Sparrow hawk (f)

[Steve Kaluski]

• Canon EOS R5
• EF200-400mm f/4L IS USM
• ƒ/6.3
• 400mm
• 1/640s
• ISO 6400
• Steve Kaluski
• Fri, 07 January 2022 10:46 AM
• www.untamedimages.co.uk
• Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 12.5 (Macintosh)

All fairly quiet currently so one from the archive.

With hindsight, I should have upped the ISO for more SS and moved the camera a tad more to the right, but in the heat of the moment... Some may want more DoF too, but here I just wanted focus on the head, having the carcass/legs fully in focus I don't think was needed.

Thanks to those who commented or viewed the last posting.

Steve

Subject: Sparrow hawk (f) (Accipiter nisus)
Location: UK
Camera: Canon EOS R5
Lens: EF200-400mm f/4L IS USM
Exposure: 1/640s at f/6.3 ISO6400
Original format: Portrait, FF width, cropped for presentation
Processed via: LRCC 12.5 & PS 24.5


Note: The subject is fully wild and completely unconstrained. Besides the potential impact of my presence, nothing has been done to intentionally alter or affect the ongoing behavior of the subject.
Wood pigeon is from road kill.

 

[Jonathan Ashton]

I was surprised at your SS I thought you would have gone faster.
I appreciate you point regarding DOF but from a personal POV I would have preferred more, I find the soft legs a little distracting, other than that it looks very good indeed, super colours!
I appreciate we all have our favourite working practices but what is wrong with setting camera to Manual mode and Auto ISO, I just can't think of anything more simple - why worry about ISO I don't get it. The way I look at it is ... I need a certain SS and I decide on a certain aperture.... the ISO is what it turns out to be - automatically and immediately determined by camera.

 

[Steve Kaluski]

Hi Jon, thanks for commenting and let me try and answer your feedback.

I was surprised at your SS I thought you would have gone faster.

At the time of shooting, it was 'suggested' that having more MPx's the higher ISO wasn't great and so I was keeping it within a range that I knew I could deal with any noise to deliver a crisp file. SS of 1/640 was in old money OK, as the theory was the length of lens gave you minimum SS ie 500mm lens you needed 1/500, however having more MPX's ie 45 you do need more SS to avoid pixel shift, but the kit was bolted down.

I appreciate you point regarding DOF but from a personal POV I would have preferred more, I find the soft legs a little distracting, other than that it looks very good indeed, super colours!

Again, down to balancing ISO, SS & aperture, and to a degree personal preference, as previous posting with more DoF highlight more 'guts' so this just gave me an option to focus more on the head only.

I appreciate we all have our favourite working practices but what is wrong with setting camera to Manual mode and Auto ISO

Surprised you asked this Jon, as I have been shooting manual for over 13 years and Auto ISO, plus, I was the one who got you and everyone in Wildlife to shoot Auto ISO. :w3

I just can't think of anything more simple - why worry about ISO I don't get it.

Jon, I'm very puzzled on this, for the last two months I have been posting images that have exceeded most ISO postings, saying exactly that, think of ISO as a number endeavouring folk to push the ISO. Only myself and Andreas have pushed ISO ie 25.600 - 40,000 on a regular basis, Will now has also enter the frame and understands the benefits, however dynamic range drops. I now know how far I can push the R3 & R5, but at the time of taking this, as I said, I was being more conservative.

The way I look at it is ... I need a certain SS and I decide on a certain aperture.... the ISO is what it turns out to be - automatically and immediately determined by camera.

Jon - Teaching (your) grandmother to suck eggs. :bg3:

 

[Gerald Kelberg]

Hi Steve,

I don't feel qualified to get into the discussion about depth of filed and the choice of shutter speed vs ISO - it is a matter of personal preference.

The sharp bird looks great against the darker background - nice posture and attitude of the Sparrowhawk - just pausing briefly to look up from her meal.

You have chosen a different image design to how I would have chosen - to my taste, I would have reduced the amount of foreground log and feathers as I feel it being so sharp, it draws my attention from the bird.

Happily we all do things different!

Thanks for sharing, Gerald

 

[Jonathan Ashton]

Steve thanks for replying... but from what I recall I was using Auto ISO before you were!!

 

[William Dickson]

Looks good here. Lovely details and sharp where it matters. I don't mind the crop. I like the fallen feathers. The facial expression and eye say it all. Perfect BG. Nice one Steve.

Will

 

[Steve Kaluski]

Thanks guys, much appreciated.

 

[Joseph Przybyla]

Hi Steve, nice image of a Sparrow Hawk. Techs as always spot on. I read your comment regarding the depth of field and focusing on the head, looking at the image I find myself wishing the legs were in focus. Thank you for sharing.