some changes , then its clear sailing ,you just take a lot of pictures. And I mean a lot , it's not like film that I learned on , it was a lot slower process as I could not afford to buy film
Pay for developing and printing , or pay for a roll of slides maybe once every two weeks at most , or a roll of film once a month .there was no charge cards ,it was cash up front, and $40 a week did not go very far after rent car insurance, food for the
Family, but now you can go out and shoot hundreds of images and it is almost free , you can put them on disk ,the cloud , jump drives. There is no excuse for not knowing the full potential of your camera , man if we had images that were as cheap back then
As they are now we all would have had no trouble in learning how to make better use of our camera , you just keep shooting
Tell you get it right , when we went camping for two weeks , I bought two rolls. Of slides film 30 shots for each roll ,that had to last
14 days. Three small kids it was a task , my daughter has three kids, grown up now, but when they were younger, I would take
A couple hundred pic of them on a Sunday bar b q , , so keep shooting ,

kocart Loc: Illinois

In day light I am shooting manually and my starting setting is 1/2500 SS, f8.0, and iso 640 or 800. That’s a starting point and I shoot manually from there. I do poorly Hand held with anything below 1/1250 unless using a rest of some sort. A tripod in my experience is too unwieldy for birds especially quick moving warblers and such. I use the Nikon D810 or D500 paired with the Nikkor 80-400 lens usually at 400. Point focus always. I’m ever ready for that bird in flight.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

I looked at the second photo. 1/100 sec for 360mm is way too slow. 1/500 would be rule of thumb to minimize hand/camera movement. Have you tried faster shots?

IBM

These are about as good as your going to get , you seem to want to blow your birds up to fill the whole page , for that you must get closer than your getting , use spot metering , and a higher zoom like 500mm or 600mm , just get closer , or build a blind and sit in it all day , or when. Light is peak .