Why are my pics terrible? (1 Viewer)

[Mad Scientist]

Shot with Nikon7100 and Tamron 150-600mm

The sun was behind me.

Handheld
Vibration Control: on
Approximate Distance 10 m
Swallow was sitting on a wire in front of and above me
ISO 160
Focal Length 550 mm (35 mm equivalent: 1100 mm)
Aperture f/6.3
Shutter: 1/1250s


Picture 1 and 2: RAW before Lightroom processing - image and 100% crop.

Clearly it’s underexposed, so I’ll apply edits in Lightroom:

Picture 3 and 4: - image and 100% crop.
Whitebalance: Daylight
Tone: Auto, and then increase the shadows setting to get more of the bird viewable.

What I think now is that the image looks very, very noisy - it was ISO 160 at about 10 metres. It shouldn't be this noisy should it?

continued below.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Picture 5 and 6
Apply Noise Reduction
Luminance: 50
Detail: 50
Contrast: 0

Color: 45
Detail: 50
Smoothness: 0

Now most of the noise has gone, but the image still looks terrible. Yes, I can apply a bit of sharpening, etc, but the image is still awful.

It's not just this photo, I took a few photos of swallows which I thought would be cracking, but they were all equally disappointing.

On other occasions I've cropped photos to 100% taken at greater distances and higher ISOs with good results, so I'm really puzzled.

Does anyone have any ideas about where things have gone wrong?

 

[Mad Scientist]

Having slept on it, I think part of my problem here is that I ought to have to set the camera's EV to +1 or even higher - light bird against light background.

The histogram for the shot looks like the first attached image, while I suppose I should have been aiming for something more like the second.

Do you think this would explain the whole problem, including the noise issue, or are there other issues here too?

Thanks.

 

[Roy C]

As you say, the first two are well underexposed, when you push them (brighten-up) in processing this will amplify any noise which is what has happened here. Also I have found that the Tammy needs stopping down to at least f8 at the long end to get sharp images. What you need to do is the have the highlights warning set for the Cameras lcd display and keep looking at the shot and histogram - make sure that you shoot to the right of the histogram just far enough to see the start of some 'blinkies' by dialing-in exposure compensation as required. By far the most difficult thing in bird shooting IMO is getting the exposure correct - this most often means applying some exposure compensation. There is no one correct setting for Exposure comp as each scenario has to be judged on its own merits but with experience you can learn to judge each shot and how much compo (or not) may be required. Hope this helps and good shooting.

 

[Retrodaz]

Hey Roy, am I right in thinking that by pressing display info on canon you can see the histogram information before you take the shot? Or are you referring to looking at the histogram information once the shot it taken?

 

[Roy C]

Hey Roy, am I right in thinking that by pressing display info on canon you can see the histogram information before you take the shot? Or are you referring to looking at the histogram information once the shot it taken?

I was referring to glancing at the histogram after the shot is taken, that way you will learn about how much Ev comp may be needed in any given situation. It also helps you to correct the exposure if the bird is still there.

 

[the black fox]

This as Roy has said is a case of not adjusting comp upwards to account for the sky ,there's no set amount to apply in will vary with time of day grey skies or blue etc I always if possible try to find a seagull to get a rough idea of the amount needed on that day/time/conditions ,it also varies from camera to camera I have to apply more on my 1D3 than on my 60D .
There is a simple way round it learn to shoot in manual exposure this will negate the need for ex.comp.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Thanks everyone. It does help. I'll try to put it into practice next time I get a chance. Hopefully the swallows will hang around for a little while yet.

 

[Mad Scientist]

I was reviewing some other pics I've been taking, and I'm beginning to think I've an impossible task.

Young Blue Sky Gull
ISO 200
Focal Length 300 mm (35 mm equivalent: 600 mm)
Aperture f/5.7
Shutter: 1/1000 s

Taken handheld a few days ago. Adjusted in lightroom, particularly to reduce shadows on underside.

I know there's an issue here and there with overexposed whites.

Worry: Even in September, there doesn't seem to be enough light to get the EXIF numbers I'm hoping to hit.

To get shutter speed to 1/1600 s, I need to take a hit on ISO.

To get aperture to f/8.0, another hit on ISO.

So, to get the shutter speed and aperture I'm hoping for, I'll end up with a piccy that's too noisy to use.

Any ideas how I can best square this apparently impossible circle, apart from a trip to the Med?

 

[seaspirit]

To get shutter speed to 1/1600 s, I need to take a hit on ISO.

To get aperture to f/8.0, another hit on ISO.

Any ideas how I can best square this apparently impossible circle, apart from a trip to the Med?

Why do you need/want an aperture of f/8, and why do you need/want a shutter speed of 1/1600s to shoot a still relative distant birds that soars predicable and slowish like gull? Would the result look different with f/5.6 and 1/1000s? Would DOF be insufficient or would you risk motion blurr? Now swifts, swallows and falcons are a different story as shutter speed is concerned, but the aperture question is still valid.

If the answers are yes, then there is no other way than getting the ISO up until you are in range. If you can consider a wider aperture and a longer exposure time you can buy yourself some ISO credit. Somewhere there will be always something to compromise on.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Thanks seaspirit - good points.

The f/8.0 was because of Roy's comment above about getting sharp images out of the Tamron. Then again, Roy was talking about the long end, which I'm not using on BIF, so perhaps I can use f5.6 or 6.3?

Ideally I could find out these things for myself with lots and lots of practice and testing, but I've not got the opportunities at the moment, so I'm hoping to learn more from wiser heads.

The shutter speed of 1/1600 s seems to be the minimum I've seen recommended for BIF. I'm only posting the gull because they're such easy targets to practice on. I suspect it would be a sharper piccy, though, if there had been enough light to keep the ISO at 200 with 1/1600s shutterspeed and aperture stopped down to below f5.8?

 

[the black fox]

your using a nikon d7100 i believe so why the hell are you shooting at 200iso ,it won't improve i/q on that camera at all and as you have seen your simply making a rod for your own back .
seagulls are the perfect target bird for practise ,just set your i.s.o to 800 ,a.v mode ,f8 and exposure compensation up 1/3rd or 2/3rds of a stop to retain detail in the birds against the sky that will vary depending on the target birds .my minimum iso is 640 and thats with a lot older sensor than you have why pay for modern technology and stick to film camera iso values ,it will also help to up your shutter speed to which goes up with your iso

another even simpler way is to use manual exposure ,as long as the light is constant ,set it on either grass ,tarmac or water then simply shoot without any compensation applied .b.i.f photography has a long learning curve practise ,practise and more practise is the only answer .if you have seagulls locally a few slices of bread is all it needs for target practise

 

[seaspirit]

Some lenses are not perfect wide open, but if a lens is really soft that it requires stepping down the aperture I also recommend a quick check if it may be front- or backfocusing. In this case the added DOF by stepping down compensates for not hitting the correct focal plane.

I met a fellow who claimed his 150-500 was soft unless stopped down to f8 - f11. A quick check in the field with a newspaper showed a significant front-focus and with rough fine-focus tuning in the camera the lens already did a much better job wide open.

As far as high ISO, and we are talking here ISO800 or higher in recent and current DX dSLRs, is a concern, in my experience it becomes an issue if the subject is small in the frame and cropping on the computer is required (and the extra crop factor offered in some camera bodies is doing the same on the spot). Then noise becomes notable because you loose detail. Fill the frame with the subject and high ISO is something you will have to worry about at much higher ISO settings.

The other common mistake is to avoid stepping up ISO fearing the increased noise and rather taking an underexposed image that will have to be fixed in post processing. This fix will add more noise, espcl. in the darker parts and the result looks worse than if the image would have been taken with a higher ISO and correctly exposed in the first place.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Thanks for your comments fox and seaspirit.

Yes, high ISOs combined with better frame filling is what I'll need to do in poorer light.

My experiences today completely bore out what you were saying seaspirit.

The weather was not especially pleasant (see the ducks shot). I don't think I'm ever going to get especially sharp shots with this sort of cloud cover, but I tested the camera on f/8.0 and 1/1600s with auto-ISO. The resulting ISOs were pretty high.

Lightroom made the piccies just about tolerable provided I didn't crop very much.

Stormy Ducks
ISO 900
Focal Length 320 mm (35 mm equivalent: 640 mm)
Aperture f/8.0
Shutter: 1/1600s


Dark Gull
ISO 1250
Focal Length 600 mm (35 mm equivalent: 1200 mm)
Aperture f/8.0
Shutter: 1/1600s

The lesson from this seems to be that I should continue to use the auto-ISO setting on the d7100. In good light, it will automatically give me a low ISO. It will always give me the best possible ISO, which is the most I can hope for.

Depending on light levels tomorrow, I'll run a check on the fine tuning of the Tamron's focus on the D7100 and see if it's spot on or whether a little tweak would help. Thanks again for your help.

 

[the black fox]

Auto iso on nikons actually works it one of the things I sorely miss on canon ,stick with it .unless your totally sure of what your doing with micro adjust leave it alone ,especially with a long zoom lens as you will end up doing more harm than good ,I.e have you got a totally stable tripod and head ,a remote shutter switch,etc it's extremely complicated and really best on prime lenses anyway.
I would also say that in the obvious light you had today .i.e sea mist even 1/1600 of a sec is pushing it ,any OOF on these pics is down to poor light and camera shake ,it really does take time to learn long lens technique and stance if hand held ,if you can see your focus point on your computer I,ll bet your focussing on the mist .i do hope your on single point a.f and not a multi point as well.

P.s I live 200 yards from the sea an I would not have gone out today pointless

 

[Mad Scientist]

Yes, very poor conditions black fox.

The main thing I wanted to do was to find out what auto-ISO was like, and I was quite pleased with it, so I learned something at least.

And a very good point you make about where I was focusing. I've been using Lightroom for processing the RAW images, but after reading what you said, I opened the images in ViewNX2 to look. With the ducks, the focus looks okay (quick screenshot of RAW image attached) but in the case of the gull, yes there was no focus.

I use single point for perching birds, but I'd read somewhere that you should use more points for BIF.

I was using 9-point which gives a little square of focus (rather than the D7100's full 51 points which more or less fill the frame). You think even as few as 9-points are still too many for BIF?

Thanks again for your advice - it's very helpful.

 

[Roy C]

The f/8.0 was because of Roy's comment above about getting sharp images out of the Tamron. Then again, Roy was talking about the long end,

Just to reiterate the Tamron 150-600 needs stopping down at the long end (say 500mm+) to at least f8 to get sharp shots and it is certainly not a a Front or back focusing problem. Just about every single capable photographer who has used this lens comes to the same conclusion. BTW I have MA'd mine and the focusing is spot on. Some lenses are pin sharp wide open (like the 400/5.6) but others need stopping down and the Tammy is one of them. Comparing the Canon 400/5.6 + 1.4x tc (560mm) with the Tammy at around the same focal length and both at f8 there is no doubt in my mind that the Tammy is best and as a side issue it AF's faster as well.

 

[the black fox]

Having had nikons and knowing how there a/f system works it's a hard one to call ,my gut feeling and in practise says use single point focus ,where you have a spread of birds multi point should be better ,the only problem with multi point is it will grab the nearest thing to focus on which might not be where you want it to be in the photo .so really it's down to choice on the day ,on the canon I now use there's a focus method nicknamed the ring of fire ,which works well but is as random as your nikon multi point ,both canon and nikon systems work it's your choice .
One thing you should try and this really works is set your camera up for back button focus and learn to use it ,I.e you grab focus using your back a/f on button and just fire using the front button ,you can focus and hold it much better and faster using this method with far more consistent results to

 

[seaspirit]

Just to reiterate the Tamron 150-600 needs stopping down at the long end (say 500mm+) to at least f8 to get sharp shots and it is certainly not a a Front or back focusing problem. .......

Like so many other zooms it will. However, if there is a Front- or Backfocus issue with a specific lens/body combination it will add to the problem. To exclude this possibility for a particular lens/body (i.e. one lens may work on one of my camera bodies out of the box, on another it may require some tweaking) pair I do a quick check and if required resolve it with MF-adjustment.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Thanks black fox, I started using back button focusing yesterday.

I revisited the swallows today, and caught a few in flight. Although the pics aren't very good, they're better than what I posted at the start of this thread.

Swallows
All handheld
ISO 450 to 500
Focal Length 500 to 550 mm (35 mm equivalent: 1000 to 1100 mm)
Aperture f/8.0
Shutter: 1/1250s

Things I think that I could improve
I expect a faster shutter speed would get crisper photos of swallows, but then ISO goes up, and with it noise starts increasing.

The obvious improvement I think would be take the photos keeping the lens at 500 mm, but taking the shots from closer. That way the ISO noise wouldn't be as much of an issue. If I could have got the lens on the blighters when they were closer, I would have... but I couldn't. Putting the focus on the eye was something else I just couldn’t manage... but maybe someday? Practise, practise, practise...

Anything else I could improve on to get better shots?
Is there anything crying out from these pics that I need to think about?