Fallow Deer

Really appealing colors, Ian. Obviously the conditions weren't ideal. With a Mark IV, how far do you think you could have cranked the ISO (and increased the depth of field along with it, perhaps getting the back deer more in focus) and still come out with an appealing image? I'm curious about your take on the Mark IV's performance at higher ISO.

btw- I'm not even sure it needed more canvas on the left, though admittedly I don't know how much was added. The staggered positions of the deer may have worked quite well without extra space added on the left.

Max

It's a great shot Ian, I like the positioning of the deer and the soft lighting. Very natural looking photo. You hit the shutter at just the right moment.

Gary.

Max

Thanks for your comment. I only added a small amount of canvas.

how far do you think you could have cranked the ISO (and increased the depth of field along with it, perhaps getting the back deer more in focus) and still come out with an appealing image? I'm curious about your take on the Mark IV's performance at higher ISO.

I haven't tried it yet above 1000, but I have to say I wouldn't even have used 800 with the 1D2n. I do however have to use noise reduction software (Nik dfine) and I am happy enough so far. I doubt if I could have got the fawn in the plane of focus given the circumstances.

The overcast conditions made for nice even illumination of the deer and helped keep the extensive white in the coat from overexposure. Having sufficient focal length allowed them to remain relaxed but aware of your presence. I like the composition a lot and don't see the softer deer in the back as a drawback, more interesting this way in fact.

This image has a very lovely feel to it Ian. I cannot decide if I would prefer this with more DOF or not. I think ifthe deer were not overlapping I woul have preferred more DOF, but now with that overlap the shallow DOF helps to separate the two.

Just to jump in to answer Max's quesion about the high ISO performance of the MK4; of course there is not one limit, meaning a lot depends on the light, like is the case with any camera. In good light you can use much higher ISO's before introducing visible noise, in very low light and deep shadows however performance will be much poorer. Hence the lighting conditions are always a point of consideration when selecting ISO. It also depend on what you are shooting; for example landscapes (and animalscapes) I generally print much larger than wildlife and would want as low as possible ISO. Whereas with wildlife and macro images other considerations are often more important than ISO. With wildlife, I generally do not even hesitate to use 1600. Upto 3200 is mostly very use-able, but above I will only do in 'emergencies'. Just my two cents for what its worth.

Great shot Ian. I think I might prefer more DOF personally, but still like everything else about this image. I also have the MIV and same as Vincent have many keepers at 3200 and even a few at 6400 with not so dark shadows. BTW, Max, I have an Elk shot still posted in this gallery at 2500 ISO if you care to take a peek. Nice work Ian!

Good shot with the conditions you were dealing with, well done.

The adult female is lovely in demeanor and in rendered detail. I was wishing they did not overlap, even with the focus difference but do agree with Vincent that as presented the oof difference helps to separate them. Colors are beautifully saturated. I have been enduring endless days of harsh edged sunlight and would appreciate if you could send some of that Scottish diffused illumination to South Dakota! Nice work, as always, Ian.

What beautiful animals...so delicate looking. DOF is no problem for me here, the slightly OOF background animal works fine for me.

Beautiful animals. I like the soft feel of this, from the habitat, to the light, to the fur.

Very nice color and I like the position of the deer. Great detail as well.