• 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.

Flight Shot (1 Viewer)

Tav94 said:
Had a go using A1 servo and Partiel meetering and ISO 800 got a few keepers this time.
Nice one Chris, practice makes perfect - after all you have what is widely considered to be the best 'birds in flight' lens that Canon make.
 
Roy C said:
Nice one Chris, practice makes perfect - after all you have what is widely considered to be the best 'birds in flight' lens that Canon make.
Thanks for all the info, had a few shots of gulls in the last two days.Had some success her is a Med gull i got today the light was poor had to use ISO of 800.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_4744_filtered_1.jpg
    IMG_4744_filtered_1.jpg
    85 KB · Views: 183
B :)
Roy C said:
Nice one Chris, practice makes perfect - after all you have what is widely considered to be the best 'birds in flight' lens that Canon make.
Thanks for the comments what are your views on a 1.4 times kenco converter on this lens for flight shot use.
 
Tav94 said:
B :)
Thanks for the comments what are your views on a 1.4 times kenco converter on this lens for flight shot use.
I use this lens with a Canon 1.4 tc (with pins taped - to acheive af) but find that af is to slow for flight shots. For near static birds like waders I use the combo on a tripod and get great results.
There is another thread going on at the moment which suggest that the new Kenko 1.5x DG AF Teleconverter costing around £60 retains af without taping the pins. It is also faster to af than the Canon - not sure that image quality would be up to the Canon but the sample I have seen looks ok. Remember that this combo would give 960mm on a 1.6 crop camera so for handheld flight shots you will need good light and a steady hand.
 
Thanks Roy will have to look into the 1.5 but just use for non flight shots, how is the wind youe side preety rough here no sea for me today.
 
Tav94 said:
Thanks Roy will have to look into the 1.5 but just use for non flight shots, how is the wind youe side preety rough here no sea for me today.
Pretty rough here as well - wont be leaving my computer desk this afternoon.
 
Flight shots

These a some shots i took today handheld in dull conditions with a 1.5 Kenco on my 400 f 5.6.This was the first time i have tried the Kenco and i am very pleased with it so far.Shot at 5.6 ISO 800.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5868_filtered.jpg
    IMG_5868_filtered.jpg
    96.7 KB · Views: 114
  • IMG_5871_filtered.jpg
    IMG_5871_filtered.jpg
    95.4 KB · Views: 161
  • IMG_5870_filtered.jpg
    IMG_5870_filtered.jpg
    84.7 KB · Views: 122
Last edited:
Thanks Mike yes i use aperture priority partial metering,and A1 servo, ISO 800 and 5.6 aperture. The chepo kenco seems to be a good bit of kit was very pleased cant wait till the sun shines and have a proper play with it all.
 
This one of Iceland gull was with the kenco 1.5+ 4005.6L the more i use this the better i like it,weather was dull and wet so ISO was 800 and hand held.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_6597_filtered.jpg
    IMG_6597_filtered.jpg
    98.3 KB · Views: 137
I'm addicted to flight shots and try to shoot them every time i have an opportunity.

I use a d70 - and mostly "Single shot" ( continous autofocus did nor result in sharp photos ) .
I try to use "Spot " metering when the bird is against the sky , or when it's a white bird e.g - egrets . Otherwise - i use matrix metering .
Aperture priority and speeds of 1\800 at least ( preferably 1\1250 ) , Iso 400 .

Here's an example :( shot with d70+Tamron 200-500 - hand held )
 

Attachments

  • 6414BW_STILT.jpg
    6414BW_STILT.jpg
    47.1 KB · Views: 120
As I say above, I'm not really a flight shot addict, but I do like to keep my hand in with my local fulmars...

Exif:
Camera Make: Canon
Camera Model: Canon EOS 30D
Image Date: 2007:02:18 14:12:10
Flash Used: No
Focal Length: 400.0mm
Exposure Time: 0.0008 s (1/1250)
Aperture: f/6.3
ISO equiv: 200
White Balance: Auto
Metering Mode: Spot
Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto)
 

Attachments

  • ful2f.jpg
    ful2f.jpg
    80.8 KB · Views: 122
Last edited:
DOC said:
I'm addicted to flight shots and try to shoot them every time i have an opportunity.

I use a d70 - and mostly "Single shot" ( continous autofocus did nor result in sharp photos ) .
I try to use "Spot " metering when the bird is against the sky , or when it's a white bird e.g - egrets . Otherwise - i use matrix metering .
Aperture priority and speeds of 1\800 at least ( preferably 1\1250 ) , Iso 400 .

Here's an example :( shot with d70+Tamron 200-500 - hand held )

Doc I have always seen you as one of the masters of flight photography here but I have never found single shot fast enough so am interested that you use it. My one shot is far too slow so I always use AI servo. Maybe it is the difference in cameras that causes the softness?
 
Annette, it's a Nikon/Canon thing, I reckon.

When I was using the D70, I found "single shot" much better than Continuous Focus for flight shots.

With Canon it's completely the other way round.
 
Keith Reeder said:
Annette, it's a Nikon/Canon thing, I reckon.

When I was using the D70, I found "single shot" much better than Continuous Focus for flight shots.

With Canon it's completely the other way round.


Oh right keith thats interesting thanks for that!
 
A flight shot from last week:

EOS 350d set on AV mode

300mm lens

1/400 shutter

7.1 aperture

partial metering

centre af sensor only
 

Attachments

  • IMG_8751_1_1 trim.jpg
    IMG_8751_1_1 trim.jpg
    41.8 KB · Views: 116
Last edited:
Good exposure and detail but still looks alittle soft to me. Really 1/400 shutter speed isnt fast enough to capture these birds in flight. What iso where you using? 1/400 sounds slow for the lighting conditions show in this photograph?
 
Warning! This thread is more than 17 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