Pixtus - Photography Forum, Photographers, Photo Tips

KSQPhotography · 03:14 PM

The photos below are samples of those taken with the Nikon 300mm f2.8 VRII lens. There are many more examples at the links posted below if you are interested.

Nikon 300mm f2.8 VRII lens KSQ Photography Blog

The first three photos were taken in Wyoming. The Osprey photo has NOT been edited other than cropping. The sky was in fact that blue on a cloudless Wyoming day. The next two photos are panning shots of a Bald Eagle at Oxbow Bend. Cropping was the only editing on these two photos.

The next few photos were taken last month on Galveston's East End of a Little Blue Heron with the Nikon 300mm f2.8 VRII in combination with the TC-20EIII (2.0x teleconverter) at 600mm. All of these photos were taken HANDHELD to test the potential of shooting 600mm without support. Sure it's not perfect technique but it does demonstrate that you can get usable photos in this situation. Photos were only cropped to upload with not additional editing performed for all you purists. These photos are not the best ever taken with this lens but rather a sample of a normal day shooting.

The photo below that was taken in Wyoming of a female moose at 300mm (no teleconverter). This photo was cropped but received no additional post processing.

The photo below that is of a Piping Plover in Galveston shot at 600mm in combination with the TC-20EIII (2.0x) teleconverter, and was taken handheld. It was stopped down one f-stop from wide open to f6.3 and at 1/1600sec.

The next photo was originally posted and is a Snowy Egret chasing fish in Galveston. This is another photo taken handheld at 600mm with the TC-20EIII teleconverter. It has only been cropped with no additional post-processing.

The next photo (another on the original posd) was taken at 510mm in combination with the TC-17EII (1.7x) teleconverter. This bull moose was relatively far away so this photo has been cropped some. No additional post processing.

Next is the final photo from the original post which was taken at 300mm low light conditions before dark. This photo was taken at f2.8 (wide-open), ISO-500, and 1/60sec. I didn't want to push the D300 much more past this ISO, as it is not a terrific performer past ISO-400 IMO.

Last is a photo taken at 300mm, cropped and converted to black and white.

For many more photos taken with this lens feel free to check out:
Nikon 300mm f2.8 VRII lens KSQ Photography Blog

-KSQ
KSQ Photography
KSQ Photography Blog

KSQPhotography · 02-08-2011, 11:05 PM

Wow...not many people comment on this forum like they do in others I frequent. Anyone else have experience with this lens that they would like to share?

ldelacruz · 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KSQPhotography

Wow...not many people comment on this forum like they do in others I frequent. Anyone else have experience with this lens that they would like to share?

Some look out of focus, soft and over saturated. You should also work on your composition but that doesn't have anything to do with the lens. Do you have others to share? Try posting in the nature and wildlife section and ask for CC If you want more feedback.

KSQPhotography · **Well actually... -** 02-09-2011, 12:07 AM

Ldelacruz

Actually, the majority of the photos are sharp, though I am hating the way this forum makes you compress your photos to upload. They always seem to look a bit soft compared to the original. Perhaps I am not doing it in the best way to perserve the photo detail, the originals are in focus. You you have any recommendation that are actually helpful with this regard by all means share. Below is a link to a full photo for comparison:

http://ksqphotography.files.wordpres...-crop-best.jpg

As far as compostion, well thank for the rather vague advice/imput. That was sarcasm in case you couldn't tell. The top photo of the little blue is less than ideal composition because it was a low photo but was the sharpest of that group of shots (shot at 600mm handheld). So I agree that the compostion is less than ideal. As far as the other, I see no real problems with the composition....the rule of thirds is basically followed when I found it necessary. Again, if you have specific critique or advice you should share it rather than just making a vague comment.

Also, as I admitted in my post that some photos might be less than perfect as they were 600mm equivalent handheld. Not exactly ideal technique but it does show that you can produce usable images with this combo handheld.

For all future posts, please make sure they are actually helpful!

KSQ

ldelacruz · 02-09-2011, 12:31 AM

Sorry you took offense and didn't find my comments to be helpful. I was answering your 2nd post above about why you were not getting comments. You posted in the wrong section. This section is to showcase the quality of a particular lens and these images don't do that. #1 is your strongest by far but the others are not very good. My comment might seem vague because you didn't ask for CC. This isn't the right forum for CC. Post them in the nature/wildlife and others would be happy to offer critiques and suggestions.

KSQPhotography · 02-09-2011, 05:34 AM

ldelcruz,

The only thing I can possibly take away from your comments is that there are other forums to post in. Beyond that they are not very helpful to me or anyone else who reads this. At the time I posted, there were not posts for this lens at all. In addition to the photos I tried to upload to the forum page, there are many photos that can be found through the link I provided, for those who are interested to see more (which can be viewed uncompressed).

Also, I will say that I feel blessed to have had an end-all photography expert like yourself share your comments...again sarcasm... I find it quite interesting that your posting history is full of comments (like a spectator in the crowd) but no/few actual posts of your own photos. There is a critic in every crowd and if it makes you happy, then more power to you. I am no offended as you put it, but do find your posting patterns, in light of the quality of your comments, more than coincidence.

KSQ
KSQ Photography
KSQ Photography Blog

ldelacruz · 07:55 AM

I sense a bit of a smart ass! First off it is not my job to kiss your ass or tell you how great your photos are. You posted in the wrong section for that. If these were posted in the nature/wildlife section then you might get a different response. Although I am not an expert, I am good enough to know when I see OOF, soft, over saturated pictures with composition issues. Your first pic of the little blue has potential.

Also, I have hundreds of pictures in the nature/wildlife section. Please feel free to search them out and critique them. Maybe it would make you feel better?

Your the expert, you have a blog.

Tom · 02-09-2011, 08:37 AM

I love the Eagle pic, but the green looks a little too green.
The bird after the Eagle looks a little soft and the sky looks unnaturally blue.
The bird running across the water looks a little soft as well.

The rest look nice.

jfoureyes · 02-09-2011, 10:48 AM

I know that the 300/2.8 is a fine lens and capable of making outstanding photos when used by an experienced photographer. I agree with both Lonnie and Thomas in their critiques of the photos posted here and can't add anything. Glad you tried Lonnie's suggestion and posted some on the nature forum I would have missed this thread if not for having the live option on. Hope to see some more of your work soon.

corralup · 02-10-2011, 05:31 PM

I'm going to bypass everything that was said here. Kyle, keep doing what your doing and Lonnie, I heard your friend Joe was asking about you. For the record I'm saving up for that 300mm 2.8 II and I also heard that 2x III is a winner. Both of you guys are good shooters. Just let it rest.

KSQPhotography · 02-10-2011, 06:16 PM

Sandy (corralup),

Sound advice indeed and I had actually already come to the same conclusion, hence the lack of further responses. As far as the Nikon 300mm f2.8 VRII lens, I think you will be very happy with your future purchase!

ldelacruz · 09:14 PM

See, that wasn't so bad! You took off the ones that were OOF and soft. These new pictures are atleast 4.7 times better than the previous ones but I would back off on the saturation and sharpening a bit and you would have a few winners here!

KSQPhotography · 02-11-2011, 11:20 PM

Most of these are the same photos that I originally posted. I have since added more. I did however find a better way to prepare the photo for uploading to this forum that did not compress them and alter the quality. As I mentioned in the original response, that was a big factor in the aparent "OOF and soft" photos...and I said that originally.

Also, the photos that I have posted here have not had post-processing other than being cropped for uploading to the forum. My in camera saturation is set on vivid so the saturation is towards the mid-upper end of the scale (7 out of 9 I think). Personally, I like a punchier and vibrant photo, so I will likely not change that much. It is a personal choice. You are correct about the sharpening being a bot too high however, as I realized not that long ago that my in-camera sharpening was maxed out at 9 out of 9. I have since changed this to the middle of the scale. But as I mentioned in the original post and in this one, only cropping was performed..no post process contrast, sharpening, color correction, etc.

Tom · 02-12-2011, 12:44 AM

Probably best to leave the contrast, sharpening and saturation to Adobe, not to the camera. Different pictures will need different things, and if you crank some of those things in camera, it could ruin perfectly good pics.

And you definitely took out the OOF ones that were there before.

jfoureyes · 02-12-2011, 07:50 AM

Are these made in jpeg or Raw?