Tronjo Loc: Canada, BC

Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

There's nothing wrong with your shot. Under exposed is always better than over exposed because it's not possible to bring back blown highlights. I spent less than 60 seconds in Photoshop with your thumbnail to get a good image.
Clicked on auto color, auto tone, auto contrast, then pushed a few sliders in shadows/highlights.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Hi Tronjo - are you suggesting that the best way to "get it right" is in the camera - and that PPing exposure and WB will have a detrimental effect on photos?

CamB Loc: Juneau, Alaska

A few things. It's just under exposed. If you need hi ISO to get the shot then crank up the ISO. Don't worry about noise. Fears of too much noise are highly over rated. If you don't get a picture because you're afraid of noise then you've got nothing. Next, use your histogram. It works in every mode and quickly tells you if the exposure is alright. Take that polarizing filter off and bury it in your camera bag. It is for a very specific purpose, which is not to protect your lens, and sucks up almost two stops of light. Even with a polarizer though, you can get the exposure right. Exposure is exposure. Once you know how much light is present (using your histogram) you can adjust your settings, including ISO, to get the picture you are after. And shoot RAW.
..Cam

JDawson Loc: Boise, Idaho

Check to make sure that you don't have bracketing turned on.

This may sound condescending, but by no means is that my intent. I've had this facepalm moment quite a few times.

John

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

800 is not high ISO on your D7100. Crank it up!

JDawson Loc: Boise, Idaho

I disagree. Start with the shutter speed. A setting of 1/1600 is too fast. Set the ISO to 100, and the shutter to 1/200 and then go faster if needed to get the metering where it needs to be.

John

Joe Blow

To echo others, it is impossible to determine the problem without the EXIF information. When you upload the photo, make sure you click on the (store original) box. That allows others to d/l the same shot you posted and see the EXIF information.

From your post, this was done at Tv 2000, ISO 200, and ? Ap. I think you're using an 80D.

From the seat of my pants guessing, your Tv (shutter) is too fast and your ISO is too slow. Assuming you're using a kit lens, most likely you're Av (aperture) is limited to a maximum of 4.0.

Try setting your camera on Av priority and adjust to around 7.6 or 8.0. Set the ISO at 800. Program the camera to shoot in RAW + JPG Fine. Check your exposure. If your shutter is slower than 320 then boost your ISO to 1600. If the shutter is faster then you're fine. Shoot a couple of shots and increase your exposure one stop + and again one -.

JDawson Loc: Boise, Idaho

Or, take a shot in program mode and see what the camera calculates then switch to manual, start with those settings and tweak as needed. That will get you closer quicker.

John

CamB Loc: Juneau, Alaska

Yes. Great way to start.
..Cam

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

And I disagree with your disagreement. How often do you shoot birds in flight at 1/200 sec?

JDawson Loc: Boise, Idaho

The OP didn't mention birds in-flight. Herons and egrets often stand near or in the water.

My advice was to improve the overall exposure. The birds aren't a problem if you can't see them due to underexposure. ;-)

John

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

This is what I was going to suggest... Switch to program mode and see what shutter speed and aperture the camera chooses. That should get you in the ballpark. HOWEVER, first:

1. Be sure you have Auto ISO turned off. Select the ISO yourself. Then if the camera is flashing the aperture/shutter speeds and/or ISO, it's warning you that ISO is too low and you should increase it.

2. Also check that you have Exposure Compensation zeroed out... that you don't have any minus or plus E.C. dialed in (minus E.C. more likely, since that would cause underexposure).

3. Do yourself a favor and buy a copy of Bryan Peterson's "Understanding Exposure". It sounds as if you are just guessing at making manual settings... which is sure to lead to disaster. Get that book, read it, understand it and you will be able to make much better choices, using the tools that you have at hand (the camera's built in metering system, as well as it's various exposure modes and the histogram).

Previous response that "underexposure is better than overexposure" is incorrect. In fact, when you need to adjust an image A LOT (as in this case) to increase exposure in order to correct for extreme underexposure, you will massively increase image noise along with it. Digital is actually more tolerant of SLIGHT overexposure than most people realize. In other words, it's harder to blow out highlights than you might think. However you have to be careful to not go too far with it. The goal, of course, is actually to make "correct" exposures... neither under- nor over-exposed... in any given situation.

A polarizer is a terrible choice for a "protection" filter because it costs you one to two stops of light, depending upon the setting of the filter. If you feel you must "protect" your lens from unknown dangers with a thin, fragile piece of glass, get a "UV" or completely clear filter instead. But before you shell out money for one, you might want to watch this video to see what - if anything - the filter is actually likely to do for you... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0CLPTd6Bds

CamB Loc: Juneau, Alaska

I disagree with you disagreement too. For almost anything that moves you are not going to be shooting at ISO 100 or a shutter speed of 200. Both of those are going to be much higher. Don't be afraid of HI ISO or too much noise. The noise problem is highly over rated and for most cameras is a thing of the past.
..Cam

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

Look at the posted picture. Birds in flight.