Puffin Island

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ron Reznick
  • Start date Start date
R

Ron Reznick

Guest
One morning, we piled into a boat and scooted over to this little postage-stamp island that the locals call Puffin Island, for very good reason. The island is infested with these cute little birds. They are extremely difficult to photograph, as the dynamic range is quite high between the darker rocks and light feathers, esp. when the birds are in partial sun. They are close to impossible to shoot consistently in the air, as they move very fast and erratically, probably to confound photographers (it certainly seemed that way -- you should have seen Joe's face when he started trying flight shots... it was so priceless I had to take a shot. To avoid possible assault, I'll avoid posting that shot of his expression [chuckle]).

All but the last shot here were taken with the D2Hs. Need for speed...

The Puffins typically hang out in small groups on rock ledges:

200mm f/2VR w/ TC14e (280mm), f/8



They share some spots with Murres, but as you'll notice above, when a photographer is around they try hard to block the Murre with their wings. I arranged to circumvent this blockade for only one shot:

1:1 crop, 280mm @ f/8



They feed offshore, flying out to get fish and bringing them back to their ledges to eat. Catching shots of the puffins coming back in with fish is an extreme challenge -- these guys are like flying footballs, and they really scoot:

Both shots, 200mm VR + TC17e (340mm) @ f/8





Sometimes, they sit on a ledge all by themselves and contemplate the whichness of what:

200mm f/2 VR @ f/5.6



They are unbelievably comical, apparently even to each other. They show a great interest in what other individuals are doing. For instance, this one puffin came in for a landing, then launched into an operatic aria. Note the interest shown by the neighboring puffin:

340mm @ f/8





They seemed quite interested in the huge glass eyes we kept pointing at them:

340mm @ f/8



...they also seemed quite interested in some of the bugs:

280mm @ f/5.6



One more flight shot... this time from the D2x and the 300mm, both of which were feeling left out except when shooting static shots. The Hs's high-speed frame rate really comes in handy for these little guys, but I didn't want to annoy the "X" so I took some at the end with it:

D2x, 300mm VR @ f/8



I hope you enjoyed your little trip to Puffin Island. C'mon back, now...

Ron
--
Ron Reznick
http://digital-images.net
http://trapagon.com
 
Hi Ron

I hope all is well.

I like the pics. You mention that the H's frame rate makes a big diffierence so you prefer it over the D2x in these sorts of situations. If so, given you are using teleconverters as well, why not use the D2x in HSC mode?

How do you like the 200VR?

Cheers

Mark
 
I could, Mark, and I did late in the shoot (I will process those shots early next week)... but these guys fly very erratically and keeping them in the center of the frame can be difficult. If you frame loosely it's not as troublesome of course.

One other thing. They fly very fast. As you may know, it's possible in situations like this for the bird to fly right through your depth of field before the AF system catches up. When that happens, you get sharp feet and soft faces. The D2x has more steps in the focused-to-defocused transition and is less forgiving of the moment the shot is taken -- if you're just a smidgen off you can really see it. One of the advantages of the D2h or D2Hs is a slightly greater latitude here, which gives you a little more room for error.

Ron
--
Ron Reznick
http://digital-images.net
http://trapagon.com
 
The 200mm f/2 VR is a new addition to my kit, Mark, and the first real use of the lens was in Alaska. It's a really stubby, surprisingly heavy but well-balanced lens that works exceptionally well with both the TC14e and TC17e. It's critically sharp wide open, and provides tremendous isolation when shooting close at wider apertures. The combination of fast aperture, AFS and VR make this lens unbelievably versatile, esp. when the light starts to drop. For larger subjects or small-ish subjects at close distances it's a fabulous tool, again, esp. when the light drops, when it will make the difference between getting a top-grade shot and getting marginal or no results.

I used it handheld on the D2Hs as a backup, for when the light was low, the subjects got too close, or when framing a scene that required a larger field of view. I'll be using it more over the next several months I'm sure, and will show results as I can. Meanwhile, I can show a few here:

Porcupine, shot close at f/2:



Grizzly climbing the riverbank right next to us, 50% resize, f/5.6



Backlit Grizzly, f/4.5, early morning



There are other shots floating around, including in this thread. It's a very, very good lens, Mark. Even for portraits:

f/2



f/2.5



f/4





f/5.6



Ron
--
Ron Reznick
http://digital-images.net
http://trapagon.com
 
Ah yes. I know exactly what you mean about D2x being unforgiving and have the shots to prove it :-) Thanks Ron.
I could, Mark, and I did late in the shoot (I will process those
shots early next week)... but these guys fly very erratically and
keeping them in the center of the frame can be difficult. If you
frame loosely it's not as troublesome of course.

One other thing. They fly very fast. As you may know, it's possible
in situations like this for the bird to fly right through your
depth of field before the AF system catches up. When that happens,
you get sharp feet and soft faces. The D2x has more steps in the
focused-to-defocused transition and is less forgiving of the moment
the shot is taken -- if you're just a smidgen off you can really
see it. One of the advantages of the D2h or D2Hs is a slightly
greater latitude here, which gives you a little more room for error.

Ron
--
Ron Reznick
http://digital-images.net
http://trapagon.com
 
Ron, you and Yves are giving me a bad case of lens lust. I have seen several works from this lens and love what it brings to the table. I would probably sell my 70-200 VR to help finance it. I love the 70-200 but most of the time it's maxed out at 200 anyway and frequently has a tc hanging off it or I'm shooting at the short end. How would you rate using the 200 F/2 vs the 70-200 as far as handling ergonomics?? I'm quite comfortable hand holding the 70-200 for extended periods.
--
Skip Teschendorf
 
Hi Skip,

The 200VR is twice as heavy as the 70-200VR, but it's balanced a LOT closer to the camera body. It's heavy... don't get me wrong. On Puffin Island, I handheld this lens for over four hours straight. It was tiring... but it's do-able.

I sold my 70-200VR and 105/2DC to finance part of the cost of this lens. I found myself working with the 70-200 between f/5.6 and f/8 almost all the time... f/4 was usable for top-grade work at 70-100mm, and f/2.8 was soft across the focal range. Given the focal range, as you found, often you're shooting it at the long end... occasionally the short end gets some use. The weight often kept me from carrying it into travelling situations or forest hikes, and the lower amount of aperture flexibility reduced my desire to carry it in those situations as well -- especially lately.

I have a 135/2DC that I prefer to carry for fast-aperture medium-telephoto work. It does excellent work at wider apertures. Along with the 85/1.4D, which I always carry when shorter telephoto work is likely, these make a lightweight and high-grade lens kit for short-to-medium telephoto work. I prefer the combination to the 70-200VR, except for those situations where I'll be shooting medium apertures and require the ability to rapidly compose at various focal lengths. Since I don't do that all that often, I also ended up using the 70-200VR as a 200mm or 280mm prime with occasional focal length flexibility, just like you do. It became less useful to me given my shooting style over the last year, and when I started getting the dreaded lens lust for a tool to mate better with my 500mm that could use TCs and had AFS (and VR), I sold the 105DC and 70-200VR to cover over half of the cost and went with the new "toy".

The Alaska trip showed me that this lens can be rapidly swung up and can be handheld with stability in tricky situations, including flight, low-light work, etc. -- it yields clean results from f/2 to f/8 (I haven't stopped it down further yet). Focusing speed is blindingly fast and very accurate. Isolation is high at the wider apertures, and detail resolution is stupendous. Contrast reminds me of the 85/1.4D, as does the isolation and defocused character. Sharp? OUCH!

You won't regret it, Skip, but it is expensive... and heavy. If the weight will cramp your style... remember that I keep a lightweight fast medium telephoto around here. This stubby little beast isn't for every shoot, but when it's the right tool, nothing else will even come close. The combination of AFS, VR and the ability to use TCs makes it worth the expense, but when you need a lightweight medium tele it's not the one.

Ron
--
Ron Reznick
http://digital-images.net
http://trapagon.com
 
Mark, I have some of those very same shots with the D2x. You have to nail the focus to really make this camera shine, or stop down enough so you can miss a little. When the focusing is tricky and the acquisition speed is going to be high, my tendency is to reach for the D2Hs to get a higher yield.

Ron
--
Ron Reznick
http://digital-images.net
http://trapagon.com
 
Hi Ron

I won't comment on the technique, it is us who need the comments, but this series is great.

You have really nailed a portrait of the Puffins. I didn't know the existence of this bird, but now I almost feel related to it (don't try to make any comparison).

It is a series with humor (helped by your comments) and the individual pictures speak for themselves.

--
Jens Dyrløv
 
That you can make such great pics. Seriously, Ron, fantastic shots.

Diderot
 
Hi Ron

These are wonderful photos - I especially like the 'aria' shot - really good stuff.

As for the word of thanks - we're off to Crete tomorrow with backpacks and gear, I'm not up for the big telephotos (not really my style anyway). But I had been very disappointed with the 70-200 with the TC2e - finally yesterday I went to my friendly local dealer and traded it in for the TC17e. (this was largely as a result of seeing your results with it).

The difference is a real revalation - added to the fact that it seems to make a serious difference to the balance of the camera. It's hard to believe that that .3 could make such a huge difference.

Finally - mud and sandals - no, I didn't take the sandals off - I usually do, but there's something rather spooky about having bare feet immersed in 18" mud with unnameable objects at the bottom!

Kind Regards
Jono
--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk
 
Wowowowowowowow! - excellent work. love those little birds

--
Phil A
FCAS Member #100
http://www.pbase.com/philinnz
D100, Sigma 12-24, nikon 50/1.8, Nikon 17-80
cp5000
 
The TC17e is a totally different animal, isn't it? The 20e was never satisfying no matter what lens I put it on, but the reduction in quality with the 17e is minimal, considering the gain in reach. Well worth the change.

I understand re: the sandals. Sticking your feet into 18" of mud with sticks and all sorts of other unknown oddities could be even more annoying than wandering around with gooey sandals later.

Ron
--
Ron Reznick
http://digital-images.net
http://trapagon.com
 
They are high-latitude birds... we don't have them near us either, and the puffins are one of the creatures who really attracted me to Alaska (along with the bears and eagles, of course). Glad you liked the shots, Jens.

I'm off to the garden! I hope you're having a good day too...

Ron
--
Ron Reznick
http://digital-images.net
http://trapagon.com
 
LOL
Hi Ron
I LIKE gooey sandals (could this be a perversion?).

Actually, I like sandals generally - I can't stand wearing walking boots when it's hot, so the Birkenstocks will be even more battered and beaten when we get back from Crete - you just have to put up with the stings and scratches . . . . and watch out for snakes.

Kind Regards
--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk
 
I have yet to see a Puffin colony but one of these days I will get there!
Sweet shots, congrats!!!
--
George DeCamp
http://www.decamp.net
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top