Beginner How did I make this bird look so soft

Shirleyr

Shirleyr

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,395
Name
Shirley
Edit My Images
No
I'm thinking I've missed the focus even though I was very close to it or maybe too close, anyway I could have added on photoshop just crop, brightness and contrast and unmask sharp. Those are what I usually add, I might not have done all that on this bird but something is not right, what should have been a cracker of a shot is not. Could I ask for advice on this please.
Yellowhammer in full song.jpg
 
What was the focal length and shutter speed, could be a small amount of blur.

Or, the background looks very noisy so it could be high ISO noise reduction.
 
Nawty said:
What was the focal length and shutter speed, could be a small amount of blur.

Or, the background looks very noisy so it could be high ISO noise reduction.
Click to expand...

According to the Exif Info:-

Exposure Time (1 / Shutter Speed) = 1/2500 second ===> 0.0004 second
Lens F-Number / F-Stop = 56/10 ===> ƒ/5.6
Exposure Program = aperture priority (3)
ISO Speed Ratings = 400
Lens Model = EF400mm f/5.6L USM
 
Last edited:
Nawty said:
What was the focal length and shutter speed, could be a small amount of blur.

Or, the background looks very noisy so it could be high ISO noise reduction.
Click to expand...


ISO 400 F5.6 400mm 1/2500 roughly

Edit, bother! took me ages to find Jeffrey's page :)
 
Last edited:
I've just been on Flickr to get the exif, strange. I'm sure I didn't do a heavy crop as I was very close to it. Camera shake is the only thing I can think off, I have my camera on a monopod as its too heavy for me to handhold.
 
molly said:
I've just been on Flickr to get the exif, strange. I'm sure I didn't do a heavy crop as I was very close to it. Camera shake is the only thing I can think off, I have my camera on a monopod as its too heavy for me to handhold.
Click to expand...
You must have a hell of a shake at 1/2500 - doubtful, but what was the distance?
 
molly said:
I've just been on Flickr to get the exif, strange. I'm sure I didn't do a heavy crop as I was very close to it. Camera shake is the only thing I can think off, I have my camera on a monopod as its too heavy for me to handhold.
Click to expand...

Need to know how much of a crop it is - all this info is important if you're asking technical questions about a shot.

It could be missed focus and if it is very close range could be that the lens is front focussing (doesn't look like back focus as none of the twig is in focus)..
 
About 7 ft. I don't shake that much, just slightly after walking up a hill in wales. I'll see if I can go to photoshop and get the original.
 
Last edited:
molly said:
About 7 ft. I don't shake that much, just slightly after walking up a hill in wales.
Click to expand...

ISO 400 at 7 ft and 1/2500th sec ........should be sharp ... what the minimum focus distance of the lens

but all that noise??
 
Maybe post the original, unedited version. Just a straight jpeg conversion.
 
It's been a while since I used the 400mm 5.6 , one of the finest lenses I have owned and still do , looking at the exif all looks good for a sharp shot , possibly to close at 7ft as and if I remember correctly the min focusing distance for this lens is a bit more than 7ft could be wrong but it sounds pretty close for the 400mm 5.6
 
den said:
It's been a while since I used the 400mm 5.6 , one of the finest lenses I have owned and still do , looking at the exif all looks good for a sharp shot , possibly to close at 7ft as and if I remember correctly the min focusing distance for this lens is a bit more than 7ft could be wrong but it sounds pretty close for the 400mm 5.6
Click to expand...
I think this could be the answer, as I have always tried to get really close to a bird but when I take a seagull in flight they are my best photos. It just would never have dawned on me, too close. Thanks so much for answering and for all the other replies, its very much appriciated.:canon::ty:
 
den said:
It's been a while since I used the 400mm 5.6 , one of the finest lenses I have owned and still do , looking at the exif all looks good for a sharp shot , possibly to close at 7ft as and if I remember correctly the min focusing distance for this lens is a bit more than 7ft could be wrong but it sounds pretty close for the 400mm 5.6
Click to expand...

MFD is 3.5m according to Canon so that might be the problem
 
To me, tis looks like simply out of focus. I notice, epically when tracking with small birds (such as long tailed tits!) that focussing can get a bit off. I’d suggest having another check - maybe some garden birds so you’re not missing a cracker - and do some testing. Was it in AFS or AFC? That could make a difference as it might have slightly moved and then the AF plane went out a bit.. just my penny worth but may be the thing!
 
Yes I just checked and 3.5mtrs or 11.5 feet min focus distance.
If you're ever in the market for a newer lens check out the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM MK II
It has a minimum focus of 0.98 meters officially but I have set this up on a tripod and measured it from the sensor plane at 100mm with 31 inches
And at 400mm it was 35 inches.
Plus the 4 stops of IS really work as I have had several more than acceptable keepers handheld 400mm at 1/40sec and a few as low as 1/20 sec when I wanted to get a full 360 blur of a helicopters rotor blur and the choppers body and writing were pin sharp plus the full 360 rotor blur.
Well chuffed I was and still am.
 
I used to have that 400mm lens and swapped it for the 100-400 L II because of the close focusing distance and the extra versatility of the zoom. I can photograph a butterfly at my feet and I'm not very tall!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top