The question put forth by BillA was in regards to an abbreviation contained within the program eBird. This program is basically intended for BIRDERS and usually not the general public. It appears to me that that is not one of your interests. This application/program is one created by the Cornell Lab of Ornithology as a resource for research, conservation and education in dealing with the world bird population. We as birders record information such as specie type, location etc on all birds throughout the world which is then put into databases to be used for research. Yes, you probably would have no idea what the codes mean if you saw them, but why would you care? And yes they are posted basically only for the benefit of other birders as unless you are a birder you will never see them. The codes I mention and BillA talks about can only be seen on the eBird website which unless you register/join cannot access. And why would you if your not a Birder????
As for the alligator at Blue Springs there could be a list of abbreviations for them there. I dont really know if theres is or not. (I doubt it as being an active member of iNaturalist i've not ever seen or heard of one)
So please don't chastise us for using something that is beneficial within the world of Birding. Instead become a BIRDER and join us in the creation of a larger eBird database to assist in further research.

LittleRed (Ron)

Sadly most of the time this is not really realistic when using the app eBird in the field. Most of the sightings made are done “on the run” using a small mobile device. Instead of having to punch in long words/sentences on a miniature keyboard birders use abbreviation codes. These can refer to many items such as locations, types of birds, and breeding. For example one could use the breeding code ON rather than typing in the statement “occupied nest”. Or you could use the code FO instead of “flyover”, or the code FOY instead of “first of the year”. At times you may have to refer to another type of bird that is seen with the species your recording. In that case while standing in the swamp it is much easier to punch in the ABA code GBHE rather than Great Blue Heron. So you can see the use of these codes are usually necessary.
To my knowledge there is no real list for general codes on eBird but I may be wrong. Never seen one and have been a eBirder for many moons. The only lists I can remember that are recorded in use on eBird are “breeding codes” and “ABA bird species codes”.
As for the code HO it is one I’m not familiar with. Can’t even take guess without knowing how it was used within the comments area on eBird. I myself on many occasions have used codes including ones that probably others may not recognize but ones for my personal benefit. Maybe this code is likewise.

LittleRed (Ron)

Thanks Stephen for the kind words. I was quite pleased to get even a few fair-2-midlin pics considering the light I had available.

LittleRed (Ron)

Thank you Curmudgeon looking and commenting. Yes, they do serve very well in what I use them for.

LittleRed (Ron)

Yes I agree that it would be better if I gave my feathered friends a wee more room. I guess that’s one of my failings, making the subject “fill the frame”. A bit of a bad habit but in some ways necessary for my purpose. Most of my pics are attached to birding reports sent to the eBird (Cornell Lab) website. These pics are then included in the Macaulay Library database which in turn is the basis for the photo recognition app Merlin. So I think in my case the size I show is a better requirement for the use intended. For anybody looking to ID any bird they photograph that they don’t know this is a lifesaver. It’s quite accurate and getting better as the number of pics in the library increases. Happily I know that in a small way I’m making that happen. (Sadly the Merlin program is only available on mobile devices.)
As for “noise” in most cases I don’t even consider it, unless I want to print out a large pic, either for myself or for sale.
I value everybody’s opinions as I find they are a lot of the time of value to me, whether I agree or not. Even at my age leaning heavily on my 8th decade one has much to learn.
I thank you kindly for looking in and the interesting comments.

LittleRed (Ron)

Thank you kpmac for looking and commenting.

LittleRed (Ron)

Alas I agree that by using a much better PP program these pictures could be much more presentable. But I am not really interested in working with any upscale program like Lightroom. My main interest is as a Naturalist/Birder who uses my camera to record all wildlife I see. This data is then recorded with photos to websites such as iNaturalist and eBird (Cornell University). Normally I’m not really concerned as to the how good/bad my photos are but rather the data it contains. But I’m always interested in how to improve my picture taking ability. In this case I was just happy to be able to catch the little scoundrels on the wing. Like I said it was very overcast/dark with periods of heavy snow during this shoot. If the present flock sticks around for much better weather I’ll try and give it another go. (However the forecast shows basically no improvement for the next week or so with a call for more snow about the 10th of this month)🤬🤬🤬🤬.
I thank you kindly looking in and giving me your observation, tis appreciated.

LittleRed (Ron)

Laid up with a broken knee, weather is bad (seems like every day), gotta keep busy so spent some time trying to catch a fair to middling pic of a small songbird called a Common Redpoll (these little buggers are fast). Got a few, not as good as I hoped for but considering the weather conditions (heavy overcast, scattered snow squalls etc) they didn't turn out too bad. Wish I could have lessened the ISO but you take and use what the Lord giveth. I do not use any super PP program just a cheapy called PhotoPad and only spend less than a minute on each pic. So heres a few pics of my efforts. Critique is welcome as always. But I do realize that they are quite noisy.
But you never learn by not listening, right!!!

All pics taken using a Canon 90D with a Canon 100-400 Mark II

Little Red (Ron)

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

That’s the problem when you’ve had both versions of this lens. Your correct about my quote being for the older model. According to the data I found online the correct quote is “The minimum focus distance of Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS II USM is 0.98m (3.21’)”. That’s pretty close to your call. But I think that perhaps the 2.75 measurement possibly only occurs when the lens is set at 100mm. Either way it’s a helluva lens even though it set me back close to $3000

LittleRed (Ron)

[quote=LittleRed]I think it will depend on what your normal taking of photos consists of. Unless there is a reason for the need of a super fast focus I tend to set my lens to the “full” setting on my lens. I only reset it to the “3m - infinity” mark when I’m working with items that are moving (like sports or wildlife) where speed in getting a focus is critical or I know all my pics will be closer to infinity. That way if you see a swan swimming on a pond or a pretty flower at your feet your ready fo either one if your on the “full” setting. But if you see the same swan flying overhead you’d best be on the second setting.
I should also mention that the stated minimum focus distance in the lens specs is 59 inches but in use it will actually focus down to approx 38 inches. In fact I have found that if you set the lens to the minimum 100mm I can get a good focus at close to 30 inches. This is a remarkable lens and you should have many pleasures for many years to come.
Stay safe and keep a’shooting.

My bad😵‍💫😵‍💫. The stated minimum focus distance is 5.9 feet, not 59 inches. Problem of leaning on my 8th decade and not proof reading your own stuff.

LittleRed (Ron)

I think it will depend on what your normal taking of photos consists of. Unless there is a reason for the need of a super fast focus I tend to set my lens to the “full” setting on my lens. I only reset it to the “3m - infinity” mark when I’m working with items that are moving (like sports or wildlife) where speed in getting a focus is critical or I know all my pics will be closer to infinity. That way if you see a swan swimming on a pond or a pretty flower at your feet your ready fo either one if your on the “full” setting. But if you see the same swan flying overhead you’d best be on the second setting.
I should also mention that the stated minimum focus distance in the lens specs is 59 inches but in use it will actually focus down to approx 38 inches. In fact I have found that if you set the lens to the minimum 100mm I can get a good focus at close to 30 inches. This is a remarkable lens and you should have many pleasures for many years to come.
Stay safe and keep a’shooting.

LittleRed (Ron)

Ontario, Canada- it’s the law! It’s called the “Move Over Law” up here. If you don’t move over for an emergency vehicle you can be charged under the Highway Traffic Act which could result in a fine of $400 to $2000. This not only includes emergency vehicles you meet while both are in motion and also those with flashing lights parked on the side of the road. In that case if you can’t move over (2 lane highway) then you must SLOW DOWN. Sadly these occurrences happen too often even with the law being quite well known by all drivers. Last year there were over 1700 of these charges made in Ontario.

Thanks all for looking in at one of my feathered arch-enemies, one of the God’s beautiful creatures that preys on my songbird friends. But alas, nature will be nature. And kpmac in my case no choice as even quietly trying to slide open the door would have resulted in no pic.

LittleRed (Ron)

of songbirds and other riffraff.
Heard it yesterday, seen it today. The Merlin is an agile falcon who dines on my small songbirds (Redpolls, Sparrow and the like). Will on occasion also take on a small rodent if it unwisely strolls down my garden paths. Pics were taken out a double-paned sliding door at our backyard during a dark dreary day with an occasional snowflake/raindrop coming down.

LittleRed (Ron)

(Download)


(Download)

Very well done, excellent detail on a wee one. But you must have upped the speed to at least 1/2000 in order to get that detail and prevent motion blur, right 😊😊

LittleRed (Ron)