Hummingbird Lens Focal Length

[CoyoteCreationsNW]

Habituated hummingbirds are often shot with a 300 mm lens. I experimented with using a much longer lens from further away. It changed the look of the images. I would appreciate your feedback on the depth of field, resolution and framing. You can't really tell much about sharpness at this reduced file size.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Archibald]

Yeah, you will get much silkier backgrounds with the longer perspective. DOF stays the same, though, at the same aperture (and same framing & format).

Nice shot, eye is sharp.

 

[CoyoteCreationsNW]

Yeah, you will get much silkier backgrounds with the longer perspective. DOF stays the same, though, at the same aperture (and same framing & format).

Nice shot, eye is sharp.

Thanks for your feedback. To keep the same subject size I had to be much closer with a 300 mm PF lens and the framing did change. In that case I had more clutter at the edges of the shot. may not have phrased my questions very clearly.

 

[Archibald]

Thanks for your feedback. To keep the same subject size I had to be much closer with a 300 mm PF lens and the framing did change. In that case I had more clutter at the edges of the shot. may not have phrased my questions very clearly.

What is pretty consistent is that folks get gorgeous backgrounds with the really long lenses. Your image shows that - although we don't have the comparison pic.

 

[DRwyoming]

Very nice image!

Yeah, if the background is interesting as in some flowering areas I like shooting a wider lens but in general I shoot hummingbirds with longer lenses in the 500mm to 600mm range, it makes it pretty easy to control backgrounds and keep stuff out I don't want there.

 

[hef19898]

Regarding the framing, since you asked, either more or less. The current framing is a bit diszracting, not quite showing the environment (which makes for much more compelling shots that just the animal anyway) but enough to distract. The branches are also not quite in focus, and not out of focus enough.

The background works great so!

 

[bleirer]

I agree the branch is distracting, especially oof and at the upper edge, pulling the eye away from the area of emphasis. Could be cropped out or content aware filled and the bird by itself could stand alone. The background neither adds nor detracts. I guess I would lower the background saturation just to up the contrast in saturation between bird and background enhancing the idea that the most saturated thing in the frame is the bird. And maybe smooth out the parts of the background that make me look twice wondering what they were or even if they were denoise artifacts.

 

[CoyoteCreationsNW]

Regarding the framing, since you asked, either more or less. The current framing is a bit diszracting, not quite showing the environment (which makes for much more compelling shots that just the animal anyway) but enough to distract. The branches are also not quite in focus, and not out of focus enough.

The background works great so!

Thank you, I appreciate you comments.

 

[CoyoteCreationsNW]

I agree the branch is distracting, especially oof and at the upper edge, pulling the eye away from the area of emphasis. Could be cropped out or content aware filled and the bird by itself could stand alone. The background neither adds nor detracts. I guess I would lower the background saturation just to up the contrast in saturation between bird and background enhancing the idea that the most saturated thing in the frame is the bird. And maybe smooth out the parts of the background that make me look twice wondering what they were or even if they were denoise artifacts.

Thank you for taking time to comment.