CCC Forum

Hi Paul,

Further to my last post regarding the outing, circumstances now dictate that neither Paul Wenham or myself can make this outing.

Sorry for any inconvenience caused and again thank you for organising the trip. Hopefully we can join another one in the future.

At least this post will save you an unnecessary phone call to the centre.

Regards,

Tom

Paul, David and I had a very enjoyable day at Millers Wood. The birds put on a stellar performance for our benefit and It is definitely worth a return visit, maybe at a different time of year to get some variety. Thanks to Paul for suggesting such a great location and organising the trip.

Pictures to follow, once I have had the opportunity to go through the 1300+ I took today.

1300+

Took just over 400 myself and a quick edit i.e. all the failures, blurs, bird bums etc has brought down to less than half of that.

I had 323 but my final count after deletions is 313. Although my camera is set up for multiple shooting I was only taking single shots although my finger did occasionally linger go the button and i ended with two or three shots in quick succession.

I was using a Canon 7D mk II with a Canon 100-400 f/4-5.6 mk II.

Some of my shots:

1. Great Tit
2. Blue Tit
3. Great Spotted Woodpecker

… and some more

4. Jay
5. Nuthatch
6. Grey Squirrel

You can check out more photographs on my Flickr account at:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/44566609@ ... 4099932770

Paul Heester wrote:1300+

Took just over 400 myself and a quick edit i.e. all the failures, blurs, bird bums etc has brought down to less than half of that.

I have just completed my initial run through and, ironically, will probably have a similar number of usable shots where the bird is sharp and in a good position.

One of the reasons for the low number compared to shots taken is lens sharpness. If you recall, at the beginning of the day I was complaining about my images being soft. The owner of the wood, John, suggested that it might be an in camera focussing calibration issue. For flexibility, I had started off using my Canon 70-300 DO (Diffractive Optics) lens, since on a crop sensor I could get the full frame equivalent of 480 mm at full stretch. Unfortunately, I had forgotten that this lens is a bit soft at anything over 200, so I ended up with a lot of unusable images. The way the 70-300 DO draws at the long end of its focal range really is very crude. I might have got better results shooting through the bottom of a milk bottle ........

After a while, I switched to my Canon 300 f/4L which was a great improvement. Even my inexpensive Panasonic 100-300 was better than the 70-300 DO. Given that the Panasonic is less than a quarter of the price compared to the Canon, the performance of the latter really is inexcusable. Its relatively diminutive size is convenient, but it is still bigger and heavier than the Panasonic. eBay beckons, unless someone here is tempted to make me an offer after the stellar write-up I have given it.

davidb wrote:I was using a Canon 7D mk II with a Canon 100-400 f/4-5.6 mk II.

It is a combination which has given you some good results. You have produced some excellent work.

Thanks Mike - I tried my best. If nothing else it was a good day out with like minded people.

At least the Nature Competition is covered for a few years!

I've uploaded 45 images (including the ones in this post) to Flickr. The remaining photographs had varying degrees of success but were not good enough to process them further. I'll not delete them but my screen saver (which looks into my "Events" folder for donor pictures) will occassionally make use of them.

I was using a Canon 7D mk II with a Canon 100-400 f/4-5.6 mk II.

Hi David,
I love your Woodpecker image.
Looking forward to seeing Paul's images taken with your borrowed Canon 100-400mm lens.
Iggy