Just Missed Flight Shots

I know there was a thread on this some time ago - but figured we've all had enough time since then to miss out on some great flight shots. I photographed a pair of Western Kingbirds that had found there way to Long Island earlier this weekend and had the darndest time getting quality flight shots of them (using the teleconverter didn't help). Anyway, I got some really awesome "almost" shots and thought it would be helpful to share them and share what I think I could have done different to have made the shot.

I think the biggest issue with these flight shot attempts on this species was my SS. It was generally 1/1250s, and my ISO was only 250. I easily could have bumped the ISO up, and even dialed the EV down a bit to shoot at 1/2500s or even 1/3200 which would have frozen it well.

Another problem was I was hand holding and was in the field for quite some time... my arms got absolutely exhausted while holding the camera up at the perched bird waiting for it to fly, which made me shake like a leaf (I've been hitting the gym since...)

Lastly, I should have taken off the TC and utilized the AF speed of the f/4 lens. Getting close wasn't really an issue as the birds were primarily focused on eating, and even if I was a little further away, the sharpness would have allowed for a little more cropping.

So, let's see what you got.

This is the one that really kills me...

And one more to round it out....

I'm not an avian photographer (yet), so I'm simply curious: what's wrong with these? I love the first one; it's just great with the bird beak open and a bug right in front of it, and a perfect (imho) comp. I don't even see any motion blur, I just get a sense of movement

I'm hoping to learn something here, so please feel free to explain things to death

Katja,

The pictures are all soft. They're no terrible by any means - but the focus wasn't locked on the bird, and particulalry in the 3rd shot there is too much wing blur. If you go through the avian gallery and look at flight shots you will see how sharp they are and they generally have had little post processing sharpening. I sharpened the hell out of these to get them to look decent.

I think you are being too hard on yourself. These are nice shots of bird action, not an easy behavior to capture. I have some similar shots of bluebirds which are no where as good as the ones you have posted, but I still like to look at them and recall the scenario which led to the photos.

John,

I'm not implying that these are terrible shots that should be dumped - if I thought they were that bad I would have deleted them. My hopes with this thread is that myself and others can post shots that have all of the elements but are missing on sharpness, or motion freeze or are too close to the bottom/side of the frame etc. and what we think we could have done differnetly in the field to avoid those things. If I had made the adjustments I mentioned at the start of this thread these would be top notch shots ready for publication. As they are, they're pretty good pictures do a decent job of capturing a behavior.

Hi Luke, I agree shutter speed being too low was probably the cause of the softness. Small birds fly extremely fast, you may need shutter speeds of up to 1/5000 or so to completely freeze the wings, but the speeds you were quoting would have been sharper than 1/1250. And as far as AF performance it is usually better without the tc with birds in flight if you can get close enough.

Hey Luke,

I'm jumping into this late in the game, but the missing elements in this discussion (ihmo) are the actual lens and camera body used. Lenses (long story short) - even the pro lenses differ in their autofocus speed - both in terms of speed of image acquisition and their ability to hold a fast-moving bird in focus. For instance, the 200-400 VR is a phenomenal lens, but whenever I use it for flight shots it seems it's initial focus acquisition is simply too slow for MOST bird shots - my "tack sharp" ratio is just too low when I use this lens. Over time I've found the fast primes (200 f2, 300 f2.8 and even the 600 VR) fastest at acquiring focus and holding it and thus the best for flight shots. Overall, my personal favourite lens for flight shots is the 300 2.8 VR, even when paired with a 1.4x TC. One of my best selling (and most commonly pirated!) shots of all time (an eagle in flight - I can send you to it on my website if you're interested) was shot with this 300 paired with a 1/4x TC.

The speed of autofocus acquisition AND ability to hold focus (focus-tracking) also varies between camera bodies. Unfortunately for many, the pro bodies (in the Nikon line) are MUCH better at acquiring and holding focus on fast moving objects, like birds in flight. I was excited when the D300 first came out - DX crop PLUS new 51-point AF - thought it would be great for flight shots. But, alas, my old D2x out-performed it in speed of focus acquisition (when the same lens was used). There actually IS a reason why the pro bodies cost so much more than the consumer and prosumer bodies (I'd put the D300s in the prosumer category myself).

The other variables discussed above (primarily shutter speed) obviously play a large role in image sharpness in flight shots as well, but blazingly fast shutter speeds won't help you much if the lens and/or camera you're using isn't quite up to the task of the focus.

One final point - I'm primarily talking about the "hit ratio" here - any Nikon SLR made today can produce a tack sharp flight shot under the right conditions. With a D5000 or D40x and an 18-200 zoom you might have to shoot 500 shots to get that perfectly sharp image, whereas with a D3 and 300 f2.8 you would, on average, need to shoot only a smaller number of frames to get a bunch of great shots.

Just my 2 cents worth...take it for what it's worth...

Brad

Oh.. for a little more shutter speed.

This was taken early in the morning, I was at ISO 400, f6.3 and only had a shutter speed of 1/350, I wish I had been at at least 1/1000, then the legs might have been sharp and had less motion blur.

Luke, Ok, I understand your reasons. I think this is a good subject for more input. I tried to get a decent flight shot of a swallow, 500 frames latter still trying! Of course that is part of the fun. I do like your shots. One problem I have is trying to get my autofocus to work on a bird in flight. It seems like regardless of the lens I am using I am way behind action like barn swallows flying a close range. Farther out it does seem to be a problem just to locate the bird, let alone get it in focus. Thanks for starting this thread.

Hi Luke,

thought I would go ahead an post the bluebird shot. I was not prepared for this shot, actually a series of 4-5, including the bird on a fence post with the bug. I had been trying for hummingbirds at a feeder, step around the building and these bluebirds were hunting. Taken with a Canon Rebel XSi, 400 ISO. 1/640 at f-11 at 300mm. Just was not quick enough to catch this type of action. No where as good as your shots.

Thank you for all the explanations so far. This is certainly an interesting topic

Lia: I love that shot too, the crane has lots of speed. (It's not "motion blur" but "sense of movement"; it's perfectly fine if you ask me )

John T: Fast reactions on your part, good job getting that shot! I think I should start with birds that don't move at all

Brad: I'd be very interested in seeing that eagle image you mentioned.

John and Lia,

Thanks for the contributions. This thread hasn't gone exactly how I'd planned, but that's part of the fun. Nice examples of close calls - I think Lia's shot is actually kind of interesting, as the head/body are pretty sharp. While photographing birds today, I kind of got lucky and nabbed this shot (I was trying to photograph it when it took off and jumped to another perch) I'm just bummed there isn't a clear BG.

Well, this is one from the summer that still hurts to even think about. I had located some juvenile peregrines hanging out near a zone-tailed hawk nest. Young peregrines are hell on wheels, unbelievably fast and reckless. Here, a juvenile zone-tailed hawk is twisting up to battle the juvenile peregrine.

This happened with a Canon 40D, 100-400L at 180mm, 1/1000, f/5, ISO 400, 33% of FF. I think the main problem here is EVERYTHING. Fast birds, a photographer inexperienced with tracking birds in flight, and I think gear that probably just could not keep up with this scenario.

On that note..... in terms of Canon bodies, for auto-focus on fast moving BIF, is the 1DmkIII the way to go, or is the upgraded AF and extra pixels of the 7D the new standard for moving birds?

Can't help you with the canon bodies, but this shot is awesome... save for the OOF look to it! The camera did a great job locking onto the peregrine, but the hawk just wasn't there. I'm wondering if you had been able to bump the ISO and increase your f-stop if that would have gotten you the results you were looking for.

Red shouldered hawks. At 1000mm and manual focus this is off on the sharpness. The only time I've seen hawks mate.

In response to Brian´s question regarding Canon bodies, the 1DMkIV has just come out. I´m trying to decide between that and the 7D right now. I currently use the 1DMkIII but from what I´ve heard both of the new Canon bodies have better AF performance. I believe Jim Neiger is now using the 7D.

Hi Luke,

Just wondering if this thread has accomplished what you wanted? I think for me it is very helpful to see that others have also struggled with flight action photos. But, has also encouraged me to keep trying.