Shot at Loose Park:
1DsMk2, 70-200/2.8L is @ 2.8 + 100% crop

I love the first one, but why did you crop the 2nd version so close? Amazing view of the bird's musculature, though - it's not often you get such a clear cut vision of the bird's anatomy that way!
Gene

Mr Grim wrote:
I love the first one, but why did you crop the 2nd version so close? Amazing view of the bird's musculature, though - it's not often you get such a clear cut vision of the bird's anatomy that way!
Gene

Hey thanks Mr Grim, I really liked that shot also.
With everyone clammering about 1Dsmk3 and D3 detail just wanted to show that the 1DsMk2 still rocks in detail & AF performance with no sharpening added.

Nice detail indeed in that crop Jarvis

Jarvis, I do think you demonstrated you point quite consicely.

Tim

Dave In La wrote:
Nice detail indeed in that crop Jarvis

Hey thanks Dave, I liked the cover you did on Will and Monkey Glass.
Excellent job

Tim Kuhn wrote:
Jarvis, I do think you demonstrated you point quite consicely.

Tim

Thanks Tim, not nearly as good as your bird shots.

Neat shot

Jenna

I find it amusing how so many people always start talking about the generation before the latest is "obsolete".

In that case - - how many of us are driving "obsolete" cars How old is the computer we're working on But no, they're rarely considered "obsolete" - - So why our cameras?

Ultimately it's the photographer using a tool. The tool is only as good as the photographer knows how to use it.

Well done - & keep shooting with that camera of yours.

Lil, shooting with two obsolete Nikon D300 & D200 camera bodies (yes, people actually are already calling the D300 obsolete due to the D700)

Lil

Oh yeah no doubt that's a great camera+lens combo!
Neat shot...now you need a looonger lens for serious birding so you can join the madness of the N&W forum
I see you're covered w bodies and flashes

I agree with Lil, seems like the Latest and Greatest makes a camera "obsolete" even if it's only less than a year old. Sheesh...It's the one behind the lens that's important, and you've shown you know how to use your "old" MKII, Jarvis. But now you have to get at least a 400 L for the boids...

Best Wishes,
Steve

Raindrop_333 wrote:
Neat shot

Jenna

Thanks Jenna

Lil Judd wrote:
I find it amusing how so many people always start talking about the generation before the latest is "obsolete".

In that case - - how many of us are driving "obsolete" cars How old is the computer we're working on But no, they're rarely considered "obsolete" - - So why our cameras?

Ultimately it's the photographer using a tool. The tool is only as good as the photographer knows how to use it.

Well done - & keep shooting with that camera of yours.

Lil, shooting with two obsolete Nikon D300 & D200 camera bodies (yes, people actually are already calling the D300 obsolete due to the D700)

Lil

Exactly, new cameras are nice but the OLD cameras wont stop taking great pictures because there's a new model out. Thanks for the encouragement
Have a Blessed Day

Nello Milanese wrote:
Oh yeah no doubt that's a great camera+lens combo!
Neat shot...now you need a looonger lens for serious birding so you can join the madness of the N&W forum
I see you're covered w bodies and flashes

Most of my boids walk down aisles. I keep thinking I want a longer lens when I see some of the birding shots here on FM.

trailhiker wrote:
I agree with Lil, seems like the Latest and Greatest makes a camera "obsolete" even if it's only less than a year old. Sheesh...It's the one behind the lens that's important, and you've shown you know how to use your "old" MKII, Jarvis. But now you have to get at least a 400 L for the boids...

Best Wishes,
Steve

Thanks Steve I'll look into that