Great one cwilson The light captures their eye color beautifully.

Really great shot! Like everyone else said, that's one you print and hang on the wall. Before you do, just get rid of the lens dust spots in the left side of the picture (Same latitude as the light house). There's a ton of them hanging out over the ocean ;)

Nice

Thanks for the thumbs up ramled :)

Thanks Jeff. I like the color too, and it comes out a bit different whether processed through lightroom or DPP.

I hear ya.

Thanks cmc65! I got the 1DxII when it came out last May. I don't list them for a reason....they're too over the top. Just doesn't seem right for UHH.

Yes there is a way you can crop and still get excellent detail.

First your settings: Shoot for the lowest ISO possible to eliminate detail killing noise. Anywhere between 1/250 sec to 1/400 sec shutter and aperture of f9-f5.6, should yield an ISO close to 100 with a full moon. Of course there are variances, but you have to experiment.

If you are handholding (like I do) make sure your lens has good image stabilization. Hold your breath when taking the picture. Stabilize the camera with your arms on your knees sitting down with your back against something. Take tons of pictures!!! One will be good Otherwise use a tripod.....and still take tons of pictures.

70-200 is a little too short to get great detail, but should provide at least satisfactory results. Your image should be much better at 200mm (I am assuming that is the focal length you choose). 400mm is better and 600mm even better. A cheap 600mm option is the Tamron 150-600mm version 1. I have a lot of shots here on UHH using that lens. You could probably get it used for under $600, maybe even less.

Of course, the more megapixels the better ( you didn't say what body you were using).

I vote #2. The softness quality of the white water with the rest of the picture being sharp (which you were both trying to achieve) is better in # 2. That is the main reason I pick # 2. The slightly different focal lengths is subjective, composition is basically the same (except for focal length), but #2 has better overall image quality.

Both pictures are too small, but #1 is a much smaller picture (#1 is 1000x666 V. #2 at 1400x933). If a picture's dimensions are smaller than filling the frame of a 1080 monitor, I generally don't like it. We have big screens and fast internet.....don't make your pictures like thumbnails. If you view both pics on a cell phone, your eyes fool you as they both appear similar in size but #1 has more contrast, which your brain interprets as better.

Overall you both did a great job and are pretty much equal. #2, go to the seafood section of the menu and order up! Preferably something with lobster tail or some other expensive dish :)

A few shoots with slightly different head positions. Canon 1Dx II with 600mm IS II F4 and 2x Extender III on a tripod

I cropped away almost half the picture to get in tighter than even 1200mm allowed.

All at 1/1600 sec F8 ISO 250 (wide open with 2x TC)

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

He was a good boy. So sorry. Last month I lost my 18 y.o. cat, who thought he was a dog (super friendly, not scared of anyone, met me at the door every night)....I feel your pain. God bless Steve.

Fantastic hand held shot Extreme feather detail

I got rid of all my stuff too

Karin, I really like the weeping tree at the shoreline. Very compelling, draws you in and has wonderful branch/leaf movement. Lovely mood!

Wow great images Nice post on #2...D810 showing its stuff there.