• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Birds in Action at 15 fps, and more: Nikon 1 (1 Viewer)

The Nikon 1 - I have found the sensor to be noisy if you crop at anything over ISO 400 - just too noisy for me

If you can fill the frame, i.e. with a Dragonfly it is good at ISO 400

It is extremely easy to blow the whites in harsh sunlight

(but I found the D7200 too noisy at ISO 800 over 50% of the time)
 
The Nikon 1 - I have found the sensor to be noisy if you crop at anything over ISO 400 - just too noisy for me

If you can fill the frame, i.e. with a Dragonfly it is good at ISO 400

It is extremely easy to blow the whites in harsh sunlight.

Since I come from years of practice with the Canon SX50, I can (still) bear the noise level of the V2. In many respects the Nikon 1 stands between the DSLR and the superzooms, for me it is a significant step up. True, "noise" isn't a strength of this 1'' sensor system, and many still hope for an improved V4. The Nikon J5 (with the new sensor) seems to be nice for Macro work (with the 1Nikkor 30-110).

In one of his articles (shooting gulls, no blown highlights!) Stirr described his PP workflow in some detail (see his comment 4.1 below the article) . I am planning to imitate this strategy to control flaws of the 1 system - as good as I can.

Edit: Still a novice in raw editing, but I have fun. A photo from today, in three versions: (a) jpeg ooc, (b) unedited, cropped, (c) RAW edited, cropped.
 

Attachments

  • Sample jpeg.jpg
    Sample jpeg.jpg
    237.3 KB · Views: 269
  • Sample jpeg crop.jpg
    Sample jpeg crop.jpg
    263.7 KB · Views: 306
  • Sample RAW EDITED.jpg
    Sample RAW EDITED.jpg
    297 KB · Views: 267
Last edited:
Back to BIF - typically shot at 1/1600 sec or less, as in the first two photos below: Marsh harrier and a Black kite. The third bird was a surprise for me, in more than one sense, apparently a Red-footed falcon. With 1/640 sec (as in this image) you can sometimes get away for a gliding raptor, for small birds it's clearly too slow.
 

Attachments

  • Marsh harrier_.jpg
    Marsh harrier_.jpg
    136.6 KB · Views: 340
  • Black Kite.jpg
    Black Kite.jpg
    195.6 KB · Views: 315
  • Red-footed falcon.jpg
    Red-footed falcon.jpg
    236.9 KB · Views: 329
How useful is the rate of 30 fps without AF-C for birds? Thomas Stirr has recently explored using 30 fps and even 60 fps when shooting birds in flight. I keep trying it, with mixed results. Such a fast frame rate can be helpful in many circumstances, not only BIF. The following 15 photos are a selection from about 100 images taken within a few seconds, at 30 fps, 1/2500 sec, iso 280 - courtship among White wagtails. - A focal length of 810 mm may seem "too short" for anybody who owns a superzoom. Imo the V2 / CX 70-300 compensates for this "defect" very well, e.g. the EVF is clearly superior to the SX50's EVF. The bird in the EVF is smaller, but you see rather more than less with the V2.
 

Attachments

  • Courtship 1.jpg
    Courtship 1.jpg
    307.4 KB · Views: 250
  • Courtship 2.jpg
    Courtship 2.jpg
    325.4 KB · Views: 197
  • Courtship 3.jpg
    Courtship 3.jpg
    327.1 KB · Views: 237
  • Courtship 4.jpg
    Courtship 4.jpg
    313.7 KB · Views: 236
  • Courtship 5.jpg
    Courtship 5.jpg
    319.5 KB · Views: 267
Back to BIF - typically shot at 1/1600 sec or less, as in the first two photos below: Marsh harrier and a Black kite. The third bird was a surprise for me, in more than one sense, apparently a Red-footed falcon. With 1/640 sec (as in this image) you can sometimes get away for a gliding raptor, for small birds it's clearly too slow.


nice pictures. I struggle with the V1 for birds in flight - as much due to the 800mm equivalent magnification with the 300mm PF !

Also I'm afraid that your falcon in a Kestrel, rather than a red-foot.
 
nice pictures. I struggle with the V1 for birds in flight - as much due to the 800mm equivalent magnification with the 300mm PF !

Also I'm afraid that your falcon in a Kestrel, rather than a red-foot.

Thanks für the hint, you are right, it was only a Kestrel gilded by the evening light. Only now I've looked into my copy of Beaman/Madge and see that the female red-footed falcon looks very different indeed.

My go-to guru Thomas Stirr has recommended to turn the VR off for BIF, since this makes it easier to keep the frame on the bird. Maybe he is right? So far I prefer to use the VR, being too lazy to change it back for perched birds.

When I bought the V2, I wrongly assumed that the "Smart Photo Selector" would be a great feature: that focusing on a stationary bird and half-pressing the shutter button would almost guarantee to catch the moment when the bird takes off. But nope - Nikon had other ideas. BIF with small birds remains difficult.
 

Attachments

  • Courtship 6.jpg
    Courtship 6.jpg
    336.9 KB · Views: 190
  • Courtship 7.jpg
    Courtship 7.jpg
    297.7 KB · Views: 189
  • Courtship 8.jpg
    Courtship 8.jpg
    345.5 KB · Views: 177
  • Courtship 9.jpg
    Courtship 9.jpg
    310.7 KB · Views: 217
  • Courtship 10.jpg
    Courtship 10.jpg
    323.2 KB · Views: 182
... and the rest. Hmm, the background looks a bit grainy, maybe I've "oversharpened". - PS. The birds were about 8 meters away.
 

Attachments

  • Courtship 11.jpg
    Courtship 11.jpg
    332.2 KB · Views: 171
  • Courtship 12.jpg
    Courtship 12.jpg
    313.2 KB · Views: 197
  • Courtship 13.jpg
    Courtship 13.jpg
    315.2 KB · Views: 186
  • Courtship 14.jpg
    Courtship 14.jpg
    300.4 KB · Views: 175
  • Courtship 15.jpg
    Courtship 15.jpg
    341.8 KB · Views: 194
Last edited:
nice pictures. I struggle with the V1 for birds in flight - as much due to the 800mm equivalent magnification with the 300mm PF !

That's why I prefer a zoom on the V1. I use the 70-300 Nikkor, and I find I normally use no more than the equivalent of 600mm for BIF.

That said, the 300 PF is quite something ...

Hermann
 
That's why I prefer a zoom on the V1. I use the 70-300 Nikkor, and I find I normally use no more than the equivalent of 600mm for BIF. That said, the 300 PF is quite something ...

In another thread I had posted about a "comparison shooting" when my Canon 450D at a focal length of 700mm took decent BIF photos, much superior to what I got with a SX50 at 1200mm. In most cases an equivalent of 600 or 700mm would be enough for BIF. That said, I am pretty satisfied with the V2/ CX70-300's ability, it delivers reliably at 810mm.

A detailed article by Fredrik Glockner titled "Nikon 300mm f/4E PF used on Nikon 1 cameras" came to the conclusion that his set-up Nikon V3 + FT1 + Nikon 300 PF is superior in many respects to the CX70-300 lens, except one: BIF. He says:
[T]he f/5.6 [of the CX70-300] means that I have to go home earlier than the other guys when photographing birds in the evening. Adding one more stop with the Nikon 300mm f/4E sure does help! The lens is not ideal for birds in flight, as you must pinpoint the bird in the very centre to achieve focus, but for stationary birds, it works very well.

The same author had written another piece on using the CX 70-300 for BIF.

By the way, Thomas Stirr prefers the AF of the Nikon V2 over the V3's, while Glockner doesn't see a big difference:
As far as I know, the V2 and V3 are similar in terms of focus performance, and both are pretty much equally fast in terms of framerate. So the choice between the two comes down to economics

Recent photos, to demonstrate that the camera does OK, only hampered by user errors. Shooting the juvenile hobby with 1/1600 sec and no exposure correction as a dark silhouette against the bright sky - lousy skills! ;)
 

Attachments

  • 0 Hobby.jpg
    0 Hobby.jpg
    184.4 KB · Views: 217
  • Sand martin.jpg
    Sand martin.jpg
    176.7 KB · Views: 222
  • Swift2.jpg
    Swift2.jpg
    218.1 KB · Views: 198
  • Swift.jpg
    Swift.jpg
    123.4 KB · Views: 193
  • Buzzard2.jpg
    Buzzard2.jpg
    263.1 KB · Views: 209
Last edited:
Grey wagtails, kind of a courtship flight. From the series of 48 consecutive shots, taken within 3 seconds, four were blurry (no 1-3 and no 7). I've selected 15, to show that I have no unfair bias to one wagtail species.
 

Attachments

  • Grey wagtails 1.jpg
    Grey wagtails 1.jpg
    190.1 KB · Views: 175
  • Grey wagtails 2.jpg
    Grey wagtails 2.jpg
    215 KB · Views: 194
  • Grey wagtails 3.jpg
    Grey wagtails 3.jpg
    259.2 KB · Views: 173
  • Grey wagtails 4.jpg
    Grey wagtails 4.jpg
    287.4 KB · Views: 178
  • Grey wagtails 5.jpg
    Grey wagtails 5.jpg
    289.3 KB · Views: 170
Part two.
 

Attachments

  • Grey wagtails 6.jpg
    Grey wagtails 6.jpg
    283.3 KB · Views: 153
  • Grey wagtails 7.jpg
    Grey wagtails 7.jpg
    292.2 KB · Views: 156
  • Grey wagtails 8.jpg
    Grey wagtails 8.jpg
    300 KB · Views: 183
  • Grey wagtails 9.jpg
    Grey wagtails 9.jpg
    288.6 KB · Views: 160
  • Grey wagtails 10.jpg
    Grey wagtails 10.jpg
    279.9 KB · Views: 167
Part three.
 

Attachments

  • Grey wagtails 11.jpg
    Grey wagtails 11.jpg
    279.6 KB · Views: 199
  • Grey wagtails 12.jpg
    Grey wagtails 12.jpg
    280.4 KB · Views: 191
  • Grey wagtails 13.jpg
    Grey wagtails 13.jpg
    320.2 KB · Views: 168
  • Grey wagtails 14.jpg
    Grey wagtails 14.jpg
    249.2 KB · Views: 175
  • Grey wagtails 15.jpg
    Grey wagtails 15.jpg
    371.1 KB · Views: 163
For larger birds, ducks and beyond, in most cases 1/1600 sec will be sufficient for sharp BIFs. For Swallows, Swifts or Terns 1/2000 sec or perhaps 1/2500 sec is necessary. The series above (Grey wagtails) was shot with 1/3200 sec. The smaller the birds, of the "fluttering" kind, the faster the shutter speed. For wagtails hunting flies over the water, even 1/3200 sec isn't enough to freeze the wings. As an example, I add a Sparrow sequence taken with 1/4000 sec and 30 fps. The wing isn't completely frozen.
 

Attachments

  • Sparrow 1.jpg
    Sparrow 1.jpg
    183.2 KB · Views: 158
  • Sparrow 2.jpg
    Sparrow 2.jpg
    183 KB · Views: 145
  • Sparrow 3.jpg
    Sparrow 3.jpg
    212.2 KB · Views: 164
  • Sparrow 4.jpg
    Sparrow 4.jpg
    194.4 KB · Views: 171
  • Sparrow 5.jpg
    Sparrow 5.jpg
    189.3 KB · Views: 194
Both shots with V1 and Nikkor 70-300.

Hermann
 

Attachments

  • DSC_2062.jpg
    DSC_2062.jpg
    499.3 KB · Views: 194
  • DSC_2388.jpg
    DSC_2388.jpg
    380.1 KB · Views: 197
Thanks for sharing!

Below: five photos from today, taken in a public park.

Lately I've bought a Nikon J5 & 1Nikkor 30-110mm (used, for a modest price), mainly intended as a solution for macros. This camera doesn't have an EVF, so it won't be great for BIF. Anyway, in specific situations like today (public park, birds about 8m away) focusing with the back screen may be worth trying.
 

Attachments

  • Park1.jpg
    Park1.jpg
    288.8 KB · Views: 160
  • Park2.jpg
    Park2.jpg
    283.1 KB · Views: 192
  • Park3.jpg
    Park3.jpg
    255.9 KB · Views: 164
  • Park6.jpg
    Park6.jpg
    292.2 KB · Views: 151
  • Park5.jpg
    Park5.jpg
    291 KB · Views: 182
Last edited:
As i mentioned earlier i was waiting for the GX8 and 100-400,well i got the GX8 but ime still waiting for the lens,at the moment ime using a 45-175,i have had a few 6fps action shots but none worth keeping so ime sticking with standard BIF until the new lens arrives.
 

Attachments

  • P1040052.jpg
    P1040052.jpg
    174.5 KB · Views: 188
  • P1040053.jpg
    P1040053.jpg
    121.7 KB · Views: 191
The Heron sailing narrowly over your garden furniture reminds me of gull acrobatics shot a while ago. :t:
 

Attachments

  • Gull.jpg
    Gull.jpg
    158.8 KB · Views: 202
Last edited:
My Nikon J5 works nicely, mainly as a macro tool and an alternative to the V2. The first photo shows my two main set-ups at their largest extension: the V2 and the "birding choice" CX70-300 are 29.5 cm long (996g), the J5 set up for macros with three Kooka extension tubes plus 30-110mm lens measures 20.5cm (567g). - Some sample photos, all taken with the J5. While I'd prefer the Nikon V2 with its bright EVF for birds in flight, it is possible to use the CX70-300 on the J5 for birds in specific situations, as demonstrated by the last three photos
 

Attachments

  • Nikon j5.jpg
    Nikon j5.jpg
    266.8 KB · Views: 215
  • Nikon J5 -macro.jpg
    Nikon J5 -macro.jpg
    149.6 KB · Views: 179
  • Nikon J5 -a.jpg
    Nikon J5 -a.jpg
    293.5 KB · Views: 239
  • Nikon J5 -c.jpg
    Nikon J5 -c.jpg
    297.7 KB · Views: 172
  • Nikon J5 -e.jpg
    Nikon J5 -e.jpg
    324.3 KB · Views: 189
My Nikon J5 was originally purchased for macros and stationary birds. In both cases I am very satisfied with the results (photo 1). Attached to an external viewfinder (Tarion TR-V1), the camera even produces attractive BIF images, as illustrated by the four consecutive shots from a longer sequence of a hunting Blackccap. These photos are roughly 100% crops, i.e. each is a 1600x1060 pixels segment in the larger originals.
 

Attachments

  • Crow.jpg
    Crow.jpg
    324.5 KB · Views: 172
  • Blackcap1.jpg
    Blackcap1.jpg
    225.1 KB · Views: 207
  • Blackcap2.jpg
    Blackcap2.jpg
    236.9 KB · Views: 185
  • Blackcap3.jpg
    Blackcap3.jpg
    229.7 KB · Views: 174
  • Blackcap4.jpg
    Blackcap4.jpg
    255.3 KB · Views: 199
Last edited:
A couple of photos from Monday. Mostly fishing in a distance of 30m, my resident kingfishers are often too far away for good shots. I am getting used to the Tarion viewfinder on my J5, but it is still a challenge to catch fast action. - The first two photos below are from the Nikon V2, the others from the J5.
 

Attachments

  • Kingfisher1.jpg
    Kingfisher1.jpg
    185.7 KB · Views: 198
  • Kingfisher2.jpg
    Kingfisher2.jpg
    315 KB · Views: 226
  • Kingfisher3.jpg
    Kingfisher3.jpg
    195.5 KB · Views: 180
  • Kingfisher4.jpg
    Kingfisher4.jpg
    352.1 KB · Views: 198
  • Kingfisher5.jpg
    Kingfisher5.jpg
    172.4 KB · Views: 153
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 5 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top