Posted by Larry Fischer on August 3, 2012 at 9:04 AM
Taken about a month ago on the Kansas River near Topeka.
I was wading the river. While standing on a sandbar. In the distance I perceived a large bird coming towards me. Thinking it to be an eagle I began to get ready for a real workout with my manual lens. Got that? Manual Nikkor f/5.6 100-300...
Anyway, I observed it was not an eagle. It kept dropping in altitude and went in front of me about 20 yards distant, tried to land in the water, it was too deep, and it beat its wings against the water to gain a little height, and then landed about 20 yards from me on the sandbar.
I quickly focused the not-moving bird and began shooting. Of course the sharp-eyed Heron, although dumb in this instance, took off. This is what is presented, his takeoff.
I basically did not do a good job on the moving bird as it approached. Almost but not quite. This would have made a great series... A case for an autofocus... but cash is always what makes photographers miss a good series of shots.
Enjoy.
Comments of constructive nature appreciated.
the fisch
Posted by David Bostedo on August 3, 2012 at 12:05 PM
As I've never used a manual focus long lens, I'm very thankful for auto-focus, and I only have to imagine how much practice it would take to get really good at it with a long lens.
That said, auto-focus only gets so good... but is still being improved... This set of posts from Roger Cicala of Lenrentals.com are really interesting :
-- Contrast detection is much more accurate than phase detection (no surprise really)
-- There quite a bit of variance even in the same model lenses and cameras as far as auto-focus accuracy
-- Newer Canon lenses focus better on newer Canon cameras achieve phase detection auto-focus that's as good as contrast detection
Posted by Larry Fischer on August 3, 2012 at 12:21 PM
I looked at parts 1 through 3a.
Since this was an older manual lens I really had no choice. I do not know what type of focus the camera body uses on Nikon. I just try to get the greenish dot to show for focus. Seldom do I use my eye.
This rapid sequence has some neat possibilities that I missed while trying to focus and move the camera. I'll attach one and illustrate what perhaps could
have been with autofocus.
the fisch
Posted by Larry Fischer on August 3, 2012 at 12:21 PM
David,
I looked at parts 1 through 3a.
Since this was an older manual lens I really had no choice.
I do not know what type of focus the camera body uses on Nikon, phase or contrast.
I just try to get the greenish dot to show proper focus. Seldom do I use my eye but that's all that can be done for this type situation. And just a small twist of the barrel, even at 100 mm, makes a huge difference.
This rapid sequence had some neat possibilities that I were missed while trying to focus and move the camera.
I'll attach one and illustrate what perhaps could have been with autofocus. I also should have adjusted for a higher ISO. I was using a D700 Nikon and it can take good shots hat high ISO. Some of the blur was probably too slow shutter??
the fisch
Posted by David Graham on August 3, 2012 at 1:28 PM
If you can shoot burst mode and are in manual focus this is a great situation for a "through focus" series. Focus well ahead of the bird and, as it approaches the plane of focus start the burst which, if judged well, will continue as the bird passes though the plane of focus.
The opposite, and probably more often used application of the through-focus series, is for a stable subject when you focus beyond...or closer than...the subject and manually and smoothly focus through the stable subject during your burst of exposures.
Expensive with film! But this is why the metaphorical Gods of Photography gave us digital imaging!
Discussion
4 repliesI was wading the river. While standing on a sandbar. In the distance I perceived a large bird coming towards me. Thinking it to be an eagle I began to get ready for a real workout with my manual lens. Got that? Manual Nikkor f/5.6 100-300...
Anyway, I observed it was not an eagle. It kept dropping in altitude and went in front of me about 20 yards distant, tried to land in the water, it was too deep, and it beat its wings against the water to gain a little height, and then landed about 20 yards from me on the sandbar.
I quickly focused the not-moving bird and began shooting. Of course the sharp-eyed Heron, although dumb in this instance, took off. This is what is presented, his takeoff.
I basically did not do a good job on the moving bird as it approached. Almost but not quite. This would have made a great series... A case for an autofocus... but cash is always what makes photographers miss a good series of shots.
Enjoy.
Comments of constructive nature appreciated.
the fisch
That said, auto-focus only gets so good... but is still being improved... This set of posts from Roger Cicala of Lenrentals.com are really interesting :
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3a
Part 3b
Some things he's shown :
-- Contrast detection is much more accurate than phase detection (no surprise really)
-- There quite a bit of variance even in the same model lenses and cameras as far as auto-focus accuracy
-- Newer Canon lenses focus better on newer Canon cameras achieve phase detection auto-focus that's as good as contrast detection
Since this was an older manual lens I really had no choice. I do not know what type of focus the camera body uses on Nikon. I just try to get the greenish dot to show for focus. Seldom do I use my eye.
This rapid sequence has some neat possibilities that I missed while trying to focus and move the camera. I'll attach one and illustrate what perhaps could
have been with autofocus.
the fisch
I looked at parts 1 through 3a.
Since this was an older manual lens I really had no choice.
I do not know what type of focus the camera body uses on Nikon, phase or contrast.
I just try to get the greenish dot to show proper focus. Seldom do I use my eye but that's all that can be done for this type situation. And just a small twist of the barrel, even at 100 mm, makes a huge difference.
This rapid sequence had some neat possibilities that I were missed while trying to focus and move the camera.
I'll attach one and illustrate what perhaps could have been with autofocus. I also should have adjusted for a higher ISO. I was using a D700 Nikon and it can take good shots hat high ISO. Some of the blur was probably too slow shutter??
the fisch
The opposite, and probably more often used application of the through-focus series, is for a stable subject when you focus beyond...or closer than...the subject and manually and smoothly focus through the stable subject during your burst of exposures.
Expensive with film! But this is why the metaphorical Gods of Photography gave us digital imaging!
Dave Graham
East River, SD