Kingfisher with Dinner

[RobO]

Hi all
Here's my first post! I'm able to take it on the chin so please, your honest views & help will be very welcome, thanks.
This tiny bird was taken from a photographers hide and had been sitting & diving from a perch about 6-8metres away. Suddenly, inexplicably it decided to fly to another perch to prepare it's meal [kill the fish] The perch was probably nearer 20-25 metres away. I was using a 300mm prime so had to crop the shot to get this.
Have I gone too far, got the composition wrong ??
It's the first time I've tried to photograph these wonderful, very small birds & for those of you unfamiliar with the Kingfisher, they are very fast ~ gone like a small blue flash! Amazing birds.
All comments gratefully accepted. Thanks
A final comment from me - it looks dreadful on posting so something seems to have gone wrong [posted @ 300ppi maybe better at 72 ppi?] ~ again advice welcome,
Thanks.
Rob
PS I'm so enthralled with these wonderful birds, I'm going to have to go again.

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

 

[raptor photo]

It's a nice shot, but unfortunately the crop has affected the image quality. 300mm is usually not enough for small birds.
Also, while the D6 is a great wildlife camera, the full frame 20 MP limits cropping ability. You could probably sell it and have enough money for a D850 and a 200-500 lens, which effectively makes your focal length 750mm. With a 1.4x TC, you get 1050mm with 20 pixels left to crop.

 

[Rassie]

You got quite a few things right with this image, certainly all the basics. Pose of the bird, exposure, nice smooth background, focus seems good.
Many images need to be cropped for final posting. One of the main reasons for that is the fact that long lenses that enable one to fill the frame are relatively expensive and one cannot always afford them.
There are four things that play a role in filling the frame with an acceptable image:
1. Long lens. The longer the focal length of the lens, the larger the animal is in the frame and the more detail can be captured.
2. Amount of cropping. The more you crop the more you lose image quality. Your D6 has a 20.8 Mp sensor. The more you crop, the fewer pixels are retained in the final image and the less you can display the image large. Stretching an image with too few pixels into too large a display size results in loss in sharpness and image quality.
3. Megapixel count of the camera. The more megapixels in the sensor, the more you can crop while still retaining enough pixels to display the image at a reasonable size.
4. Get closer to the animal.

Your image here suffers from all four things: The lens was too short and that resulted in the need for severe cropping. The relatively low pixel count of the D6 does not allow for a lot of cropping before the image degrades to mush. To improve on this image you need to get a lot closer to the bird. Failing that, use a longer lens. There is a reason why bird photographers use lenses of 600mm or more, especially with the small birds. Or use a camera with a higher megapixel count. A 46Mp Z8, Z9, or D850 will allow a lot more cropping than the D6. While the D6 was Nikon's absolute flagship pro DSLR camera, many more wildlife photographers used the D850 for its higher Mp count sensor, and that can now also be seen in the Z8/Z9.

So keep at it. Practice makes perfect, and if you can't change the camera or lens, then try to get closer to the bird. It will make a difference. Probably the least expensive way for you to improve things right now if your finances allow it is to get a longer lens like the Nikkor 200-500mm F/5.6. They can be purchased relatively cheap on the used market. Throw in a 1.4X teleconverter and you have 700mm focal length, more than double your 300mm lens, which is just too short for what you want to achieve.

 

[RobO]

Good Morning [UK] Rassie & Raptor Photo [sorry, no name attached]

Thank you for your generous and most helpful comments, they are much appreciated. I'm painfully aware of some of the D6 limitations & I guess as you say this was just a step [or two] too far! If I can spend a moment and tell about my experience with the D6 -
My wife & I both photo usually same subject but hopefully different perspectives. We had a chance to shoot some wildlife and as there was "cash in the pot" I decided we'd both splash out. During Covid we'd both locked down as she is clinically vulnerable. So, I bought for her a Nikon Z7/2 with a small zoom ?70 to 200mm - she had a 2x tele converter from the old setup. I wanted a camera with fast focus and as high frame rate as possible - I wanted a Z9 BUT .... none were available in the UK :( so after calling many dealers I found the D6 which "seemed" a good deal [here's the crunch] -
The D6, almost new, boxed, sub 3k shutter count and charger, battery and a reasonable memory card 256 Mb deal - circa £4.3k [ex demo - 2 very small marks on it which I had a job to find]
On a previous wildlife shoot I'd borrowed a 300/F2.8 and compared to our old Sigma 150/600 5.6/6.3 was Oh so sharp, we had to have one. - £3k each [used - imagine the salesman's eyes when he said "which one would you like" - my reply "BOTH"!!] - I did buy a 1.7x teleconverter to go with mine. We also both had Wimberley Gimbal tripod heads.

I've had thoughts of still purchasing a Z9 so I asked for a trade in price from a dealer. ..........
D6 - £2.25k !! so effectively a New price of £6.4k down to £2.25k in around 4 months and still only sub 7k shutter count!

I'm hugely disappointed to say the least - probably should have changed to Canon at the point I couldn't get the Z9. That said, I'm still uncertain about the mirrorless cameras - particularly unknown longevity & excellence in waterproofing. Water & electronics are far less compatible than older tech where waterproofing has been developed over it's evolution. I have to confess that I did look at grey imports. I have NO dedication to Nikon or genuine UK Nikon any more.

I'm a septuagenarian and don't want to dig into "the pot" a second time especially when my longevity is unknown.

Also: I still have a D800 [74Mb] but a very slow frame rate 4/sec - 5 at a push - not good for fast moving wildlife. However, I guess I should have taken that with me too.

A note on the photo posted - I processed in Topaz which seemed OK and then cropped in Photoshop & again it seemed OK but when posted here - my heart sank! I'd cropped to the forum guidelines - what had I done wrong! [Gutted!]

Gentlemen, your advice is sound and solid and accepted, thank you. Frankly, I'm not sure where to go from here, but selling it all seems very tempting at this moment. I guess that I might find a Z9 from someone who bought & couldn't get on with it, but maybe a Canon dealer would give me a better price ..... maybe. In view of the current trade in price plummet, I really don't want to spend more.

Thank you both, once again
Rob

Out of interest, I processed the image slightly wider view & re-sized it in Photoshop ONLY - until I post I can't see the eventual quality but .... here goes -

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

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

Not sure why 2nd copy of Photoshop image appears!

 

[Rassie]

If this is what the image looks like uncropped, you should be able to post a better-looking version after cropping compared to your original. Take a look at Steve’s educational free videos posted on this website. In one of them he shows how to resize an image for postiing and he supplies an action that you can download and use in Photoshop. It’s excellent and I use it all the time.

 

[RobO]

Hi Rassle
That's great advice, thanks. I haven't been through the whole of the forum yet but I know Steve's videos are excellent. That must be my next move for sure.
Thanks so much.
Rob

 

[Rassie]

Hi Rassle
That's great advice, thanks. I haven't been through the whole of the forum yet but I know Steve's videos are excellent. That must be my next move for sure.
Thanks so much.
Rob

I screen-captured the last image you posted, imported it into Photoshop, and then applied Steve's resizing action. While the end result is still not very good, I'm sure you can do a lot better if you re-edit the original and then resize with Steve's action.

Comparing this image with your original posted above, it looks like the original is over-sharpened - this can be seen in the white halo around the edges of the bird's beak. If not due to sharpening it must be caused by the specific way the image was processed. Secondly, the contrast may be a bit too high with highlights too bright.

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

 

[DRwyoming]

Welcome to the forums.

Interesting moment you captured and a beautiful subject.

Good advice above. Personally I'd probably do a minimal crop and retain more of that interesting perch in the final image. I find the composition of the Kingfisher off to the side of the perch to be nicer overall than the tight crop with the main subject off center and the curve of the perch complimenting the twist of the bird with its fish. Cropping a bit less will also retain more of the inherent image quality.

In addition to the deep crop it appears the image has substantial sharpening artifacts. Don't know if you used a sharpening tool like one of the Topaz products or just the sharpening in your main image editing tool but the high contrast on the bird's head and bright halos along the wing edges are classic over sharpening artifacts that can usually be avoided with more careful use of sharpening tools though less of a crop tends to help as well.

Not sure why 2nd copy of Photoshop image appears!

That usually results from the way you import. If you use Ctrl-P (Cmd-P on a Mac) to browse to and then insert an image you get one image in your post. But when you do that the forum software shows you a set of buttons to insert either a Thumbnail or a Full Size image. Ignore those as clicking either one will place a second image in your post.

If you really just want a thumbnail size image then do your import, hit the Thumbnail insert button and then delete the full size image by placing the cursor to the right of the image and hitting Backspace. But if you just want one full size image ignore those two buttons once you've added the image to your post.

It's just the way the forum software is written but those buttons after initial image insert trip up a lot of folks.

 

[bleirer]

The PPI doesn't matter in this context, only the actual pixel dimensions is what counts.

 

[raptor photo]

Second version is so much nicer!!! Wider crop is better too.

 

[RobO]

Gents
Thank you all so very much for all your most kind and above all such useful, helpful, remarks. Each one of them is very much appreciated. I have an early start tomorrow and may be away for a, hopefully, short while, but will follow up on your wonderful, helpful comments ASAP.
Take care
Rob