Sooc shots of Osprey. Not sharp, Lots of noise

[Ontarian]

Hi Ellie.

I think Sherman is dead on with his remarks. My main reason for replying is that I think you would struggle a lot with the 150-600. I borrowed one from a friend and put it on my Canon. I could not get a decent shot with it hand held. It was just too heavy and unbalanced for me. Even at 1/2000 ss blur was quite apparent. Birds on a feeder 40 ft away were worse than with my 70-300 DO. Also Canon a Canon 100-400 and it was manageable but still heavy.

That's why I decided to go to a lighter system than APCs. Either a Sony RX10, Nikon Coolpix 950, Olympus EM5 or Panasonic G9 are my top contenders. Have yet to try any of those yet.

 

[tbcass]

Ok, folks, I am looking for help again before I have to return this camera. I posted some replies in another thread earlier today about problems I have at long end of zoom. Tomorrow is the last day of my free trial. I really want to like this camera, but I seem to have some issues with sharpness at the long end.

Just so you know:
1. Yes I often use my car window to stabilize the camera
2. Yes the motor is ALWAYS turned off as is the radio.
3. The Ospreys are only 200-300 ft from my home, so the engine has not been running long and shouldn’t be overly hot.
4. Sometimes I stand up and rest my elbows on the car door to help stabilize the camera.
5. I hold the view finder tight against my eye to help minimize shake, I never use the screen view.

So far so good.

I only shoot jpeg. I make any minor adjustments after downloading to my phone/iPad. I shoot in Aperture or Shutter priority modes most of the time.
High ISO NR is off,

First mistake. Set it to low. Second use a lower ISO.

continuous shooting is low, focus area is expand flexible spot, but have also used lock on AF:flexible spot medium. AF with shutter is on. Disp. cont. AF area is on. Phase detect area-on. ISO is usually 100 but sometimes up to 400. ISO AUTO min. SS was 1/1000.

Actually, the shutter speed was 1/1250 which is higher than necessary. 1/500 should be sufficient. You also were using f8 and f9 which will actually reduce detail due to diffraction. The RX10iv works best at F4.

Metering Mode-spot-large. Spot metering point was center. (It was suggested I use focus point link instead). AEL with shutter-on. White balance- auto. Priority set in AWB-standard. DRO/auto HDR-off.
Creative style: vivid, contrast +1, Saturation +/-0, sharpness +2.
That’s all. So here are two images. All suggestions are welcome. All SOOC

I thank any and all who take the time to read this long post and offer any suggestions.

Reduce the shutter speed to 1/500 and open the aperture to f4 which should reduce the ISO to 100. This should nearly eliminate the noise.

--
Tom

 

[tbcass]

I considered getting a long lens for my d5600 such as the Sigma 150-600, which B&H has for $899. But that sucker is huge and heavy!!

I have to decide by tomorrow

Don't bother. I own a Tamron 150-600 for use on my Full Frame camera and the results are no better than what I get with my RX10iv, maybe worse because the depth of field is so thin.

 

[tbcass]

"You chose shutter priority 1/1250 second, and you set the ISO to fixed 400. You added a bit of positive EC to brighten the osprey against the blue sky. As a consequence, the aperture narrowed to f/8 or f/9 in the two pictures.

Nothing wrong with any of that -

Yes, there is because F8 and F9 results in diffraction with a 1" sensor. Diffraction makes images less sharp. Whenever possible use F4 and never anything beyond F6.3.

but if you had just used auto ISO here, I suspect the aperture would have widened as far as it could go (f/4) before the ISO increased, and you'd have ended up at ISO 100 with a greater contrast range."

I think Sherm makes an important point here.

For me, the best results are at f4 or at most f5.6, to keep the shutter speed up and/or ISO lower. So generally my RX10iv will be in Aperture Priority wide open, unless I choose to set at f5.6, or use Shutter Priority for video. Though I do sometimes use Shutter Priority at 1/2000 sec for BIF.

IMHO, your problem is that you are not using the right settings, for the particular scenario. And, it's best to shoot Raw + Jpeg for any camera with a smaller sensor.

-M1

True. It is entirely possible that a camera of this complexity is not right for the OP.

 

[tbcass]

Ok, folks, I am looking for help again before I have to return this camera. I posted some replies in another thread earlier today about problems I have at long end of zoom. Tomorrow is the last day of my free trial. I really want to like this camera, but I seem to have some issues with sharpness at the long end.

Just so you know:
3. The Ospreys are only 200-300 ft from my home

Only is not the right word to insert there. That's quite a long distance.

I'll be interested to hear from birders who are accustomed to getting good results with the same camera as to their success with similar subjects at similar distances.

Sorry I wasn’t more clear. The drive or walk to the Osprey trees are 200-300 ft away from my home. They perch atop tall pine trees. Often dead ones. I park my car about 20 -30 ft from the trees in order to get a clear view of the birds

My fault. I should have been able to decipher it. 200-300 feet of distance is too far for that kind of framing. But the subject distance is still pretty significant - I'm guessing something like 100 feet considering the tall trees you describe.

In another post she said 20-30 feet.

 

[tbcass]

Shooting at any aperture smaller than f/5.6 with a 1 inch sensor is not recommended. Past f/5.6 you are getting into diffraction. You can sometimes get away with f/8, but I try to avoid it when possible. Shooting mid-day is certainly possible to keep the aperture open to f/5.6 or more.

Using terms like more or less with aperture is confusing for many people. Smaller or wider, open or close, or giving specific numbers is more clear. I would say use f4 to F5.6 and never smaller than F6.3.

--
Tom

 

[tbcass]

Thanks, Alwyn for replying. I assumed my problems were operator error, too.
**One thing though, I always use f4 as you suggested and I just looked to be sure it hadn’t moved and is still on f4. So how is it possible for it to show as f8 and f9???

The aperture ring works only in Aperture priority and Manual modes.

I did have it set to Shutter priority because I originally was attempting to shoot flying birds earlier and didn’t reset it to A, totally my fault. You and others suggested various settings for me to use when I wasn’t happy with my results, early on; including getting Stephen Ingraham’s book on the RX10 iv, which I did. So somewhere in my settings, I have a combination of recommended settings.
I will give it a try again today with only 100% your settings and see how it goes. That f8 and f9 you are seeing still bothers me though.
Thanks so much for you help and kindness in pointing out my mistakes. I will post another sooc shot with my results.

 

[Digital Nigel]

Thanks, Sherm. If I could get a good denoise program for my iPad I would do that. As you know, birds don’t usually let you get real close, at least not large ones. What de-noise program do you recommend? I do have a lap top but it’s very old and not much use. My husband has one that he never uses, so I might be able to take over that one.
I considered getting a long lens for my d5600 such as the Sigma 150-600, which B&H has for $899. But that sucker is huge and heavy!!

I have to decide by tomorrow

I'm not sure about DeNoise programs for an iPad. The ones I use need a powerful PC. For example, I put your image through Topaz DeNoise AI and then brightened it a bit, particularly the shadows:

Topaz DeNoise AI plus some light changes to shadows and highlights

However, this wouldn't be needed if you either shot raw or used the right camera settings

 

[Elliern]

"You chose shutter priority 1/1250 second, and you set the ISO to fixed 400. You added a bit of positive EC to brighten the osprey against the blue sky. As a consequence, the aperture narrowed to f/8 or f/9 in the two pictures.

Nothing wrong with any of that - but if you had just used auto ISO here, I suspect the aperture would have widened as far as it could go (f/4) before the ISO increased, and you'd have ended up at ISO 100 with a greater contrast range."

I think Sherm makes an important point here.

For me, the best results are at f4 or at most f5.6, to keep the shutter speed up and/or ISO lower. So generally my RX10iv will be in Aperture Priority wide open, unless I choose to set at f5.6, or use Shutter Priority for video. Though I do sometimes use Shutter Priority at 1/2000 sec for BIF.

IMHO, your problem is that you are not using the right settings, for the particular scenario. And, it's best to shoot Raw + Jpeg for any camera with a smaller sensor.

-M1

Ah, Thanks for explaining how the f stop changed.

 

[Elliern]

"You chose shutter priority 1/1250 second, and you set the ISO to fixed 400. You added a bit of positive EC to brighten the osprey against the blue sky. As a consequence, the aperture narrowed to f/8 or f/9 in the two pictures.

Nothing wrong with any of that - but if you had just used auto ISO here, I suspect the aperture would have widened as far as it could go (f/4) before the ISO increased, and you'd have ended up at ISO 100 with a greater contrast range."

I think Sherm makes an important point here.

For me, the best results are at f4 or at most f5.6, to keep the shutter speed up and/or ISO lower. So generally my RX10iv will be in Aperture Priority wide open, unless I choose to set at f5.6, or use Shutter Priority for video. Though I do sometimes use Shutter Priority at 1/2000 sec for BIF.

IMHO, your problem is that you are not using the right settings, for the particular scenario. And, it's best to shoot Raw + Jpeg for any camera with a smaller sensor.

-M1

Thanks for your explanation, I appreciate that

 

[Digital Nigel]

"You chose shutter priority 1/1250 second, and you set the ISO to fixed 400. You added a bit of positive EC to brighten the osprey against the blue sky. As a consequence, the aperture narrowed to f/8 or f/9 in the two pictures.

Nothing wrong with any of that - but if you had just used auto ISO here, I suspect the aperture would have widened as far as it could go (f/4) before the ISO increased, and you'd have ended up at ISO 100 with a greater contrast range."

I think Sherm makes an important point here.

For me, the best results are at f4 or at most f5.6, to keep the shutter speed up and/or ISO lower. So generally my RX10iv will be in Aperture Priority wide open, unless I choose to set at f5.6, or use Shutter Priority for video. Though I do sometimes use Shutter Priority at 1/2000 sec for BIF.

IMHO, your problem is that you are not using the right settings, for the particular scenario. And, it's best to shoot Raw + Jpeg for any camera with a smaller sensor.

-M1

Ah, Thanks for explaining how the f stop changed.

It's not so much that the f stop changed as that you hadn't set it at all. The aperture ring isn't mechanically connected to anything: it's just an electronic switch, which does nothing in S mode.

When you're in S or P mode, you're leaving decisions about the aperture up to the camera, but in P mode at least you can use Auto ISO Min SS Faster to hint that you want a wider aperture and faster shutter.

 

[Elliern]

Ellie,

These aren't bad for images where the subject is so small and the range of light so large. I'm not sure what more you were expecting SOOC.

I'm glad you did post them SOOC, however, because they provided a lot of information

You chose shutter priority 1/1250 second, and you set the ISO to fixed 400. You added a bit of positive EC to brighten the osprey against the blue sky. As a consequence, the aperture narrowed to f/8 or f/9 in the two pictures.

Nothing wrong with any of that - but if you had just used auto ISO here, I suspect the aperture would have widened as far as it could go (f/4) before the ISO increased, and you'd have ended up at ISO 100 with a greater contrast range.

You could also have used M mode at 1/1250 and f/4 with auto ISO to reach the same end point, etc etc.

The actual mode (P,A,S,M) is far less important than the shutter speed/aperture/ISO endpoint which you reach.

These are difficult pictures because they have such a large dynamic range - from sunlit white (even brighter than the sky) to black. In that situation a low ISO is particularly important. I'd say you did as well as one could given the light and the higher ISO- The sunlit white areas are not badly overexposed, and it's possible to brighten the dark areas a lot, even from the JPG. (I'll spare you my "but if you had saved is as raw" macro)

The image is well-focused and sharp, and it's easy to remove the noise and adjust the lighting with some easy postprocessing

Beyond that, keep in mind that to fill the frame, you'll need to get about as close as you were with your recent rabbit.

Thanks, Sherm. If I could get a good denoise program for my iPad I would do that. As you know, birds don’t usually let you get real close, at least not large ones. What de-noise program do you recommend? I do have a lap top but it’s very old and not much use. My husband has one that he never uses, so I might be able to take over that one.
I considered getting a long lens for my d5600 such as the Sigma 150-600, which B&H has for $899. But that sucker is huge and heavy!!

I have to decide by tomorrow

Ellie,

I use DXO PL4 which is superb, but I'm puzzled by your logic.

You're happy with the P950 for stationary birds far away and for photography in general.

You also wanted a camera with faster/better focus for birds in flight for your trip. A big heavy long lens for the d5600 won't be practical for that purpose (though perhaps a much shorter one might be), and you can practice with whatever lens you have at home prior to deciding whether or not you want to go that route.

--

Sherm
Sherms flickr page

P950 album

P900 album RX10iv album

You are 100% correct, Sherm! B&H had the 150-600 Sigma on sale for $899. But when I saw how heavy and big it was, I knew there was no way I could use it and I can’t take a tripod on my trip. So it is out. I will definitely be taking my P950.
I am still undecided on the RX10. There are a lot of things I like about it. I am very happy with my close up shots. But only have 1-2 BIFs that were “ok”. And not many good close up shots of dragonflies or bees. That might all be explained by poor settings and/or camera shake. I have seen fantastic images of BIFs and insects posted so I know the camera is very capable.
I also compared my D5600 to the D7200 and D7500 and the areas that counted were the same or very close. The D7500 was 1or 2 points higher in image quality and slightly faster. So someday I may look for a good refurbished or used one.
There is a lot of real noise and activity here this morning from lawn mowers and pressure washing, that may be why the Ospreys weren’t out. I will keep checking their two trees. Unfortunately I can’t see them from my house because other condo buildings are in the way, so have to keep driving down there. If I can’t shoot them today, I think I will just keep the camera. I can always sell it or trade it in for another camera. I also mentioned to you once, I considered the Panasonic fz300. While it does have a much smaller sensor, it is very inexpensive and I have seen some good BIFs and bird images that people have posted. So in the future that might be an option, but not yet.
I am looking into getting a collapsible lightweight carbon or aluminum tripod to keep in my car.

Thanks for alway being there with helpful advice and encouragement. I greatly appreciate it.

--
Ellie
Enjoy the Moments!
“What day is it?” asked Pooh.
“It’s today,” squeaked Piglet.
“My favorite day,” said Pooh.
A.A. Milne

 

[Elliern]

"You chose shutter priority 1/1250 second, and you set the ISO to fixed 400. You added a bit of positive EC to brighten the osprey against the blue sky. As a consequence, the aperture narrowed to f/8 or f/9 in the two pictures.

Nothing wrong with any of that - but if you had just used auto ISO here, I suspect the aperture would have widened as far as it could go (f/4) before the ISO increased, and you'd have ended up at ISO 100 with a greater contrast range."

I think Sherm makes an important point here.

For me, the best results are at f4 or at most f5.6, to keep the shutter speed up and/or ISO lower. So generally my RX10iv will be in Aperture Priority wide open, unless I choose to set at f5.6, or use Shutter Priority for video. Though I do sometimes use Shutter Priority at 1/2000 sec for BIF.

IMHO, your problem is that you are not using the right settings, for the particular scenario. And, it's best to shoot Raw + Jpeg for any camera with a smaller sensor.

-M1

Thanks for those suggestions. I have not used auto ISO in quite awhile, so will give that a try for sure.

 

[Elliern]

first off change iso to 125 and never go above F:5 in (A) mode see how that works.

If stand hold cam tight against face and tuck arms tightly to sides of body

use med movable focus brackets and full metering mode. If cam does not catch focus move brackets 1/2 on 1/2 off subject

Photo taken thru plate glass window Handheld

--
Bill
"Life's Too Short to Worry about the BS!"
So I Choose my Battles
Click for Wild Man's Photos
Using Rx10 IV at Present

Thanks, Bill. I will try your suggestions. I appreciate all your help. That’s a great shot through a window!

--
Ellie
Enjoy the Moments!
“What day is it?” asked Pooh.
“It’s today,” squeaked Piglet.
“My favorite day,” said Pooh.
A.A. Milne

 

[sybersitizen]

Ok, folks, I am looking for help again before I have to return this camera. I posted some replies in another thread earlier today about problems I have at long end of zoom. Tomorrow is the last day of my free trial. I really want to like this camera, but I seem to have some issues with sharpness at the long end.

Just so you know:
3. The Ospreys are only 200-300 ft from my home

Only is not the right word to insert there. That's quite a long distance.

I'll be interested to hear from birders who are accustomed to getting good results with the same camera as to their success with similar subjects at similar distances.

Sorry I wasn’t more clear. The drive or walk to the Osprey trees are 200-300 ft away from my home. They perch atop tall pine trees. Often dead ones. I park my car about 20 -30 ft from the trees in order to get a clear view of the birds

My fault. I should have been able to decipher it. 200-300 feet of distance is too far for that kind of framing. But the subject distance is still pretty significant - I'm guessing something like 100 feet considering the tall trees you describe.

In another post she said 20-30 feet.

I quoted it in my reply: 20-30 feet from atop tall pines trees, which get pretty high.

Based on what I see, I'd guess the distance at around 150 feet.

Here's a shot of a street light from 150 feet at the same focal length with my V3 (1" sensor). The bell is about two feet tall. I imagine a medium size osprey perched on it would occupy about the same area as the one in the image.

 

[sherman_levine]

Ellie,

These aren't bad for images where the subject is so small and the range of light so large. I'm not sure what more you were expecting SOOC.

I'm glad you did post them SOOC, however, because they provided a lot of information

You chose shutter priority 1/1250 second, and you set the ISO to fixed 400. You added a bit of positive EC to brighten the osprey against the blue sky. As a consequence, the aperture narrowed to f/8 or f/9 in the two pictures.

Nothing wrong with any of that - but if you had just used auto ISO here, I suspect the aperture would have widened as far as it could go (f/4) before the ISO increased, and you'd have ended up at ISO 100 with a greater contrast range.

You could also have used M mode at 1/1250 and f/4 with auto ISO to reach the same end point, etc etc.

The actual mode (P,A,S,M) is far less important than the shutter speed/aperture/ISO endpoint which you reach.

These are difficult pictures because they have such a large dynamic range - from sunlit white (even brighter than the sky) to black. In that situation a low ISO is particularly important. I'd say you did as well as one could given the light and the higher ISO- The sunlit white areas are not badly overexposed, and it's possible to brighten the dark areas a lot, even from the JPG. (I'll spare you my "but if you had saved is as raw" macro)

The image is well-focused and sharp, and it's easy to remove the noise and adjust the lighting with some easy postprocessing

Beyond that, keep in mind that to fill the frame, you'll need to get about as close as you were with your recent rabbit.

Thanks, Sherm. If I could get a good denoise program for my iPad I would do that. As you know, birds don’t usually let you get real close, at least not large ones. What de-noise program do you recommend? I do have a lap top but it’s very old and not much use. My husband has one that he never uses, so I might be able to take over that one.
I considered getting a long lens for my d5600 such as the Sigma 150-600, which B&H has for $899. But that sucker is huge and heavy!!

I have to decide by tomorrow

Ellie,

I use DXO PL4 which is superb, but I'm puzzled by your logic.

You're happy with the P950 for stationary birds far away and for photography in general.

You also wanted a camera with faster/better focus for birds in flight for your trip. A big heavy long lens for the d5600 won't be practical for that purpose (though perhaps a much shorter one might be), and you can practice with whatever lens you have at home prior to deciding whether or not you want to go that route.

You are 100% correct, Sherm! B&H had the 150-600 Sigma on sale for $899. But when I saw how heavy and big it was, I knew there was no way I could use it and I can’t take a tripod on my trip. So it is out. I will definitely be taking my P950.

Sounds very reasonable.

I am still undecided on the RX10. There are a lot of things I like about it. I am very happy with my close up shots. But only have 1-2 BIFs that were “ok”. And not many good close up shots of dragonflies or bees. That might all be explained by poor settings and/or camera shake. I have seen fantastic images of BIFs and insects posted so I know the camera is very capable.

You're chasing around following everybody's advice and it's just causing confusion. Pick one configuration ( Alwyn's is excellent ) and just use that until you understand it.

Continue to post SOOC JPGs, because they can be used to determine your actual camera settings.

I also compared my D5600 to the D7200 and D7500 and the areas that counted were the same or very close. The D7500 was 1or 2 points higher in image quality and slightly faster. So someday I may look for a good refurbished or used one.
There is a lot of real noise and activity here this morning from lawn mowers and pressure washing, that may be why the Ospreys weren’t out. I will keep checking their two trees. Unfortunately I can’t see them from my house because other condo buildings are in the way, so have to keep driving down there. If I can’t shoot them today, I think I will just keep the camera. I can always sell it or trade it in for another camera. I also mentioned to you once, I considered the Panasonic fz300. While it does have a much smaller sensor, it is very inexpensive and I have seen some good BIFs and bird images that people have posted. So in the future that might be an option, but not yet.

Don't worry about the birds. Take pictures of the post the bird sits on and get those looking proper. Learn how changing exposure offset changes the live view.

Nothing will be solved by changing cameras. The issue is what you're doing with what you already have.

If I had to make one suggestion (which has nothing to do with the camera settings) it's to save in raw (or JPG and raw) and get DXO and (perhaps) Topaz Sharpen. It will improve what you get from the RX10 and to an even greater degree what you get from the P950.

Here's an ISO 5000 image from Rx10iv (raw) from a few evenings back, posted at 100% so you can see all the ticks.

Here's one at ISO 1600 from a P950 raw, also at 100%

I am looking into getting a collapsible lightweight carbon or aluminum tripod to keep in my car.

Why not a monopod? For me, the difference between nothing and a light monopod is much greater than the difference between a monopod and a tripod. You can even take the monopod on your trip.

Thanks for alway being there with helpful advice and encouragement. I greatly appreciate it.

Happy to help.

Perhaps also consider whether taking BIF really needs to be on your bucket list. It requires a certain amount of agility, and the success rate at best is low. I've removed skiing from my own bucket list (to be more precise, I keep adding it and my wife keeps removing it because she hates seeing me in a cast).

--

Sherm
Sherms flickr page

P950 album

P900 album RX10iv album

 

[tbcass]

Good point if the tree was very high. Pine trees can exceed 100 feet.

--
Tom

 

[sybersitizen]

Ok, folks, I am looking for help again before I have to return this camera. I posted some replies in another thread earlier today about problems I have at long end of zoom. Tomorrow is the last day of my free trial. I really want to like this camera, but I seem to have some issues with sharpness at the long end.

Just so you know:
3. The Ospreys are only 200-300 ft from my home

Only is not the right word to insert there. That's quite a long distance.

I'll be interested to hear from birders who are accustomed to getting good results with the same camera as to their success with similar subjects at similar distances.

Sorry I wasn’t more clear. The drive or walk to the Osprey trees are 200-300 ft away from my home. They perch atop tall pine trees. Often dead ones. I park my car about 20 -30 ft from the trees in order to get a clear view of the birds

My fault. I should have been able to decipher it. 200-300 feet of distance is too far for that kind of framing. But the subject distance is still pretty significant - I'm guessing something like 100 feet considering the tall trees you describe.

In another post she said 20-30 feet.

I quoted it in my reply: 20-30 feet from atop tall pines trees, which get pretty high.

Based on what I see, I'd guess the distance at around 150 feet.

Here's a shot of a street light from 150 feet at the same focal length with my V3 (1" sensor). The bell is about two feet tall. I imagine a medium size osprey perched on it would occupy about the same area as the one in the image.

I was mistaken. Google Maps says that light is exactly 200 feet from where I was standing ... so we're back to my original question:

What kind of results do expert birders get with a bird that size at 200 feet?

 

[mackey1001]

Nothing will be solved by changing cameras. The issue is what you're doing with what you already have.

+++++++++++++++++++ infinity ;-)

Agree 1 million % on people spending more time improving their own skills and technique. Education and work pays off

I sometimes have blamed my camera for being the problem, when in many cases it's been that I didn't put in the time and hard work to learn how to better use it (and just being a better photographer, in general).

-M1

 

[tbcass]

Nothing will be solved by changing cameras. The issue is what you're doing with what you already have.

+++++++++++++++++++ infinity ;-)

Agree 1 million % on people spending more time improving their own skills and technique. Education and work pays off

I sometimes have blamed my camera for being the problem, when in many cases it's been that I didn't put in the time and hard work to learn how to better use it (and just being a better photographer, in general).

-M1

Exactly. I have been shooting sports with my RX10iv for 3 years and my results are much better now than they were 3 years ago.