Hummingbird with SX280

Britney Elvis

Veteran Member
Messages
5,382
Reaction score
692
Location
NorCal, US
borrowed my daughters SX280 to shoot the local humming bird. You have to work to get some of the NR artifacts out. But it did ok for a little pocket camera.

I shot the same hummingbird feeder (maybe the same bird) with the SX50 in my latest Hodgepodge thread. If any one wants to compare.



6496e84fd03e43ef8a4c60be49d80ab7.jpg

thanks for looking

--
"It is not necessary to understand things in order to argue about them."
~~ Pierre Beaumarchais~~
 
BuddyJPA wrote:
Britney Elvis wrote:

borrowed my daughters SX280 to shoot the local humming bird. You have to work to get some of the NR artifacts out.
How did you get the noise out?
I think for the most part... just filling your subject up in the frame helps a lot. The bigger the subject, the less the artifacts appear to destroy detail. If that bird is half the size in the photo the same size NR artifacts cover more of the feather detail.
You also have to have a sharp shot to begin with, cause any noise smoothing is going to affect detail.
 
brianj wrote:

Very clean shot considering the ISO and zoom, was there any CA at full zoom, the SX260 has a bit of blue fringing.

Brian
Brian, I honestly have not shot much with it... And they pictures she takes are all over the map. So not sure she has really pushed enough to know.

Have not notice a whole lot of PF or the green ca ... but that may be that I just dont use it enough.
 
I have never used a SX280, but it appears that you did a wonderful job.
 
Hi mate, nice image and a great little bird, did you use on camera flash?

Regards.

Stephen.
 
stephent wrote:

Hi mate, nice image and a great little bird, did you use on camera flash?

Regards.

Stephen.
This feeder is in the shade except for an hour or two in the AM (and the hummers are not out)

So I needed the flash to make the color pop.

Thanks for the nice comment
 
:-O Wow, that bird really "pops," as you say! Would you mind if I sent it to a relative who is also a keen bird-feeder-watcher, and trying to get to grips with a new camera? She's not (yet) on the forum, but if she sees what there is to learn here she might just come on over.

Stadler
 
Last edited:
Stadleroux wrote:

:-O Wow, that bird really "pops," as you say! Would you mind if I sent it to a relative who is also a keen bird-feeder-watcher, and trying to get to grips with a new camera? She's not (yet) on the forum, but if she sees what there is to learn here she might just come on over.

Stadler
if you send her some of my SX 50 shots... it is the real birder lens. And with the RAW files you can truly clean up some of the higher ISO noise.

This is my recent fave... straight down the beak!

Have her 'click' on them, cause they look pretty good full res








479411b410f440e1bc70c5bce042311e.jpg



6c4d14173f4e4a609884dc01286a8afd.jpg



fbbc75af86004c7db7bb9a0b6e9752c2.jpg



--
"It is not necessary to understand things in order to argue about them."
~~ Pierre Beaumarchais~~
 
Thanks so much! :-)

Did you use flash on the second of these three, but not on the last one?

My relative used to have a very good Nikon film camera with lenses, then she used a Kodak digital hand-me-down for a couple of years and now she's getting to grips with an EOS 600D. :-O She has an eye for detail, however, because she used to be a graphic artist, and I've seen some amazing shots she'd taken, even with the Kodak.

Stadler
 
Stadleroux wrote:

Thanks so much! :-)

Did you use flash on the second of these three, but not on the last one?

My relative used to have a very good Nikon film camera with lenses, then she used a Kodak digital hand-me-down for a couple of years and now she's getting to grips with an EOS 600D. :-O She has an eye for detail, however, because she used to be a graphic artist, and I've seen some amazing shots she'd taken, even with the Kodak.

Stadler

yes I did use flash on the second one. The feeder is in the shade for most of the day... so if I did not use flash the ISO would get bumped up too high.

The other feeder is in the sun most of the day. So you dont need flash.

The first one is also in the shade but without flash... I needed ISO 640 to get that shot. That is as high as I want to go as it starts to get noisy.
 
Very nice, Britney. I started using an SX280 as my go-everywhere belt camera last week. Nothing remarkable (your shot is "remarkable") yet, but I'm pleased with the camera so far based on some test shots I've done; PF/CA has not been an issue so far. 25-500 mm in that small a package is very handy on hikes and local walks where carrying a heavier camera and multiple lenses is undesirable.

--
Phil
 
Last edited:
PC Wheeler wrote:

Very nice, Britney. I started using an SX280 as my go-everywhere belt camera last week. Nothing remarkable (your shot is "remarkable") yet, but I'm pleased with the camera so far based on some test shots I've done; PF/CA has not been an issue so far. 25-500 mm in that small a package is very handy on hikes and local walks where carrying a heavier camera and multiple lenses is undesirable.
 
My relative, my favourite aunt, is now wholly depressed after having seen these photos of yours! She sent me two photos of birds, both with pin-sharp wing feathers, but the one's head and eye isn't quite sharp. She thinks it's out of focus, but I'm wondering if her shutter speed wasn't perhaps too slow for its moving head. Unfortunately it was taken in Creative Auto mode, so she didn't see the shutter speed either. She sent them in .pdf format, but I'm trying to get her to send them again in .jpg with the exif data included. Will have to see how I can instruct her tonight when I'm in front of my own computer again, with Zoombrowser open, then I can possibly post them here.
 
Stadleroux wrote:

My relative, my favourite aunt, is now wholly depressed after having seen these photos of yours! She sent me two photos of birds, both with pin-sharp wing feathers, but the one's head and eye isn't quite sharp. She thinks it's out of focus, but I'm wondering if her shutter speed wasn't perhaps too slow for its moving head. Unfortunately it was taken in Creative Auto mode, so she didn't see the shutter speed either. She sent them in .pdf format, but I'm trying to get her to send them again in .jpg with the exif data included. Will have to see how I can instruct her tonight when I'm in front of my own computer again, with Zoombrowser open, then I can possibly post them here.
WHat camera did you say she was shooting?

Please tell her that for every shot of mine I posted... there are probably 15 with something out of focus or a moving (blurred head)

Plus on these hummer shots I am pretting close to the birds.
 
She's just starting out with an EOS 600D. Fortunately she's already doing a lot better than before. She was petrified at having bought such an expensive camera and not getting to grips with it, but now she is learning how user friendly the camera actually is and she keeps on trying out different types of focusing, f stops, etc.

I don't think she realised that she could see the EXIF data for every photo, because she couldn't tell me the shutter speed of the one taken in Creative Auto mode, so I've now explained to her how to get to it, and I hope it will be of some help to her in her experimenting. I also suggested she use pill cartons stacked on top of one another at very slightly differing distances from her camera to see when an f/stop is small enough to keep both in focus and when not. Haven't used it myself, but it was the thing closest to bird size that I could think of at the time, so I hope it helps! :-D

Oh, and thanks, I'll tell her!
 
Last edited:

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top