Not always needed.
I like the bird’s power impression given by the focus not on the eyes in this photo.
1 Like
Many, perhaps most, birders seem to use auto ISO.
Mark
Auto iso is handy when light changes fast, because light can change when pressing shutter button.
And a great deal of attention is needed to observe the scene and seize the right moment, which is often extremely short and unpredictable.
2 Likes
Shutter speed is the most important parameter : wrong shutter speed, not sharp photo.
Then comes Aperture : right DOF.
So better to let move ISO.
In natural light without flashes (which are sometime used on small birds like hummingbird attracted by “feeders” for example to get nice reflections on feathers).
1 Like
That’s all you need really, except perhaps for a bit of luck as well. That combination gave me this shot:
1 Like
That shot may or may not be a prize-winner, but technically speaking, it is awesome. I have no idea if I can do that. The top bird looks like you were shooting from under the bird, but the other bird looks like you shot it from above? Maybe I’m just confused. My brain struggles to understand it, but I really enjoy it. I almost wish you cropped it tighter. Realistically speaking, it has to be the under-side of both birds, so it’s me that is confused, not the birds. I could stare at it forever trying to make sense of it.
A lovely photo. My brain insists on the face being the sharpest, but since it isn’t, I get to pay more attention to the bird’s body. I would be lucky to get it half that sharp. 
I can’t tell if the blur is from focus or movement, as only a tiny little area on the right wing looks “sharp”. If I somehow captured this image, I would be bound and determined to go out for more photos. It’s sort of dream-like in your photo, and the cropping emphasizes that. My thoughts are “you did good!!!”, followed by go back for more. I have no idea how I would begin to capture an image like this - 200 or 300 mm might not be long enough. I especially enjoy the “whimsical”, out of focus, background. Oh, and nice signature too!!
1 Like
You could have taken this shot, if you’d been in the same place at the same time. I don’t have fancy birding lenses. This was shot with a basic Canon 55-200 lens on a Canon 90D body, and then heavily cropped.
The two birds (Red Kites) where wheeling around each other. In this shot they are both flying in a tight circle, travelling left to right, and banked at a very steep angle so you are seeing the top of both birds.
Thank a lot for those nice words.
This is a 300 mm shot, full open f/4 1/1250s 1600 ISO.
Subject came by luck. I was doing photographs of flooding in Paris. And I saw a flock of seagulls attracted by a food source I couldn’t identify. I removed my 105mm and put the 300 mm and got a nice serie.
Here is an other one from this serie :
1 Like
Something about being in the right place, at the right time, and having a camera. 
…and most importantly, knowing what to do, and how to do it. I find all this fascinating, but then again, I find most things fascinating. I expect to get back to creating the types of images I’ve been trying to capture, and learning how to edit them better. If the opportunity arises to photograph some more birds, great!
I’m grudgingly agreeing that I still need to concentrate on my Nikon, and not my Leica. So be it.
I kept wondering about the unaffordable Nikon Z9. I haven’t seen any convincing reasons to even consider a switch, not that I could afford to do so. While reading, this morning, I found this interesting (to me) YouTube video:
I’ve got a standard D3, not the D3X, but for sports photography the D3 was better. It’s still a rainy day, and I got bored, so I spent a couple of hours reading up on my D3. I know the D780 is “better”, but I could have saved a lot of money had I stuck with the D3. If I stuck to 200 ISO, Joanna might have even accepted the dynamic range. The D4, D5, and D6 were the series of “professional Nikons” after my D3, but spending $4000 to $6000 and more, every year didn’t make sense. The D6 is now on sale at B&H for “only” $6500. I’m convinced, for my needs, my D780, or my D750, or a D850 would be (or is) a better choice. Too much to think about, even for a rainy day.
As one of my friends puts it (he is thinking target shooting), it’s THE INDIAN, not the BOW and ARROW. …meaning I can use one of my oldest cameras, or buy a Z9. Just the postings of Joanna and the rest of you are teaching me how to do better. Throwing $$$ at a better camera would not change my photography (even as it opened more doors for what is possible).
Wow, I’m just rambling on. I should stop reading and go back to using what I’ve learned recently.
1 Like
With D850 you have a “slightly” better sensor (dynamic range) than Z9 or Z8 (but very similar).
What you’ll get with Z8/9 is a much better video camera. A much customizable camera. And a much better AF (the best of nikon) but with a long learning curve to manage to use it fully and without problems and to customize it to suit your needs. And you’ll have to use Electronic view finder (with it’s pro and con against wonderfull D850 viewfinder).
And you’ll need an adapter (wich work great) to use your F mount lenses.
D6 is an other kind of sensor. Less resolution, better at high ISO and better AF than D850 and with some more option (switch from one mode to an other without loosing target - but needs customisation).(That would not be my choice).
Still talking about bird photography.
There now. You know it makes sense 
Only if all you were interested in was press photography. The D3 is hardly the right choice for art photography.
Indeed. I went for the D850 because it gives me the highest resolution for making large prints (36" x 24" or larger) not because it has all those bells, whistles and automations, most of which I have either deactivated or will never use.
Look back at the exquisite work of Léonard Misonne, taken long before digital was even thought of. I know the text is in French, but you always pass it through Deepl.
It’s the sheer beauty of the light and his compositions that I find totally entrancing.
2 Likes
Assuming you mean the D3, there are a few choices:
-
take it with me when I’m going someplace where I might not feel “safe”.
-
take it with me when I travel, and don’t want to take expensive stuff.
-
take it with me when I’m afraid of weather, or dust.
-
I dunno…
-
Joanna would tell me to put it in a box and forget about it.
-
The eventual goal is to donate it to Aravind Eye Hospital.
-
A temporary goal is to enjoy using it for a while.
-
As “professional cameras” the D3, D4, D5. and D6 are supposed to be very rugged, and weather sealed. I might have considered it instead of the D780, but for the cost.
-
The “real answer” is I don’t know.
Cameras are supposed to be “tools”, but they are also “toys”.
I’ve got many years of professional experience with this D3. The money I earned was more than enough to pay for what it cost me. I’ve got lots of good memories, from when I was using it.
Finally, it is a challenge to create a good image from a camera that dates back to 2008.
It would be probably better to buy a secondhand newer camera in the midrange. Those are often also weather sealed now a day’s. (i suppose they are because my humble G80 is that too).
More pixels, likely more equal in user interface.
Same lensmount.
No, I was talking about the new (even second hand) camera you’re considering.
It depends of the kind of image you shoot and the way you envisage photography and how much time (learning curve) and money you want to invest.
Do you need a very good portrait/landscape camera ?
Do you need features dedicated to macro photography (focus stacking), or landscape (aperture stacking).
Do you need a very good video camera (and know how digital video works) ?
Do you need a top notch action camera (for sport, wildlife) ?
Do you want very good image stabilisation (yes, everyone wants this but it has a coast) ?
You really have to consider lens too (I would say first with not too old cameras). Good image means good and adapted to your style and your camera lenses.
Do you feel able and are not afraid from a more or less long learning curve (which could take away the pleasure of photographing for a while) ?
Do you often shoot in low light condition ?
Will you use it for long cessions freehand or mostly on tripod ? So what size and weight you are ok to handhold easily and will you have need for long lenses handholding ?
Etc, etc …
Then is the choice to stay dslr or jump to mirrorless with the pro and con you could encounter (viewfinder, learning curve on some points).
What your images are intended for ?
For what support (big print, social media, personnal use on monitor, etc …) ?
Is it for professional use ?
Last or first, the budget you’re ok to spend on it now and later.
Maybe this does not help, but you anyway should consider all this.
1 Like
Yes, luck was involved, it’s not every day you see a pair of Red Kites wheeling around like that. As for knowing what to do:
- I rarely use auto ISO, and my default ISO choice is 200, I didn’t change that.
- I fitted my 55-200 and set it at 200 mm.
- I selected shutter priority, which I have set to default to 1/640 sec, I didn’t change that.
- I set the auto focus to ‘servo’, so the camera would continually focus as I tried to track the birds.
- I found the birds in the viewfinder and did my best to follow them as they played in the sky.
- I took six individual shots, no burst mode.
None of that is rocket science.
I then just enjoyed watching the birds for a few more minutes before continuing my walk. When I got home I found this shot was worth processing, and printing.
2 Likes
No, it doesn’t help, as for me, the D780 is as good as it gets. If Joanna can do so well with her D850 (it’s Joanna, not the camera) then with the D780 I am all set, and already have everything I need, with the possible exception of a 600 or 800 lens.
It’s the Indian, not the arrow. What I have to work on is ME, not my equipment.
The D3 - that’s all for enjoyment, like driving an old car from the 1960’s, like I used to do, which is much less enjoyable if I don’t have the mechanics I used to visit every few weeks, and a collection of spanners for when I thought I could “do it myself”. The D3 is just for enjoyment, and possibly to take with me when I don’t want to take the D780.
Most of the time, I believe in using “the best”, and for triple the cost, I don’t think a D6 would be better for me than my D780.
Regarding other things you’ve posted, I have no desire to switch to mirrorless, and probably buy all new glass. My photo use - mostly for on-screen and email, and sending to other people who make huge prints every so often. Budget? I dunno, but I do know spending $5000 to $10,000 isn’t an option.
The “weakest thing in my chain” is ME, not the camera, or lens, or processing software.
Like what I already wrote:
Sorry I didn’t understand well your message about cameras, so.
So everything is fine.
Good work with your D780.
800 mm is a very special lens with lot of other sharpness problem to manage (stability, atmospheric distorsion, wind). Get a very very sturdy tripod. And you won’t get IBIS (stabilisation) with D780 for it.
I’ve come close to buying a longer lens, but for years figured my 80-200 was plenty. Then I bought my 70-300, and expected to sell the 80-200, but I guess I’m lazy - I still have both. On my last visit to Colorado, I got to use my friend Susie’s Sigma 600mm lens, and loved it - but I’m not sure I need one enough to spend the $$$.
I think I need to spend the majority of my time trying to create good images using my “normal” lenses.
I don’t know of any camera that could replace my D780. It’s as close as I can get to Susie’s D850 without carrying around so much more weight - and as something that should be obvious by now, I’m not yet getting the most out of my current gear. I probably never will. Long, long ago I wanted more powerful cameras, and made good use of them. My current cameras, D3 included, surpass my own ability. That’s obvious from the feedback I get here. (Anyplace other than here, people rave over my images, but I think all of you are far better both in cameras and in PhotoLab - which is fine, as every time I come here, I learn new things, and better things.)
I would be thrilled if at some time in the future, Joanna and Wolfgang would react to one of my photos the way I react to theirs, but that’s unlikely - like racing a Ford sedan against a Ferrari driven by an F1 driver. But the challenge of trying, is enough to keep my engaged and happy. Heck, even when I do capture a great photo, Joanna points out how I could have edited it better, does so, and I’m going “wow, did I really take that photo???” For better or worse, I doubt my editing ability will ever catch up to hers - or maybe it’s her eye.
Back to this discussion, I need to go out and take some new, creative photos, and see if I can now edit them well enough for all of you to accept, and show me how PhotoLab could have been used better.
Really? My first DSLR was a Canon EOS 400D (aka Digital Rebel XTi in North America and EOS Kiss Digital X in Japan). It was released in August 2006 but I didn’t acquire it until in 2011 (I inherited it from my father). It only had a basic / kit 18-55 lens (no IS) but that didn’t stop me getting some good images, e.g. this one:
2 Likes