Wildlife: show us your walk on the wild side and post your wild animal photos

[JamesBedster]

This one with the Leica 100-400. I think the creature looks almost reverential in this pic

https://flic.kr/p/2mz9ZzS

 

[JamesBedster]

And here are some stag pictures from the same walk

https://flic.kr/p/2mzeugn
https://flic.kr/p/2mzi1aY
https://flic.kr/p/2mzvVWC

 

[L0n3Gr3yW0lf]

@JamesBedster you do know you can post up to 20 pictures per Reply, that way the thread page doesn't blow up in the number of pages.

 

[poetsie]

once again I was at the fallow deer rut

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[itisasitis]

once again I was at the fallow deer rut View attachment 914456 View attachment 914457 View attachment 914458

Incredible colors!

 

[poetsie]

Incredible colors!

Thank you, greetzzz Cyril

 

[L0n3Gr3yW0lf]

once again I was at the fallow deer rut View attachment 914456 View attachment 914457 View attachment 914458

That is jaw-dropping ... it's what I live for to experience

 

[jbruce]

If you are interested, here is a site by Mike Jackson, "The Best of the Tetons", from Grand Teton National Park in Wyoming. <https://www.bestofthetetons.com/2021/10/25/hoback-stellar-moose-of-the-tetons/ >

 

[L0n3Gr3yW0lf]

If you are interested, here is a site by Mike Jackson, "The Best of the Tetons", from Grand Teton National Park in Wyoming. <https://www.bestofthetetons.com/2021/10/25/hoback-stellar-moose-of-the-tetons/ >

If only I could but it would take quite a lot to get there for me:

... over "The Pond"
https://media.giphy.com/media/d80SdOeWNm3GE/giphy-downsized-large.gif
.... crossing over Florida

... passing by Alabama

... going down Mississippi

.... having no idea what I am doing in Arkansas

... enjoying the weather of Oklahoma
https://media.giphy.com/media/l4xpWcT7tqiW1j4Os/giphy.mp4
... getting the warm Colorado welcome
https://media.giphy.com/media/xT8qB0DAGUl6hl1BKw/giphy.gif
... to my final destination.

 

[L0n3Gr3yW0lf]

Last weekend I was focusing on getting ducks mid-air, to test the C-AF, to see if I can still manage it after months out of practice:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

"In for the landing"

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

"Touchdown"

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

The shutter speed seems to have not been enough but I am quite happy with the motion blur for the sensation of speed.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

I was very happy with this one, the C-AF does an exceptional job of keeping the duck in focus and this one was my favourite of this burst sequence.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

"Putting the breaks on"

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

I love this shot so much because the duck's head is hidden and, for some reason, it gives the duck a very powerful feeling, a lot more then the one above (which is the same duck in the sequence burst).

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

The next one in the sequence was quite interesting as the floating duck house and the female duck below the frame line up so well vertically, hence why I chose to crop this was to emphasize the position of the subjects a bit more.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

The next one doesn't feel as good as the other ones BUT I still love the position of the wings and the added reflection below the duck landing as it got closer to the water.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

I kept this frame (out of the same sequence) because of the motion blur on the wings and the few drops of water right below the duck (no, it's not duck poop) gives a little bit more context to the action.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

A very young seagull decided to crash the "Feeding the Ducks Party" and it was swinging around, probably to find the best position to take advantage of the ducks. It was flying quite low on the water at times and I am very happy I got the right moment even though I had to crop quite a lot for "only" 200mm.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

The C-AF worked quite well, at least moving from side to side, but it did struggle for a few frames which were strange as I expected the white on dark green to not have any issues like that.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

I love the idea of birds in flight but the best framing that I would love to get is with foreground and background to give a bit more sense of perspective and 3D effect BUT the camera struggled to keep the C-AF on the bird as it got closer to the tree (on the top left of the frame).

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Another favourite of perspective, getting head-on incoming birds in flight is not the easiest job to do even for more high-er end cameras ... and the fact that I was at 200mm where the subject was about 15-20% of the entire image I was quite happy(il)y surprised it worked so well.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Luckily seagulls don't give a flying poop about humans and where you are ... and this one was quite close to me as it was circling around the pond.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

"Touchdown" I was quite surprised that I got almost all the highlights back in post because of the very high contrast between the background and the bright feathers.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Back to the ducks, I do find that 10 FPS may not be as much headroom for capturing "all" the moments of the action as there's quite a bit of action jumping between each frame ... compared to the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III *cough* OM-1 *cough*.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

"Did I get it right, cousin?"

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

"FLY AWAY EVERYONE" (Kids were trying to spook the ducks).

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

"Peaking"

 

[LightSpeed]

E-m1x- M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-400mm f/4.5 TC1.25X IS PRO - Using two teleconverters , the MC14 and the built in 1.25 for 1400MM,
Bird was quite a distance out ( Retraction - Less than 200 yards. Ranged the location with a Leupold laser- 137 yards.) and I just wanted to see how stacked converters on this lens would do.
I found out quickly how difficult this is at such a high magnification, Plus the lens became an F8 and even then had a shallow depth of field. And this was at distance.
This one and a few others came out ok. But there were many that didn't.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[John King]

E-m1x- M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-400mm f/4.5 TC1.25X IS PRO - Using two teleconverters , the MC14 and the built in 1.25 for 1400MM,
Bird was quite a distance out ( 200 yards or more) and I just wanted to see how stacked converters on this lens would do.
I found out quickly how difficult this is at such a high magnification, Plus the lens became an F8 and even then had a shallow depth of field. And this was at distance.
This one and a few others came out ok. But there were many that didn't.
View attachment 915434

Well done, Arthur, but it's easy to see the image degradation setting in! I'm amazed that any were even as good as this.

I guess it's acceptable if you just have to get a shot of that unicorn, and you already knew that.

Thanks for doing the experiment.

 

[LightSpeed]

Well done, Arthur, but it's easy to see the image degradation setting in! I'm amazed that any were even as good as this.

I guess it's acceptable if you just have to get a shot of that unicorn, and you already knew that.

Thanks for doing the experiment.

Thanks John.
The lens is marketed as such that one can throw an MC20, 2x converter and go about ones merry way with 2000mm on hand.
I can testify that this is not the case at all. That's why the lens comes with a 1.25 built in converter, and not a built in MC20.
I was as surprised as anyone that any of these came out this good, especially hand held. Image stabilization is pretty much useless at 1400mm hand held.
At these magnifications the camera jumps when the shutter flips and you can see it clearly. The things that I've learned about using this lens, to this point: 1: The subjects can still be too far away to resolve detail. 2: It's not meant to shoot at small birds at 100 yards. 3: It's spectacular on anything 30-35 yards and inside that range. You can squeeze out a little more range but it's best to be closer. 4: Even with 800mm to play with, you won't be shooting at 800mm at all times. 5: Birds in flight move so fast that the next thing you know they are completely out of the frame, and it's impossible to find them at high magnification. 6: I need a good mono-pod badly. 7: Yes compared to other lenses of this caliber , it's light weight. But that doesn't mean it's light weight. Because it's not. It will slap wear you out trying to hand hold this setup all morning. You can do it but the longer it goes on the more fatiguing it becomes. Any slight movement is magnified exponentially and this manifests itself in images. The further out the subject is, the worse it becomes. Yes, even at higher shutter speeds.
8: I havent learned to use it yet because it's completely different from any lens I've ever used. It's a very nice lens but geared to photographers far more skilled than me.
My failure rate is much higher than my success rate at this point. I'll figure it all out sooner or later. I'm going to start with a good quality mono-pod. I'm looking at this Alan 3 legged thing. It's getting ordered tomorrow. Doubt that will help with birds in flight though. But I think it might help with stills, and set shots of birds taking flight or landing. I don't know.
Oh , number 9: Depth of field is challenging. There is no depth of field. At 800-1000mm about as thin as a piece of paper. One of the guys here wrote a synopsis on depth of field. I read the entire thing and it was a good read. But he sure as heck wasn't using this lens. At F4.5 800mm , you don't have much DOF at all, even at distance. Anyway, I'm having my frustrations. If I miss a shot on Bigfoot, or get a blurry shot like all the other blurry shots of Bigfoot, I'm not going to be happy about it.
Hope you're well,
LS

Meanwhile here's another shot at 1400mm. Here's the other problem. F8 at iso 6400.
I didn't even sign my name on this monstrosity.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[John King]

Thanks John.
The lens is marketed as such that one can throw an MC20, 2x converter and go about ones merry way with 2000mm on hand.
I can testify that this is not the case at all. That's why the lens comes with a 1.25 built in converter, and not a built in MC20.
I was as surprised as anyone that any of these came out this good, especially hand held. Image stabilization is pretty much useless at 1400mm hand held.
At these magnifications the camera jumps when the shutter flips and you can see it clearly. The things that I've learned about using this lens, to this point: 1: The subjects can still be too far away to resolve detail. 2: It's not meant to shoot at small birds at 100 yards. 3: It's spectacular on anything 30-35 yards and inside that range. You can squeeze out a little more range but it's best to be closer. 4: Even with 800mm to play with, you won't be shooting at 800mm at all times. 5: Birds in flight move so fast that the next thing you know they are completely out of the frame, and it's impossible to find them at high magnification. 6: I need a good mono-pod badly. 7: Yes compared to other lenses of this caliber , it's light weight. But that doesn't mean it's light weight. Because it's not. It will slap wear you out trying to hand hold this setup all morning. You can do it but the longer it goes on the more fatiguing it becomes. Any slight movement is magnified exponentially and this manifests itself in images. The further out the subject is, the worse it becomes. Yes, even at higher shutter speeds.
8: I havent learned to use it yet because it's completely different from any lens I've ever used. It's a very nice lens but geared to photographers far more skilled than me.
My failure rate is much higher than my success rate at this point. I'll figure it all out sooner or later. I'm going to start with a good quality mono-pod. I'm looking at this Alan 3 legged thing. It's getting ordered tomorrow. Doubt that will help with birds in flight though. But I think it might help with stills, and set shots of birds taking flight or landing. I don't know.
Oh , number 9: Depth of field is challenging. There is no depth of field. At 800-1000mm about as thin as a piece of paper. One of the guys here wrote a synopsis on depth of field. I read the entire thing and it was a good read. But he sure as heck wasn't using this lens. At F4.5 800mm , you don't have much DOF at all, even at distance. Anyway, I'm having my frustrations. If I miss a shot on Bigfoot, or get a blurry shot like all the other blurry shots of Bigfoot, I'm not going to be happy about it.
Hope you're well,
LS

That's a brilliant review, Arthur.

 

[Jibz]

I had some fun with the Olympus 100-400, I managed to get my first kingfisher shots!

 

[Mountain_Man_79]

At these magnifications the camera jumps when the shutter flips and you can see it clearly.

If you already haven’t started, could I suggest you try using the electronic shutter instead? I’ve always used the e-shutter at longer focal lengths to avoid that very problem.

 

[John King]

If you already haven’t started, could I suggest you try using the electronic shutter instead? I’ve always used the e-shutter at longer focal lengths to avoid that very problem.

Chris, that makes a huge difference with my 75-300 at 300mm on my E-M1 MkII. I'm nowhere near as steady as I once was!

 

[LightSpeed]

He appeared from nowhere.
F5.6 - 1000mm used built in teleconverter for this.
Moved with him until he traveled into the reflections , instead of trying to photo him in bright light reflecting off the water.
It was an experience. Used the reflections.
Hope you are all well,
LS.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[LightSpeed]

Wish I could have been closer. Wildlife photography is tough sometimes.
May never have this opportunity again with the mist coming off the water , Early morning light and stuff.
E-m1x- 150-400mm - F5.6 - 1/1250s -iso500.
Bird was out there a good ways so this of course is cropped.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[LightSpeed]

From this morning.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)