# Help Shooting Birds



## smoke665 (Feb 13, 2017)

Pulled out the Sigma 100-300 yesterday, and took a trip down to a local beaver pond where I'd seen a few ducks earlier in the day. By the time I got there it was getting late, and rain clouds were rolling in. The ducks had moved completely out of range, these two geese were barely at the limit on distance.  Both were shot with a tripod and both are extreme crops. Manual focus was used with live view at 10x, and shutter set on 12 sec. timed release.  My concern is the lack of sharpness, despite adjustments in post. 

So the questions are - 1) Is this because of the extreme crop/distance, 2) Is this because of the failing light, 3) Is this just the best the lens can do,  4) Shutter speed to slow,  5) Any other suggestions for getting a sharper image?

First shot 300mm, ISO 200,  f/7.1, 1/50th 




Beaver Pond02122017_010.jpg by William Raber, on Flickr

Second shot 300mm, ISO 1600, f/10, 1/320




Beaver Pond02122017_001.jpg by William Raber, on Flickr


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 13, 2017)

Were the ducks moving at all on the 1/50th shutter speed.   Why did you choose 1/50 ?
Even if they were slightly moving the shutter speed should be much faster, at least say 1/200.  Otherwise any subject movement is going to cause blur.

Also, I can't see where the focus is crisp anywhere in the image.  maybe the camera was moving from wind, etc even with any delay.

you also mentioned "extreme crop"  Can you show the original non-cropped version ?

Your camera support ISO from 100 - 51,200.  You should test the ISO range on the camera and determine your limits for the ISO.  This will allow you faster shutter speeds for non-perfect light situations.


----------



## MSnowy (Feb 13, 2017)

1. yes
2.yes
3.yes under these conditions
4.yes for any thing moving
5.increase the iso up and up the shutter speed would help some for anything moving. Go out on a better day and hope they come closer


----------



## smoke665 (Feb 13, 2017)

astroNikon said:


> Were the ducks moving at all on the 1/50th shutter speed.   Why did you choose 1/50 ?
> Even if they were slightly moving the shutter speed should be much faster, at least say 1/200.  Otherwise any subject movement is going to cause blur.
> 
> Also, I can't see where the focus is crisp anywhere in the image.  maybe the camera was moving from wind, etc even with any delay.
> ...



Moving??  Not really, though at that distance hard to tell for sure.
Shutter speed? I was trying to hold the ISO lower on the first image, but if you'll notice the second image at ISO 1600 was at 1/320, yet there isn't much difference in sharpness. That's partly what is confusing me.
Camera movement? As it was hands off, mirror up when the shutter was triggered, it was pretty stable. No wind.
Extreme Crop - Not where I can send the original right now, but both of these were a 4x6 crop.


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 13, 2017)

Run sharpness / imaging tests inside your house.  So you can control everything.

After testing inanimate objects, then
If you have a pet, have them sit still and take their photo at various shutter speeds.  Or have a person sit there and slightly wobble to see how those slower shutter speeds can be blurring from the slightest movements.

in your two images both geese were both in different places, so they definitely were moving.

I don't trust my eyes too much on focusing especially animals.  I let my AF system do that.


----------



## jcdeboever (Feb 13, 2017)

Any time I see the watercolor effect in my images, I know it is generally, too slow a shutter speed, camera movement, or subject is too far away. Even on a tripod, if a subject is breathing, I always consider the shutter speed in relation the the focal length. Granted, if on a tripod you can get away with a little slower than double the length but if subject moves, all bets are off. This situation is magnified worse the smaller the sensor size. So ISO is your friend here as mentioned above but then the distance is something only your legs can control in relation to your lens reach.... but then you spook the subject. As mentioned, better light is always a plus.


----------



## smoke665 (Feb 13, 2017)

@astroNikon Didn't have a way of determining the exact distance, but I'm guessing close to 500 yards.  Viewfinder uses phase shift to focus, but the geese were so far that I couldn't tell if the single spot was on them or something else. Live view uses contrast edge detect and in low light it struggles. So that's the reason for manual focus in live view with 10x magnification.

@jcdeboever I have another one that I shot at ISO 3200, 1/640. I'll go back and check it when I get a chance later. The rain ran me off before I had time to try higher ISOs. However, I'm thinking I was also close to exceeding the capabilities of the lens. Previously I've noticed that it tends to be a little softer even at the 100-200 mm range as compared to my pentax 50-200mm at comparable focal lengths.


----------



## MSnowy (Feb 13, 2017)

These are both pretty good for something that's maybe 3 ft wide shot at 1500ft away


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 13, 2017)

also, with extreme distances if a storm was approaching you may have had water / haze / etc in the air thus further deteriorating any high detail in a photo.  Even very minor amounts will decrease the IQ.

I was out Saturday to take photos of Bald Eagles but due to distance, and a very slight haze I knew any image would not be very detailed.  The only solution is going back on a day that is clear with no haze.  No Shutter, ISO or Aperture will correct an image if you are shooting through something.  Try shooting through a pane glass window or a screen as an example, or fog.

but 500 yards .. this is what to expect.


----------



## smoke665 (Feb 13, 2017)

@astroNikon there was a rain cloud approaching but the sun had been shining. So there really wasn't much haze. As you and others have suggested I suspect that I found the limit on range for this lens!


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 13, 2017)

smoke665 said:


> @astroNikon there was a rain cloud approaching but the sun had been shining. So there really *wasn't much haze*. As you and others have suggested I suspect that I found the limit on range for this lens!


Any haze will deteriorate the image.

I take photos of subjects up to 14 miles away, moving at very fast speeds.  Any haze what so ever affects the images.

This is about 1,000 yards away, but a much bigger subject. Notice the lack of crispness / detail from the minor haze.



aircraft_20161015 (5 of 16)

versus this at about the same distance.



20170115_Aircraft-2


not birds but you'll get the same result. 
I tend not to bother to take pics with birds when there's any haze.  All the images lack detail.


----------



## smoke665 (Feb 13, 2017)

@astroNikon I'd be happy with your first shot as you can see from today. Nice clear day, sun. Measured off 75 yards, and set up in a protected area so there wouldn't be any influence from wind. Tripod, Manual focus 10x maginification on screen, mirror locked up time release, 300 mm, ISO 800, f/13, 1/800. Image opened in PS viewed at 100%, cropped, then exported as a JPEG at 200% of the original.  The "r" and the "e" in the title of the magazine measure 1" tall. The lettering below that measures just under 3/4" tall and the smaller letters on the right are 3/8" tall.  So comparing the image on my screen with the actual magazine the screen image is right at 75% of the magazine. Straight out of the camera with no adjustments





In PS Unsharp and noise filter run. White balance adjustment, levels, and curves.





So does this look right or am I wasting my time with this lens????? I've never been comfortable with the results on this lens, at first I assumed it was me, now I'm not so sure.


----------



## zombiesniper (Feb 13, 2017)

Is it also like this if you use the auto focus?

I would say that a 300mm lens should be able to deliver a better image then this at 75 yards.


----------



## smoke665 (Feb 13, 2017)

@zombiesniper I need to find some paper targets so I can get a decent place to put the spot on to be sure, but from what I've seen so far yes it does. The soft focus doesn't seem to change much with a change in shutter speed either. The one thing I haven't tried (will do it tomorrow) is try activating shutter with the button. Shake reduction is not active on either timed release or remote.


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 13, 2017)

smoke665 said:


> @astroNikon I'd be happy with your first shot as you can see from today. Nice clear day, sun. Measured off 75 yards, and set up in a protected area so there wouldn't be any influence from wind. Tripod, Manual focus 10x maginification on screen, mirror locked up time release, 300 mm, ISO 800, f/13, 1/800. Image opened in PS viewed at 100%, cropped, then exported as a JPEG at 200% of the original.  The "r" and the "e" in the title of the magazine measure 1" tall. The lettering below that measures just under 3/4" tall and the smaller letters on the right are 3/8" tall.  So comparing the image on my screen with the actual magazine the screen image is right at 75% of the magazine. Straight out of the camera with no adjustments
> View attachment 135059
> 
> In PS Unsharp and noise filter run. White balance adjustment, levels, and curves.
> ...



#1 - What are you doing with a RedBook?   Wait .. I *do not* want to know.

#2 - Do you happen to have a filter on the lens ??

#3 - take images far more up close.  Say from 35 feet away.

#4 - I read this review of it .... it does not do so well.  In the summary it was stated "Unfortunately, the performance of this sample is on par, and sometimes bested by, the consumer telezooms of its competitors."
==> Sigma 100-300mm f/4 EX DG HSM APO Review

If you cannot get sharp images with this lens in a test environment: tripod, remote release, image not too far away, etc.  then there is definitely something wrong here and it may not be you.


----------



## smoke665 (Feb 13, 2017)

@astroNikon  LOL it was on the counter it had red easy to see Letters!

No filters. Going to print out some test targets and try it again. I bought this used some time ago, and frankly it keeps getting put up, because of questiontionable performance. Might be time to look for something else.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 13, 2017)

Smoke--not sure which exact Sigma 100-300 you own, but I owned the Sigma *100-300mm f/4 EX HSM *lens for about 10 years; sold it last month. it never was all 'that" sharp, but I used to use it for softball and baseball games, where the focal length range and f/4 max aperture made it a pretty "hot lens" on DX-Nikon back in the mid-2000's era.

The thing is--1/50 second at 300mm...that speed is dangerous...look at the goose black and white juncture on their necks--see that faint line of white? That's movement. The high-ISO shot at the proper minimum shutter speed of 1/320 second really is much better. Slow speed shots at long focal length MIGHT turn out sharp 10,15,20 percent of the time, but the reject rate will be pretty substantial on many subjects, or if the conditions are not 100% ideal.

The 100-300 f/4 EX HSM Sigma was wayyyyyyyyy less sharp than the Nikkor 300 f/4 AF-S ED lens was. or even the ancient 300 f/4.5 ED~IF from 1987. it's a long zoom., and was never designed to do heavy crop-ins on...that's the thing with a zoom: if you fill the frame and keep it in its normal wheelhouse, it's fine, but if yuo need to realllllllly crop-in hard, the zoom weaknesses will show.


----------



## zombiesniper (Feb 13, 2017)

smoke665 said:


> I need to find some paper targets



Here's a decent one


----------



## smoke665 (Feb 13, 2017)

@Derrel I'm not sure which model it is. The geese were barely visible, so it was an extreme crop. The shots today we're at 75 yards. 100% crop then 200% enlargement.  So again a really hard crop. Researching how to effectively test the lens. Guess I'll go from there.


----------



## smoke665 (Feb 13, 2017)

@zombiesniper Thanks I'm going to try that. Looks very much like one I saw at B&H


----------



## dxqcanada (Feb 13, 2017)

smoke665 said:


> @Derrel I'm not sure which model it is.



Take a picture of the lens, we should be able to figure it out.


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 14, 2017)

smoke665 said:


> @Derrel I'm not sure which model it is. The geese were barely visible, so it was an extreme crop. The shots today we're at 75 yards. 100% crop then 200% enlargement.  So again a really hard crop. Researching how to effectively test the lens. Guess I'll go from there.


First, take pictures of objects where there is ZERO crop.
Fill the sensor with an image whether the RedBook or something else that has a lot of detail.  Do this at 100mm, 200mm and 300mm.

And then use another lens and take a picture, then compare the detail of the two.


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 14, 2017)

btw, doing extreme crops takes practice from something up close, optimizing your IQ, then going further distances while optimizing you image as you go further and further away.  Then being very cognizant of anything in the air that can diffuse the image detail.

This was about 7 miles away, heavily cropped.  I do many images heavily cropped.   It's basically a dot in the viewfinder, but you learn how to focus on dots.



20151114_Nippon747-1


----------



## smoke665 (Feb 14, 2017)

astroNikon said:


> btw, doing extreme crops takes practice from



I've done a lot of them over the years, just not with this lens. Hopefully will be able to test it further today.


----------

