Now I know its just a humble and common seagull and nothing exotic but here is the story anyway...
I decided to try and do some bird in flight shots today. Its the first time I have used the D200 for wildlife really since getting it and thought I'd try and put the autofocus to the test by shooting white seagulls against an increasingly cloudy sky as the afternoon went on. Thankfully there was a pretty strong wind and I was standing next to 'bread throwers', as a result of these two elements I got the seagull looking at me and also managed to track him well as he was hardly moving due to the wind.
The D200 tracked even the faster flying gulls easily which I was pleased about, my only complaint is that I think the extra resolution of the D200 is starting to show up the optics of the Sigma as most of my shots were pretty soft (even ones taken at 1/1250 second at f8!). This was one of the few that is 'useable' and although it was sharper than some of the others it does look better as a web sized image than the full size version (web size is very forgiving!). I blame my purchase of the 12-24 and 28-70 as they are both tack sharp!
Hope you like it, I just liked the wing detail and the fact he is looking at us. I cropped slightly to place him a little higher in the frame as to me it gives the feeling of him looking down from above a little more. Not sure if maybe he should be placed a little further to the left of the frame though. Thoughts?
Nikon D200, Sigma 100-300 EX, 1/640 second at f8, ISO200
Posted by Tim Munsey on March 20, 2006 at 12:51 PM
Hi Richard,
It looks pretty sharp to me, have you tried the lens on a less active subject (Vince for instance). I like it, lots of detail and the sky is always good when its a mixture of sky and cloud, position wise I feel quite comfortable with but maybe a fraction to the left would help.
Tim
Posted by Malcolm Muir on March 20, 2006 at 1:23 PM
Great subjects for practising on seagulls. This one looks pretty sharp to me but I have heard that the D200 is fairly unforgiving of some of the less than top notch optics. Doubtless, I will find out when mu own D200 finally arrives. I suspect it is half way along the Silk Road on the back of a camel!
Malcolm
Posted by Simon Hawtin on March 20, 2006 at 2:38 PM
Hi Richard
Looks sharp and has eye contact and a good BG. Nice photo.
Simon
I like the way he appears to be looking towards you and the positioning within the frame is effective,perhaps just a little closer to the top and left would be even better.
I would definatly try Tim's suggestion of testing the lens on a completly stationary subject with mirror lock-up,remote release,tripod,etc,etc. before coming to the conclusion the lens is below par.
Although gulls are numerous and make great flight subjects,personally I find they can still be challenging,especially when going for bread, as they're wheeling about here there and everywhere in every direction.
I find you can end up with plenty of out of focus shots,a good selection of sharp ones,but not so many TACK sharp ones.Breezebrowser is excellent for evaluating this type of image as you can have the focus points showing, which in many cases often reveals the focus point wasn't accuratly on the subject,let alone squarly on the birds eye or thereabouts.
I find a good scenario to test the lens's/camera's tracking capability is to set your equipment up on a solid tripod a few feet off the ground by the side of a road and lock your focus point firmly on an approaching car's number plate,tracking it from a good distance away and taking a succession of shots from near to far.It's interesting to see whether 100% of the images are tack sharp.
It's also amusing seeing the look on the drivers/passengers face (when the images are viewed on the PC) as they try and fathom out what your doing and whether or not they've just been caught speeding
Posted by John Varley on March 20, 2006 at 5:00 PM
Nice shot Richard - like the broken cloud background I think this is much more interesting than a uniform blue background. It can be tricky getting decent light under the wings.
Regarding the Sigma and sharpness problems - I doubt this is due to the lens lacking sharpness. My old flight lens was a 300 f4 Apo HSM and I got many tack sharp flight shots with it and a D30 and the Canon D30 was well known for having poor autofocus. My recipe for success was using at least 2000th shutter speed and lots of practice at tracking the subject to give the AF maximum time to lock on. Sure I got plenty of duff soft shots as well - but every so often I would get a cracker.
Now I use a Canon 400mm 5.6L and a 20D. On a tripod the lens is razor sharp - for flight shots many are a bit too soft for my liking - its a known problem with the 20D - the AF servo tracking algorithm is not all that good. It acquires focus very well but its tracking ability is not very accurate.
Thanks for those tips, I will give the Sigma some more testing before I jump to the conclusion it isn't performing. I'll try some stationary subjects tripod mounted to see how it fairs. I'm probably just realising how hard it is to get in flight shots being used to photographing slower moving subjects (and recently landscapes, which obviously dont move ). Although I am still secretly longing for the 70-200 VR...
I've just got a D200 as well and have been trying to get to grips with it. I also got a lot of softish shots and that was after forking out for a 200-400VR . Not sure what AF settings you're using but you might do worse than try these, they do the job for me:
* AF-C (Continuous Servo AF)
* CL (Continuous Low motor drive) or CH (Continuous High motor drive) according to the speed of the subject.
* Dynamic Area AF
* Custom Setting a4 set to ON (enabled Lock-On)
* Custom Setting a2 set to Focus Priority (forces ONLY in-focus shots)
I live in hope if you have been getting some softish shots with the 200-400 (what a beast that lens is). I think my settings are the same as yours although I'll have to check custom setting a4 as I was playing with that a while ago and forget what I left it on now!
Like this and agree with the suggestions made, the sky looks really nice and gives a great backdrop for the Gull, perhaps a higher ISO would have given that little bit extra on the shutter speed as even 1/640 handheld and trying track may be pushing it a bit, I find that most of the time any softness in my images is caused by either camera or subject motion...
Discussion
11 repliesI decided to try and do some bird in flight shots today. Its the first time I have used the D200 for wildlife really since getting it and thought I'd try and put the autofocus to the test by shooting white seagulls against an increasingly cloudy sky as the afternoon went on. Thankfully there was a pretty strong wind and I was standing next to 'bread throwers', as a result of these two elements I got the seagull looking at me and also managed to track him well as he was hardly moving due to the wind.
The D200 tracked even the faster flying gulls easily which I was pleased about, my only complaint is that I think the extra resolution of the D200 is starting to show up the optics of the Sigma as most of my shots were pretty soft (even ones taken at 1/1250 second at f8!). This was one of the few that is 'useable' and although it was sharper than some of the others it does look better as a web sized image than the full size version (web size is very forgiving!). I blame my purchase of the 12-24 and 28-70 as they are both tack sharp!
Hope you like it, I just liked the wing detail and the fact he is looking at us. I cropped slightly to place him a little higher in the frame as to me it gives the feeling of him looking down from above a little more. Not sure if maybe he should be placed a little further to the left of the frame though. Thoughts?
Nikon D200, Sigma 100-300 EX, 1/640 second at f8, ISO200
Try this again and add a little fill in flash to light under the wings and i think you will be on a winner,Good detail in the feathers
It looks pretty sharp to me, have you tried the lens on a less active subject (Vince for instance). I like it, lots of detail and the sky is always good when its a mixture of sky and cloud, position wise I feel quite comfortable with but maybe a fraction to the left would help.
Tim
Malcolm
Looks sharp and has eye contact and a good BG. Nice photo.
Simon
I would definatly try Tim's suggestion of testing the lens on a completly stationary subject with mirror lock-up,remote release,tripod,etc,etc. before coming to the conclusion the lens is below par.
Although gulls are numerous and make great flight subjects,personally I find they can still be challenging,especially when going for bread, as they're wheeling about here there and everywhere in every direction.
I find you can end up with plenty of out of focus shots,a good selection of sharp ones,but not so many TACK sharp ones.Breezebrowser is excellent for evaluating this type of image as you can have the focus points showing, which in many cases often reveals the focus point wasn't accuratly on the subject,let alone squarly on the birds eye or thereabouts.
I find a good scenario to test the lens's/camera's tracking capability is to set your equipment up on a solid tripod a few feet off the ground by the side of a road and lock your focus point firmly on an approaching car's number plate,tracking it from a good distance away and taking a succession of shots from near to far.It's interesting to see whether 100% of the images are tack sharp.
It's also amusing seeing the look on the drivers/passengers face (when the images are viewed on the PC) as they try and fathom out what your doing and whether or not they've just been caught speeding
Regarding the Sigma and sharpness problems - I doubt this is due to the lens lacking sharpness. My old flight lens was a 300 f4 Apo HSM and I got many tack sharp flight shots with it and a D30 and the Canon D30 was well known for having poor autofocus. My recipe for success was using at least 2000th shutter speed and lots of practice at tracking the subject to give the AF maximum time to lock on. Sure I got plenty of duff soft shots as well - but every so often I would get a cracker.
Now I use a Canon 400mm 5.6L and a 20D. On a tripod the lens is razor sharp - for flight shots many are a bit too soft for my liking - its a known problem with the 20D - the AF servo tracking algorithm is not all that good. It acquires focus very well but its tracking ability is not very accurate.
Hope this helps
John
I've just got a D200 as well and have been trying to get to grips with it. I also got a lot of softish shots and that was after forking out for a 200-400VR . Not sure what AF settings you're using but you might do worse than try these, they do the job for me:
* AF-C (Continuous Servo AF)
* CL (Continuous Low motor drive) or CH (Continuous High motor drive) according to the speed of the subject.
* Dynamic Area AF
* Custom Setting a4 set to ON (enabled Lock-On)
* Custom Setting a2 set to Focus Priority (forces ONLY in-focus shots)