# The first week with my camera, some nature shots (EOS 7D)



## FlightIsPossible (Dec 15, 2011)

Well this is my second post to the forum, I just joined today. About a week ago I upgraded from a PowerShot SX120is to a EOS 7D. I am very, VERY happy with the camera so far. I am very new to photography... I always loved taking pics, but I just now started learning all the technical aspects of it. I haven't had a chance to get out much with it, but here are a few pics from the first week with my new cam. 
(I am very new, so any tips are greatly appreciated)


Bull Elk(wild lol), Near "Royal Blue" Tennessee






Elk





Elk





Dog





Bird, Smokey Mountain NP


----------



## bazooka (Dec 15, 2011)

Not bad at all for just starting out.

I think #3 is more effective than #1 and #2 because of all the empty textureless, colorless, and very bright sky.


----------



## FlightIsPossible (Dec 15, 2011)

bazooka said:


> Not bad at all for just starting out.
> 
> I think #3 is more effective than #1 and #2 because of all the empty textureless, colorless, and very bright sky.



I completely agree. I wasn't happy with those either for the reasons ya mentioned.

Any suggestion what would have made the most difference? Different position, maybe different metering mode?


----------



## Joel_W (Dec 15, 2011)

Congratulations on the new camera. 

Pictures 1 & 2 have blown out skies. You solved that problem  to some extent in picture #3 with the use of the trees, but the Deer? is over exposed.  As you suggested yourself, a tighter cropping would have really made it a much better composed picture. Once you composed a tighter image, you should use spot metering targeting the next portion of the deer. Since that area is darker then neutral grey, open up a 1/3 of a stop. 

I actually like your bird picture. It's well composed, and exposed properly. 

Joel


----------



## TwoTwoLeft (Dec 15, 2011)

The elk and foliage is underexposed. It's a tough shot against a bright sky. Bust out your manual and read about the different metering settings for exposure. Overall, it really isn't anything that can't be fixed with a little processing. With a little crop and processing the 2nd & 3rd elk photo actually have quite a bit of potential. I like the dog!


----------



## FlightIsPossible (Dec 16, 2011)

Thanks for the comments and suggestions. When I took the photos of the Elk, the sun was about to set it was getting dark and I just couldn't get the exposure right. It was getting pretty dark by the time I got close enough for pic #1 and #2(#1 and #2 were the last pics I took that day). In every pic, either the sky was overexposed or the Elk was underexposed. I didn't have much time to mess with the camera, that Bull Elk was following a Cow Elk and I am pretty sure its mating season. I was in a wide open field with my kit lens and he didn't seem happy with me at all, I was pushing my luck getting as close as I did. I will read more on "metering" and hopefully my next Elk pics will be better. Thanks again!


----------



## FlightIsPossible (Dec 16, 2011)

I think I just found out what part of my problem was... I was using "aperture mode" and I am pretty sure I was also in "spot metering". When I went to recompose I didn't realize it wasn't locking the exposure and that there is a button for that(EOS 7D). I think that may have helped the situation a bit. I remember reading that already, but there is so much information to remember, I suppose I forgot about that.


----------



## bazooka (Dec 16, 2011)

Personally, I prefer to use evaluative metering (default I believe) and manual exposure mode.  This way, I just fill the frame with what I want exposed properly (or something of a similar tonal value like the ground), center the meter, and recompose without having to mess with it again.  As the sun goes down, you will have to make regular adjustments, but I find that more reliable and consistent than evaluative metering on the entire scene.

I think the best technique would be what you did in #3 and avoid silhouetting him against the sky... and furthermore avoid including the sky at all.  OR an ND grad filter would have been very appropriate for all three shots.  To avoid sky on #3, you could tilt down and get more of the ground, or get a longer lens.


----------



## Joel_W (Dec 16, 2011)

Bazooka, for general scenics I also prefer manual exposure setting so that I can find, then expose for the most important subject matter.  I do prefer aperture priority for macro and close up work as I'm constantly adjusting the aperture to control depth of field. I know that's being lazy, but I've more then once forgot to also adjust the shutter, thus screwing up the exposure.


----------



## FlightIsPossible (Dec 17, 2011)

Thanks for the ideas and suggestions. I do typically keep the camera in "manual mode", but I had heard some photographers say that they primarily keep their camera on "aperture mode". I figured I would give it a try the day that I took the pics of the Elk. Thinking back on it, both those photographers were professional "portrait" photographers... maybe it doesn't work as well as a "nature" pic taker(just a theory of mine at this point). 

I did take your advice though and switched back to using manual. I find it easier to work with that mode. 

Thanks again for all the suggestions, it certainly helps figure all this stuff out... kinda a steep learning curve with this camera and photography in general. So much info, so little time.

Here are a few pics I took today... the lighting was better than when I took the Elk pics and I stayed in manual. Came out a bit better. (uncropped, unedited)


----------



## Natalie (Dec 18, 2011)

Great shots! You have a natural eye for composition, and it really shows (particularly in the first set of photos). What lenses do you have? For mammal photography, I would recommend using a longer lens (>100mm) and a lower aperture, to help separate the animal from the background. In the shots of the two does and and the turkeys, a lot of the background is in focus, which is a bit distracting to the eye.


----------



## FlightIsPossible (Dec 18, 2011)

Thanks for the kind words *Natalie*! The lenses I currently have are...EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM (Kit), EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM and a EF 50mm f1.4 US. Yesterday was the first time I got to use my new 70-300mm, the deer and turkey pics were all taken with that... the landscape pics were taken with my kit lens.          

I think I would have been much better off using the 50mm or even the kit lens for the pic with the 2 does and the turkey pic. I was very close to the animals for both those pics and I didn't have to zoom in much. Do you think I could have lowered the aperture enough on that 70-300mm to blur the background? I just looked at the pic info, and aperture was set at 5.0. I think I may have used the wrong lens for the job on those particular pics. 

Thanks again for the comments and insight, much appreciated!!!


----------



## Robin Usagani (Dec 18, 2011)

Get a nicer lens man. Be careful  with your shutter speed.  The first photo you shot was at 1/50 and you have 135mm focal length.  That is way too slow and more likely will give you soft image.  The subject is underexposed.  Personally either make sure the sun is behind you, OR just expose the subject and dont worry about blown sky unless you are trying to do a silhouette or something.  Consider these:

24-105 f/4L
70-200 f/2.8L or IS
135 f/2L


----------



## jake337 (Dec 18, 2011)

Schwettylens said:


> Get a nicer lens man. Be careful with your shutter speed. The first photo you shot was at 1/50 and you have 135mm focal length. That is way too slow and more likely will give you soft image. The subject is underexposed. Personally either make sure the sun is behind you, OR just expose the subject and dont worry about blown sky unless you are trying to do a silhouette or something. Consider these:
> 
> 24-105 f/4L
> 70-200 f/2.8L or IS
> 135 f/2L



For nature? Maybe 300-500 range plus some TC would work nice if nature/wildlife is your prime subject.  I did not add any of the 300, 400, 500, 600 fast primes because I'm not sure if your ready to spend equal, double, triple and even more than quadruple the price of your body.

300 f4
Canon EOS 300 F4 L ULTRASONIC (77) 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS TELEPHOTO LENS - KEH.com

400 f5.6
Canon EOS 400 F5.6 L ULTRASONIC (77) 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS TELEPHOTO LENS - KEH.com

100-400 f4.5-5.6
Canon EOS 100-400 F4.5-5.6 L IMAGE STABILIZATION ULTRASONIC (77) 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS ZOOM TELEPHOTO LENS - KEH.com

tokina 400 f5.6
Canon EOS 400 F5.6 TOKINA ATX SD (72) WITH CAPS 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS TELEPHOTO LENS - KEH.com

sigma 150-500 f5-6.3
Canon EOS 150-500 F5-6.3 SIGMA APO DG OS HSM (86) WITH HOOD, CAPS, CASE, 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS ZOOM TELEPHOTO LENS - KEH.com

tamron 200-500 f5-6.3
Canon EOS 200-500 F5-6.3 TAMRON SP DI INTERNAL FOCUS LD (86) (A08) WITH HOOD, CAPS, CASE, 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS ZOOM TELEPHOTO LENS - KEH.com

tamron 200-400 f5.6
Canon EOS 200-400 F5.6 TAMRON LD INTERNAL FOCUS (77) (75DE) WITH HOOD, CAPS, 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS ZOOM TELEPHOTO LENS - KEH.com


----------



## Joel_W (Dec 18, 2011)

The 1st Doe picture and your Turkey pictures are the ones I like best. I would have cropped the 1st one so that the tree on the right was at the right edge. That would have tightened up the picture just enough, and helped with the DOF issue.  The Turkey shot could use a little better composition. Move the bird with the up right head more towards the center. Here's a quick crop of the Turkey shot to give you a better idea of what I'm taking about.


----------



## Frequency (Dec 19, 2011)

Hi
Images 1 &2: Wonderful opportunity; but not benefited well; the animal does not stand out of the B/G to make an enjoyable distinction.
Image3: This clearly speaks about your potential
Image 4: In spite of the lack of eye contact, there is a story there and i liked it too
Image5: Excellent; yet i prefer trimming away the tree on the  right, bringing the deer out of centre and giving the animal closer look to theviewer; its eyes would speak a lot, i am sure
Image6: A great vantage point; a great image
Image7&8: Close ups would work better?
Image9: not happy with this one for lack of distinction
Image 10&11: lack points of interest; in the 11th, if there were a bird on the wood, that would have nullified the monotony

Expecting more
Regards


----------



## FlightIsPossible (Dec 19, 2011)

Thanks for all the comments, insight and suggestions. I did not want to edit or crop any of the original pics I posted because I wanted to get a "educated" opinion on the pics before I did that. I almost feel like I am cheating if I edit pics or crop, but since everyone else seems to, I will also. I agree that alot(maybe all) of the pics do look better cropped.

I had planned on getting one of the "L" series telephoto lenses in the next month or so... something preferably below $1500. I figured I would wait and make sure I got the right lens and didn't waste money. Since I am pretty new to all of this, I am not quite sure what would be best for me yet. A little more research and I am sure I will figure it out... I just have other things on my agenda at this particular time... like learning the basics lol. Thanks for the lens suggestions tho, I will certainly check them all out and try to figure out what is best for me and my budget. 

Here was my favorite photo that I took that day, it still has a pretty boring background, but I like it none-the-less.... and this one is cropped.


----------



## Frequency (Dec 20, 2011)

Lovely shot


----------



## Robin Usagani (Dec 20, 2011)

Yes, but the OP is just starting out and probably want more usable lenses.  You really think a new photographer would want to spend so much money on a 400mm?  Pretty extreme dont you think?  Unless he is 100% sure he just want to take wildlife photos.  What if he wants to take photo of a family member.  Make the person stand so far away?  It will surely crack me up if I ask somebody what lenses they have and they reply, I have a kit lens and a 400mm L.



jake337 said:


> Schwettylens said:
> 
> 
> > Get a nicer lens man. Be careful with your shutter speed. The first photo you shot was at 1/50 and you have 135mm focal length. That is way too slow and more likely will give you soft image. The subject is underexposed. Personally either make sure the sun is behind you, OR just expose the subject and dont worry about blown sky unless you are trying to do a silhouette or something. Consider these:
> ...


----------



## FlightIsPossible (Dec 22, 2011)

I am 100% sure that nature/wildlife is what I will mainly be focusing on, anything below 200mm seems like it would be too small for me(at least for a zoom lens). After I took the Elk pics, I went and bought a EF 70-300 IS USM just to get a cheaper, more disposable zoom lens that I could practice with before I invested in a "L" lens. That's what I used to take the Deer photos with. I am going to research lenses quite a bit before I decide on which one to go with, but something 400mm or higher would be nice... below $1500 would be great, but I can go over that if there is something really worth the money.

Thanks again for the suggestions, wish it would stop raining so I could go out and take some pics... Good day all.


----------

