KevinFRK

Are you telling me that some cruel person hasn't glued fake bills to these poor birds? I mean, you can even see the join!

Mmm, chair + fen = inevitable end

One of my favourite accessories in my camera bag is a folding square of foam, from Multimat - https://outdoorgear.co.uk/multimat-compact-kumfie-sit-mat/ Light, doesn't get in the way, and allows me to sit on most flat surfaces even if damp.

On free software - I seem to remember Canon are meant to be at the better end of what is on offer in this area (and some camera suppliers just give demo versions of third party software). So I just got lucky perhaps.

I have wondered about getting a monitor that might be more faithful to its inputs, when what I guess a Spyder might do is relevant, but my colour memory/sense is not that great, and I'm certainly not doing prints of my own photos - I'd need a much better printer!

I had the separate Topaz products, but when they offered me a free upgrade to the combo product I leapt at it - it just seemed so logical to have it all in one package, rather than chaining them.

Yes ... one more thing to get in the way: my current experiment in this area is a three-legged camping stool, so I can better watch a clump of promising bushes, etc. for longer. And it both helps the watching and gets in the way (and is a little more weight). I'll persist with it - though perhaps more when the ground is dryer and I'm less likely to find mud to sink into on one or more legs.

On semi-automatic modes - it really does depend on whether the algorithm the camera uses for the settings it controls matches our desires. If it's close enough to our desires, it's a help, if it's doing 1/8000s at ISO12800 it's clearly gone mad!

Though I've a better piece of software, I actually just use Canon's DPP4 for getting the lighting to my taste, but then I only want "whole picture" effects, and messing with the general luminance, plus the histogram tool (setting mid point and end points to match the actual picture's luminance histogram) seems enough to me. I do have ACDSee's Photo Studio (mostly chosen as it's a one off payment, not a subscription), and Topaz Photo AI which would allow more controlled messing, but with wildlife, I don't really thing messing is "right".

I actually use ACDSee to add keywords to photos (and ratings, though DPP4 can do that), and Topaz only infrequently when the photo looks like it might be rescue-able that way.

Good advice, if mostly things I kind of knew.

I knew from days with a point and click doing landscapes that a monopod is a real benefit (on a light wight point and shoot, a collapsed monopod still helps with a bit more inertia to limit shake as well), but alas if taking photos of birds the chance of the monopod putting the camera at the right height, especially if I want to use the view finder, are pretty remote.

Controlled Breathing - that might be worth my while investigating.

Better arm positioning - kind of also suffers if shooting upwards, but is something I do sometimes remember to think about. I need to remember this more often!

And yes, on AF speed I need to practice/experience, and also think about changing settings on the fly - currently I have speed and aperture fixed manually, and ISO on automatic. This means shots can drift into high ISO without me thinking about it. I either need to remember to change speed when going into a shaded wood, or experiment with Av mode. Av mode worries me with birds as it might result in motion blur too often: but with the new lens that might be a little less of an issue.

Hah, someone who pays attention to poster names & history :)

The new lens has pluses & minuses, but overall I think I'm happy:

• The weight, and so the difficulty of holding it on target at 800mm is very noticeable (compared to the 600mm F11). VERY.
• There's nothing to lock the zoom in place, even just "fully closed" - this means it often extended as I pull it out of my camera bag - the "tight or loose" ring seems of limited value
• it seems a little slow at coming into focus (but then at 800mm you'd expect it would be slower than a fixed 600mm)
• I'm not (yet?) fast enough/with it enough to change zoom dynamically (e.g. as a bird flies overhead)
• But after all that, the little bit extra aperture and length do seem to noticeably better shots at the limits
• The "AF off" button (to hold the AF distance while pressed) is definitely interesting, and I need to improve my use of it

Very nice photos. Is the particularly pale one just a local special or a young one as the starlings round here (Reading, UK) seem all to be speckled black and iridescent?

Thank you. Alas, I don't know your reference, but it is fun when you can read expressions into bird's faces: though the time of the furious kite coming straight at me was a little troubling :)

Nice shot, but what sort of fox is that, it certainly doesn't look like a Red Fox from the UK.

I can imagine going off post-processing, especially if you start believing you've got to twiddle every switch, move every slider, and correct every portion of the picture separately (the sort of thing portrait photographers get up to with Photoshop, etc.). Far too easy to get obsessional about it, and lose the point and the fun.

But for me, I limit it to cropping to a balanced subject/background, and get the whole-picture lighting correct (living in the UK, and often taking shots in poor weather or woodland means the light is rarely right) is my usual limit - though I do play with the histogram tool: tweaking the midpoint can do great things for "washed out" shots. I rarely even touch colour balance. I'm also just using Canon's DPP4 for this, so free but quite effective. Given just those, I find it feels much more like an opportunity to review and reflect on what I've taken than a burden, and in some cases, e.g. rescue a boring shadow into visible plumage.

I split my subjects into wildlife and others: for the "Others", Landscape, say, its perfectly correct to want to take the photo and "Fill the frame", only cropping if you need to straighten the shot or there's an actively irritating out of focus thing at one edge. You move, select the right lens, zoom, etc. to achieve that, before you press the shutter.

With wildlife, I take what I can, and fully expect to crop, even down to a tenth of the area of the original shot. That's because I don't have the luxury to get closer or change lens, or indeed do much to play with camera settings - if I do, the bird or animal will likely flee (or just move because it wants to). My only acknowledgement of "Fill the frame" is that after taking the best shot I can at the point of first spotting the subject, I will then try and get closer, just in case I get lucky.

But, it's your photo and so your choice - if it doesn't satisfy you, it's a failure, regardless of the opinion of others.

I would suggest massive cropping to get rid of a lot of that water lettuce.

Not sure I saw the same line of comments, but the one I started with guessed at no weather proofing, which wasn't a good start at truth. I feel I'm now committed so will take the normal fanboy choice of defending my choice to the death (errr ... maybe not).

Too invested to change - oh yes: 16mm, 35mm, 50mm, 100mm macro - v. nice, and a cheapie zoom I never use as it has no AF/MF switch, and the aforementioned 600mm. I do wonder if I should have gone the zoom route rather than prime, but choosing "today's lens" helps settle my mind in the right mode. So, a zoom is definitely an experiment.