My new A300 DSLR and 200-500 lens visit the Wetlands (imgs)

[zackiedawg]

Well, I finally had a weekend with my new DSLR-A300 shooting somewhere other than my backyard!

I went to my favorite photo hunting grounds - Wakodahatchee Wetlands and Green Cay Wetlands.

There were some learning curve mistakes - like not realizing that settings in one mode don't carry over to another (my ‘spot’ focus set in P mode didn't carry over to M or A mode), so I rattled off about 20 burst shots that all focused on a nearby branch. The silver lining is that you CAN save different settings in each mode. That I do like.

The following were all using the huge and long Tamron 200-500 F5-6.3 lens (350-750mm equiv).

Here's a raccoon family - mom and three kids - marching up to me:

They started 150 feet away, and by the time I got to the shot above, they were 20 feet away. Then mom stared at me as if to tell me to get out of the way. When I did, she marched right past me...I was blocking her path!

Here's a closeup - this tern was only 15 feet from me. I was zoomed to 360mm (540mm equiv), with the lens stopped down to F8 for sharper detail:

Here's an anhinga about 30 feet away, shot at 360mm - lens wide open for shallower depth of field, at ISO 160:

A black-necked stilt, wading a good 100+ feet away, at full tele (this was one of my mistakes...when I switched modes, I didn't realize the focus was in 'multi-point' mode instead of spot...the focus actually grabbed on a small marsh tree that I cropped out of the frame to the right, which left the bird a little off focus):

Hey...I've got a good burst mode now, and good tracking continuous focus! Never had that before on my P&S. I was shooting in the pposite direction when I heard a ruckus of honking and splashing behind me. I whipped around with no time to set up at all, and saw a moorhen chasing another out of his territory. I took roughly a 4-second burst, for about 13 shots...these were the
best:

Pretty neat how they can run on water:

A nice tri-colored heron put down on the rail ahead of me, and was grooming himself - I liked the rock-n-roll hairdo:

I can also shoot birds in flight much better than I could before...the focus is faster, more accurate, tracks the movement well, and it's easier to follow in the optical viewfinder. This wood stork flew at me, giving me very little time to react - I just handheld the big lens up in his direction, found him in the viewfinder, focus locked, and fired...he was almost too close to the threshhold of the 200mm lens!:

It's a bit easier when the bird isn't flying at your head! Ducks are awfully fast in flight, and with my P&S I've had a heck of a time getting detail without some motion blur, not to mention actually catching a duck in the right stride of flight. Finally...clear, focused, metered ducks in flight!:

A female red-winged blackbird (yes...silly name for a brown bird with no red wings! - the male gets those colors) sitting down in the low
swamp grasses and plants, which filtered the bright sun through the yellow and green leaves for a nice, warm color tone that looks almost
like golden-moment dusk light - despite being 4:30 in the afternoon!:

So that's my first real day out with the A300. Any comments, questions, and critique welcome!

 

[Roger]

Really great shots Justin!

 

[goofy101]

fantastic shots love the moorhen running across the water

 

[Craig]

great series Justin. I like the walking running on water shot too.

 

[Tim]

outstanding, my man, outstanding

 

[zackiedawg]

Thanks all. Funny, I got sick of moorhens (because they're everywhere in the wetlands) and basically pay them no attention...of course, I wasn't really set up before to try burst shots of them...and they do chase eachother alot. Now, after catching the little 'running on water' trick, I want to photograph them more!

I don't know if I've seen other birds doing that - the herons take to the air when they chase, as do most small birds, and the stilty egrets and wood storks duel with feet still on the ground. I suppose ducks are somewhat similar...but their water battles seem to be more flight than run...the moorhens seem to use their wings mostly for balance and a tiny bit of lift, but those big clawed feet are what seems to really propel them along.

 

[Jeff Fillmore]

Very nice- I love the composition on #5.

 

[Dan]

The raccoon picture is really neat, I like the story behind it. Also I vote for the second moorhen shot, that one's really impressive, with how you can see the splashes from the previous footsteps and clearly see the feet in mid stride.

The tricolor heron is really neat too, even the foot position, it looks like of like it's waving at you. I've always liked herons, and this one seems to have a bit more character with the punk feather style.

 

[zackiedawg]

Thanks Jeff and Dan. Enjoying the camera and the learning process back to SLR/DSLR, after many years of advanced P&S and ultrazooms. I won't knock what ultra-zooms can do - I've gotten great results from mine over the years and even made some money off of it...the DSLR takes a little more effort and concentration to get a good shot, but once you get things right, it has more ability and range than the ultrazoom did, especially in some types of photography that were basically impossible (low light high ISO, for example!).

And yesterday I just got my third lens...a 50mm F1.7 prime - which should hopefully be the last lens I'll need to add for a while.

 

[Roger]

Justin, once you've felt the bug of low light photography you'll hear the call of a wider angle fast prime.....50mm is too long for some things in low light. With the crop factor I mean.

 

[Scottwdw]

The more you learn and use it, Justin, the easier it will become. However, with these cameras, there's seems to be always something new to learn and try. Something I think digital SLR owners love about them. At least, I do.

Wonderful photos for a first time out in the field. What was that? Done buying lenses for awhile? Well, don't forget all the other accessories out there. Got enough filters, memory cards and batteries? ;D

 

[Jeff Fillmore]

Hey Justin-

What do you think of that Tamron 200-500? Is it pretty sharp when you look at the 100% files? How quick is the focus and tracking?

I am considering the Nikon version.

Thanks-

 

[zackiedawg]

The lens is stunning actually. Sharpness is spectacular, even at 100% viewable. What really surprised me was that I had read alot of posts mentioning the lens was at its best when stopped down to F10-14...so I expected some softness at wide open apertures. My SAL18-250mm is a little soft wide open, so I was prepared for the same. Much to my surprise, I find even wide open F5 shots to be razor-sharp at all except full 500mm tele...and even at 500mm tele, surprisingly sharp wide open. The lens has no real weaknesses I've seen - vignetting is low to nil, no CA/PF issues at virtually any range and in even the worst backlighting contrast, and color is great.

Here's a 25% crop - this small dragonfly was about 6 feet from me, and I was at 200mm, ISO400, F5:

And here's a 100% crop (different picture, same subject) - no editing, ISO400, F5:

This is a fairly tight crop, and in shadow, at ISO400, aperture wide at F6.3, at 420mm zoom:

Here's a shot wide open (F5) in good light at ISO100, cropped about 50%:

As far as focus and tracking...both very good. I don't have much to compare it with, being my first DSLR...but it is a bit faster on the focus than my all-around lens, the 18-250. And I've been able to track flying birds beautifully, even those coming towards or away from me. The camera gets near-instant focus lock with this lens in most light, even when I'm shooting in shadow like the blue jay above. The only time there's a slowdown is if the focus has to hunt the full range - such as if I missed my spot-focus point trying to hit a bird in the sky and give the camera nothing but blue sky to try to focus on - it will hunt all the way from infinity to near focus, which then takes a second or two to bring all the way back to near-infinity again. I consider that normal, and partly my fault - shooting a moving subject in an otherwise blue or empty background, multi-point focusing area would be better than spot...but my relative newness with the camera means I'm not as quick at the draw to change modes.

BTW Scott - I'm sure the accessories will draw me in...and probably the lenses too. I'm just hoping I'm done with the lenses for a little while, because they're alot more expensive than the accessories! I'm good on memory cards...and I've got a ton of filters, but need a step-up ring or two to use them (they're all 58mm, and none of my lenses are (55mm, 49mm). I won't bother with filters on the big-gun Tamron...but the 18-250 and 50mm I'd like to use some of my filters (ND4, ND8, circ pol, UV, warming, star, and ND400). Cheaper to get two step-up rings than buy all those new filters! And I'll probably get a spare battery at some point, though the A300 battery has been surprisingly durable - I've gotten over 800 shots and still had 61% battery - and that's with some live view shooting, playback, and USB transfers!

 

[Scottwdw]

Justin, you should copy that last post and put it in the Equipment Reviews section here at TMIP.

You know I was just kidding yeah there. I know too well how expensive our hobby is and enjoy sharing it with you all here along with special friends and family.

 

[zackiedawg]

No worries...I took it as a ribbing, not seriously! I just do have all that junk already from my other camera, and should find a way to use it as much as possible.

Believe me...if spare money lands in my hand...I will likely use it towards the camera. I already went out and got the 50mm F1.7 as soon as I came into a little spare change, when I sold $900 worth of photos last week! Since the lens was only $65, I've still got some money burning a hole in my pocket.

 

[Scottwdw]

Congrats on the sale, Justin!

 

[zackiedawg]

Thank you Scott. it's all the more surprising to sell anything I've taken since I am not a pro, and do not actively sell or market my stuff. I've sold some photos at my office in the past, just when clients or others would come in and ask about some of the shots I have hanging there - but I usually would charge about the cost of the print and frame...no profit. But every once in a while, I get an inquiry off my online galleries, from buyers or stock agencies...and that's been pretty neat.

I'm hoping to find out in the next few weeks if one of the shots purchased gets published...it's in the editor's hands to include my shot or not!

 

[Dan]

Hmm... very interesting. I'm interested in investigating the options for selling pictures myself, I was wondering how you went about getting the sale. Casual online gallery contacts were not among my guesses.

It's funny, I was always hesitant about the idea of posting my better stuff online on the theory that it could get ripped off. I mean I know that does happen, I've seen several reports of people finding their work used by others in various degrees. Apparently legitimate publishers are looking at online galleries as well, I'd never have guessed.

 

[zackiedawg]

If you are with any of the larger online galleries, there are probably frauds shopping through as well, but there are legitimate stock agencies, publishers (or shoppers for publishers) and the like browsing through. My guess is that they do a search for a keyword for the type of subject they are looking for, then if they see something they like, they put out a feeler to see if you are interested and also to ensure you have a high-enough quality shot to be used. Since the first stock agency bought, I've tried to keep up my keywords for all my photos!

I try to get around being ripped off by only posting my stuff at 800x600 online. The quality is good enough to see, but not high enough for any publishing standards or anything but small prints. Someone could steal something of mine to post on a website in that size...but that's about it. I was contacted by a stock photo agency last year unsolicited - they posted a comment with their e-mail address and contact info. I tried Googling them to make sure they were legit, and seemed to check out...so I gave it a shot. It worked out great, and I got paid as promised. I've sold a few more to stock agencies...but they don't pay that much...usually between $50 and $150 per shot depending on the company and the shots. This most recent sale was from a company that procures photos for a national publisher - they are given a budget and a topic, and go find shots that fit the publisher's need...so either way, you get paid. Then, it's up to the editor to sort through the materials he's given and decide if your photo fits the layout they go with.

I've had a couple of pics printed in the 'society' mags and such around town, when I photographed at charity events and such - I guess technically that's being 'published' - but it was on a local level. It would be pretty cool to get paid to be published in a national magazine...so I'm keeping my fingers crossed!

 

[Dan]

Good points. I do have an online gallery, but I don't use it much. I did at first, but I've more or less ignored it for ages now. But I tried to upload reasonably high resolution pictures. Not necessarily full resolution, but probably big enough to be useful if someone wanted to steal them. At the time I think I was thinking "eh, so what?", but now I'm thinking "hmm, being paid for taking these pictures would be awfully nice".

Still I do enjoy it when people put high resolution pictures on their galleries. Especially really crisp wildlife photography, stuff sharp enough that the higher resolution lets you see significant detail.