Dragonflies: Can the 300mm pro match this?

Guess we will all have to wait and see when I get around to posting the 300mm shots i took last week

Sorry I have a huge backlog of photos and these were very worthy of posting first.

These are Australian Emerald photo's I shot about 2 weeks ago with 40-150mm + MC-14. Last two are picked from a sequence the day before. All were good but I chose the best two to keep the photo numbers down.

Anyway Enjoy these before I give my 40-150mm pro a little rest (actually already doing that )

front on 1

front on 2, AF kept up

1 of 3

1 of 3 100% crop

2 of 3 it changes direction but AF holds

3 of 3, ok I lied it was a sequence of 7 and all were sharp but one

only locked on 1 here, it did the super manouver and I lost focus

1

2

regards, Vas

stunning as always Vas!
They are really cracking - and I am looking forward seeing your 300mm shots..
see you and cheers!
Jan

Photographer highly skilled.  Not seeing many others that match you regardless of the lens.

vass wrote:

Guess we will all have to wait and see when I get around to posting the 300mm shots i took last week

Sorry I have a huge backlog of photos and these were very worthy of posting first.

These are Australian Emerald photo's I shot about 2 weeks ago with 40-150mm + MC-14. Last two are picked from a sequence the day before. All were good but I chose the best two to keep the photo numbers down.

Anyway Enjoy these before I give my 40-150mm pro a little rest (actually already doing that )

front on 1

front on 2, AF kept up

1 of 3

1 of 3 100% crop

2 of 3 it changes direction but AF holds

3 of 3, ok I lied it was a sequence of 7 and all were sharp but one

only locked on 1 here, it did the super manouver and I lost focus

1

2

regards, Vas

Vas , it is bad enough all the wonderful BIF shots we see in the forum putting us mere mortals to shame, but insect in flight shots like these are just plain showing off Truly lovely work

No text.

Jan Krux wrote:

stunning as always Vas!
They are really cracking - and I am looking forward seeing your 300mm shots..
see you and cheers!
Jan

Trevor Carpenter wrote:

Photographer highly skilled. Not seeing many others that match you regardless of the lens.

Thanks for the comments guyz, appreciate it

Ok, how much did you pay the flies to model for you <nt>

hehe, way too much for this shoot

Send me some of your dragonflies.  At a high of 35 degrees (Fahrenheit) on Tuesday, I am sure I can photograph them.  However, I doubt that they will be flying.

Well done as usual.

drj3 wrote:

Send me some of your dragonflies. At a high of 35 degrees (Fahrenheit) on Tuesday, I am sure I can photograph them. However, I doubt that they will be flying.

Well done as usual.

hehe i'll send them without the weather then so they can freeze for you

vass wrote:

Guess we will all have to wait and see when I get around to posting the 300mm shots i took last week

Sorry I have a huge backlog of photos and these were very worthy of posting first.

These are Australian Emerald photo's I shot about 2 weeks ago with 40-150mm + MC-14. Last two are picked from a sequence the day before. All were good but I chose the best two to keep the photo numbers down.

Anyway Enjoy these before I give my 40-150mm pro a little rest (actually already doing that )

...

Great pictures!

I think the 300mm will be able to match this as long as the photographer is skilled enough to keep the dragonfly in the frame. Not an easy task at 210mm and a lot more difficult at 300mm.

I am hoping that the focus limiter will help the 300mm with this kind of subject. When I have tried to photograph flying dragonflies, one of the main problems I get is that the AF chooses to focus on the background rather than the insect, particularly if you can't get low to the water. It may be that limiting the focus to the 1.4m to 4m setting (which will actually focus a bit further away than 4m apparantly) will help where you can contrive to have the background further away than that. We'll see. Too early in the year for draginflies in the UK at the moment.

You really do put your watermark in THE most obtrusive of places.  Is that really necessary?  500 million other photographers either don't bother or put it somewhere less obtrusive.

I bet it will with you at the back. Very nice series Vas!

Tony Rogers wrote:

vass wrote:

Guess we will all have to wait and see when I get around to posting the 300mm shots i took last week

Sorry I have a huge backlog of photos and these were very worthy of posting first.

These are Australian Emerald photo's I shot about 2 weeks ago with 40-150mm + MC-14. Last two are picked from a sequence the day before. All were good but I chose the best two to keep the photo numbers down.

Anyway Enjoy these before I give my 40-150mm pro a little rest (actually already doing that )

...

Great pictures!

I think the 300mm will be able to match this as long as the photographer is skilled enough to keep the dragonfly in the frame. Not an easy task at 210mm and a lot more difficult at 300mm.

I am hoping that the focus limiter will help the 300mm with this kind of subject. When I have tried to photograph flying dragonflies, one of the main problems I get is that the AF chooses to focus on the background rather than the insect, particularly if you can't get low to the water. It may be that limiting the focus to the 1.4m to 4m setting (which will actually focus a bit further away than 4m apparantly) will help where you can contrive to have the background further away than that. We'll see. Too early in the year for draginflies in the UK at the moment.

Most of the time my subjects are in the middle of the frame but yes you can miss them out of frame at further distances if your trying to fill the frame more. Depending on the Dragonfly I am usually finding that's its easier to follow them further out as long as I'm trying to fill lets say 50% of it with the dragonfly. Advantage to 300mm here as I just sit further away and don't have to move the lens as fast.
The focus limiter I'm 50/50 on at the moment. If I was shooting dragonflies or small things close I set it but then in my situation i'm after birds most the time and it can catch you out if that birds comes out of no where. But if your only after dragonflies then I recommend it.

Chippy99 wrote:

You really do put your watermark in THE most obtrusive of places. Is that really necessary? 500 million other photographers either don't bother or put it somewhere less obtrusive.

Till I decide what to do with my images the watermark stays on flickr and forums. I'm only showing what has been captured and any good eye can see beyond the watermark. I am in the process of dealing with a heap of my product photo's being used unlawfuly and unfortunately aussie law can't catch up with these dishonest people in certain countries.

Since I started watermarking them unlawful use has almost ceased. I have had a few other companies use my images including ones that are local etc and sent a nice email that it was the only and final warning they will get before I take legal action, they removed very quickly as I would have them done for using my images and copying my wifes work and using our images to sell a cheap copy to make a profit off our hard work. In countries that don't abide by copyright I simply will be reporting to search engines etc which will get the images blocked in searches like google, yahoo, from showing etc.

I know a watermark can be removed by a super good PS user etc but it creates headaches. I also save my photos to lesser quality and shrink to no larger than 1600x1200.

Anyway sorry you feel that way but that's how I feel more comfortable from experience with unlawful use for now.

Mister Roboto wrote:

I bet it will with you at the back. Very nice series Vas!

Thanks mate

samtheman2014 wrote:

Vas , it is bad enough all the wonderful BIF shots we see in the forum putting us mere mortals to shame, but insect in flight shots like these are just plain showing off Truly lovely work

Seriously! The ability to get dragonfly shots as clear as these is incredible. I try but get no where near this result! Thanks for sharing!

BruceRH wrote:

samtheman2014 wrote:

Vas , it is bad enough all the wonderful BIF shots we see in the forum putting us mere mortals to shame, but insect in flight shots like these are just plain showing off Truly lovely work

Seriously! The ability to get dragonfly shots as clear as these is incredible. I try but get no where near this result! Thanks for sharing!

Thanks
I have always been good with guns etc so I find aiming very easy and it's important to get the dragonfly in the frame quickly otherwise it's too late. The other important factor is to pre focus and time your shutter correctly. The AF barely holds more than a second the way dragonflies fly.

Photo Pete wrote:

Excellent shots. The last time I shot dragonflies in flight was with my Nikon D3s and D800. Even with the more developed tracking autofocus of those it was a nightmare to get sharp images. Your ability to do that on m4/3 is a credit to you as a photographer and also shows how far m4/3 has come on.

I love the 40-150. One of my favourite lenses for m4/3, but the bokeh of even very out of focus backgrounds remains distracting IMHO, particularly with the 1.4tc attached. I know your backgrounds are thrown really well out of focus, but do you think some of your shots would benefit from a bit of selective wide radius blur to the backgrounds just to soften some of the tonal transitions a bit?

Thanks pete

I actually prefer some amount of detail in the background to show the environment but I mix it up and get all kinds of shots. The bokeh on 40-150 pro is just fine in my eyes but everyone has different eyes I guess.

Well done Vas, another cracking inflight set, love the detail in the cropped shot