Little Fella

Goldcrest
Before the rains came ! I think the pool photography is bu**er*d
for a while now.
Terrible light as you can see.
D7000
Nikor 70-300mm
1000 ISO
80th @f8
70% of frame
Usual pp in Paint Shop Pro /Neat Image & czm
Interesting point- if I had the expensive 2.8 lens - would it make any difference. I doubt it because the depth of field would be just the same- and thats the key issue with the stuff I do at the pool.
Tnaks for looking.
JR

If you shoot at f8 anyway John, obviously would make little difference. Except you could add a TC and get closer, meaning less cropping and better IQ overall. But is it worth expensive money to you?

Nice Goldcrest too.

Thanks Neil
I cant get any nearer really - I,m at 5 ft now ! I know what you mean though. Any way just been down to the pool which took a week to rebuild and its gone agian- floode out - and the hide under 2 foot of water.
I,m getting tired.
Cheers
JR

lovely little fellow, sorry to here about the pool looks like it maybe flooded for a while. Why not use the 50 - 500?

There is always a trade off John. Depth of field is a big issue for your kind of work and so I agree that a f2.8 lens wouldn't benefit you. The only plus would be that the f2.8 might focus a bit quicker (or be easier to focus manually) but at a hell of a cost. Nice image though. I have only ever seen these twice.

Thanks
Phil - Good point about the bigma but its just too big and sticks out to far when the birds are so close. Also , with it not being internal zoom or focus the movement is just too much for them to take. I did try it a few time but they just wouldn't take it.
Cheers
JR

that makes sense mate.

Great shot of a very difficult species JR. It may be a trick of the eye but it looks like it needs some CCW rotation. The only benefits of a 2.8 would be faster focusing which would help in low light situations and the ability to take TC's whilst still retaining reasonably fast focusing. If this is not critical or needed then you would have to find other reasons to justify the additional moola. I have a second hand 300mm f4 which is a bit battered now and occasionally i lust after a 2.8 but this lens is razor sharp even wide open and I then think is it worth the extra £3K for one extra stop? I assume you are referring to the Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 as it is the only zoom in that range at f2.8? Have heard good and bad reports about it.

Nick.

PS sorry to hear about the pool. England has really been hit hard this year with the wet stuff. With almost 3m yearly here I truly sympathise.

Just realised JR your Jay image now has over 2,000 views........is that a record and why so many?

Nick.

Nick
Yes or the straight 300mm . Trouble is I don't do much long range stuff these days and I need the 70mm end in case bigger stuff comes to the pool. I,ll stay as I am I think.
Cheers
JR
PS I think you're right about the rotation but it can be a bit deceiving when the birds are at the right of the pool.I won't repost as it might get a couple of thousand views !!

It's not just the jays either - this one is nudging towards the 300 mark at the moment. As for the right lens for the pools, I think you have it very well sussed already John. Just hope the pools are back in action soon.

David