Maybe you will like these better. I try to please! 
All with my best of class, 1.3 body the EOS 1D Mk IV. Birders favorite camera! I love this camera.
@ebiggs1 wrote:Maybe you will like these better. I try to please!
All with my best of class, 1.3 body the EOS 1D Mk IV. Birders favorite camera! I love this camera.
I like all these shots Obiwan. Very nicely done, would love to take pics like these myself one day. What lens did you use??? The background is great too.
BTW...What camera settings did you use??????? (aperture, shutter speed, ISO, etc)
The photos are mostly uncropped and pretty much as they came from the camera. LR automatically applies lens correction and a small amount of screen sharpening. That was for the most part it.
The exif data should remain if exact settings are wanted but the gear used was the 1D Mk IV and a 500mm lens.
The camera was set to Av and f8 fixed. This permitted a SS of 1/1000 or 1/2000. ISO 800. Those figures are approx.
At this point in my career I can just look at a sceen and pretty closely guess or see the camera settings without a light meter or camera. You just get that way after awhile.
I took maybe fifty pictures that day and none were more than 40 or 50 feet from the subject. Most were very much closer. A couple were 10 or 12 feet, or even less. No telephoto lens made is better than getting closer. Remember that!
Looks like something from Jurassic Park.
@ebiggs1 wrote:The photos are mostly uncropped and pretty much as they came from the camera. LR automatically applies lens correction and a small amount of screen sharpening. That was for the most part it.
The exif data should remain if exact settings are wanted but the gear used was the 1D Mk IV and a 500mm lens.
The camera was set to Av and f8 fixed. This permitted a SS of 1/1000 or 1/2000. ISO 800. Those figures are approx.
At this point in my career I can just look at a sceen and pretty closely guess or see the camera settings without a light meter or camera. You just get that way after awhile.
I took maybe fifty pictures that day and none were more than 40 or 50 feet from the subject. Most were very much closer. A couple were 10 or 12 feet, or even less. No telephoto lens made is better than getting closer. Remember that!
Looks like something from Jurassic Park.
These pics are really nice Obiwan. Love all of them. I like the background in the 1st 2 pics where the background looks clear and mostly sharp. Then you have the other blurry backgrounds that are nice too. I like both ways and think each way looks good, it should depend on your scene and the look one is trying to achieve. I will use both technics with my pics. Sometimes I don't want to blur the background. We'e all the looks here intentional, or did they just happen random?????
I also really like that you used LR sparringly. I like the natural look straight out the camera. That's my thinking for my pics. I know I will have to use editing software when needed, but I want to make it my goal to take my pics with the best skills and camrea settings so I can keep editing changes to a minuim. If software does all the work in making our pics look good...where is the skills of the photographer???????
The BG blur or not, is controlled in this instance because of the subject to BG distance.
There is a saying photographers use, at least the good ones use, "less is more." Remember that!
But you are greatly mistaken if you think great photogrphy is done by great skilled photographers just in the camera. You may not like that fact but it is true. This used to be done in the darkroom but now is done on the computer with software. The possibilies are vastly increased and almost limitless.
Great photos are 1/2 photogrpher, 1/2 equipmnet and 1/2 post editing. Now go figure that one out! 
@ebiggs1 wrote:The BG blur or not, is controlled in this instance because of the subject to BG distance.
There is a saying photographers use, at least the good ones use, "less is more." Remember that!
But you are greatly mistaken if you think great photogrphy is done by great skilled photographers just in the camera. You may not like that fact but it is true. This used to be done in the darkroom but now is done on the computer with software. The possibilies are vastly increased and almost limitless.
Great photos are 1/2 photogrpher, 1/2 equipmnet and 1/2 post editing. Now go figure that one out!
I have no problem with what you're saying, if you read my post closely you will see i said much the same thing. Never said one should not do post editing, but believe it should be used sparyingly. Of coarse I'm aware that in certain situations, and depending on what one is trying to achieve, you do what's needed. In post editing I believe your statement "more is less" applies here. I have no problem with the peeps who use a heavy hand with their editing....to each their own. Everyone has the right to see and do things their way. But I have to believe that not all great photographers think the same way on this, and some also believe that more is less here. But maybe I'm wrong, what do I know.
Far as your math it don't add up 1/2 + 1/2 + 1/2 = 1 1/2, not a whole (1) 
@ebiggs1 wrote:" I have no problem with the peeps who use a heavy hand with their editing...."
It isn't a matter of approval or whether you care if others do it . It is about making your photographs the best they can be. That is the aim and goal of all the greats. As a general rule, however, less is more. This like all rules is not etched in stone. It will be interesting, after a few years, to see how your mindset changes and grows. If you stick with it, that is? As quite a few folks don't, even though they are on fire at the on set. Seen it too many times to not know it happens.
Always put the emphasis be on the emphasis! Any way you can.
"Far as your math it don't add up 1/2 + 1/2 + 1/2 = 1 1/2, not a whole ..."
Oh, but it does and at some point you will believe so, too. You need to let the main most thing be the main most thing.
I might be the camera this time but the lens next. It could be the camera every time! Or if could be you, whatever the shot calls for.
I hear you. For the most part I agree, cause I know where you're coming from. Have no problems here. As you say, I may change how I think here, I've been known to do that from time to time. Just so you know I'm an artist, and have an artistic background.
About me quiting, don't hold your breath. I've been into photography since I was a kid. I'm only new to DSLR's. I've used point and shoot cameras long as I can remember (the 60's), and have been using video camcorders at least since the 80's. I started out with polaroid cameras, to point & shoot....then to super 8 camcorders, then to VHS casstte, then to digital tape camcorders, Now Digital HD. I still use my camcorders almost as much as my DSLR (I have 2 camcorders), but my DSLR is starting to win out. I know the feeling of newbies coming and going in almost every hobby I've been involved with. In fact, I see it now in the photo clubs I belong to. I see newbies posting bunches of pics and saying how great the club is, only to disappear in a week or so. Some show back up in 6 months or so only to disappear again after all the alcolades about being happy to be back. It amazes me that they think the regulars really buy what they say. Our club has over 1,000 members on record, but I've never known more than 10 or so to ever show up for a photo meet. (most meets) Occasionally for an outting like the Zoo, maybe 25 or so show up, never the same group of peeps at each meet. Then we're back to the regulars again. So I'm well aware of the newbie disappearing act. But talk is cheap, time will tell Obiwan. As I said, don't hold your breath 
, now using Digital HD
" I may change how I think here, I've been known to do that from time to time. "
Hmm, ... really! The biggest issue with new 'still' photographers is, they don't know what they don't know.
