Avocets on Owens Lake

Image: Avocets on Owens Lake

Description: Migrating flock photographed early morning, April, 2022.

Specific Feedback Requested: I love the shot but am concerned it isn’t sharp enough to print.

Pertinent technical details or techniques: Handheld at 1/3200th, F 6.3, ISO 400, 300MM lens on an Olympus EM1 Mark II.

1 Like

This is a nice capture of this dense flock of Avocets! I like the composition with the background sandbar and hint of tree line as it gives the image both environment and depth. I think you could print it with no problem if you sharpen it before you print. I sharpened your small image (see below) to give you some idea but it would require a different level of sharpening for the full print size. You’ll need to view this large to see the difference:

1 Like

Thanks for this counsel Gary. Will work with the file a bit and see about a large print – but I think it needs to be really large!
I recently upgraded from my Olympus to a Nikon Z6II and have been impressed with the sensor performance compared to my old camera. That said, the Olympus with the 300 PRO lens did pretty darn good considering how far away the birds were. Trouble is, pretty darn good isn’t good enough to be competitive in the NPN. Am considering shelling out $2800 for a Z100-400 telephoto to go with my new camera. If I had made the purchase earlier this year, we probably wouldn’t be having a discussion about the sharpness of this shot. I do plan to go back next April and try to find these birds again.

I think this an interesting shot. I like the layering of the birds either standing or beginning to fly.

I quoted a piece of your comment for a reason. There isn’t a camera on the market that will make anyone a better photographer. They are all more than capable of producing excellent images and sharpness is only a function of the photographer and knowing how to use the equipment. I’ve been shooting with Olympus and now OM systems for about 5 years. Before that I was a Canon user with the big white lenses. Before that I shot with Minolta in the film days. My point is if you believe you had “made the purchase earlier in the year, we wouldn’t be having a discussion about the sharpness of this shot”, I simply disagree. I created all kinds of slightly soft images from Minolta, Canon and Olympus and I have created all kinds of dead sharp images from all three systems. It’s not the camera. As Ansel Adams so eloquently said “The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it.”

1 Like

Thanks for this great counterpunch Keith !
I have loved my Oly and especially the 40-150 Pro lens. I’ve been an Oly shooter since the wonderful C-8080. I have a 2x4 foot Grand Canyon metal print in my home shot with the EM1. For my upcoming trip to the Alps, I’m taking my Oly and 3 Oly lenses.
But we do have a purely technical question here: Full frame at 400MM vs. micro 4/3 at 300MM. It may cost me $2700 (for the Nikon Z100-400) to find out, but I expect when I shoot those Avocets at 1/3200th in good morning light next spring, the birds will be significantly sharper and enlargement worthy.
Not the camera, true, but bigger sensors and longer telephotos? Got to matter !

Hi @james7 . If you end up with the Nikon 100-400, you will have a shorter focal length (field of view) than you have with the 300mm on the Olympus. To compare the field of view on a 4/3 sensor to a full frame sensor, you need to multiply the stated focal length on the 4/3 lens by 2. So the field of view on your Oly 300 is 600mm in full frame terminology. The birds will be smaller in the frame using 400mm on your Nikon. I don’t understand why you think the birds would be “significantly sharper”. They won’t be any sharper assuming you use great technique with either system. Bigger sensors don’t create sharper images. They have other advantages, but sharpness isn’t one of them. Sensors don’t create sharpness, lenses do. As I noted, I have shot with the finest Canon glass money can buy. Incredible lenses. The same can be said for the best of any manufacturers lenses. They are all great. The Oly 300mm is renowned for its’ optical qualities. It is the equal of any Canon L series telephoto I ever shot with. And…. Since it is an Image stabilized lens, that syncs with the IS in the camera body, the combination is at the top of the charts for any system on the market today for stabilization.
To be very clear. I’m not saying that Nikon, Canon or any system is not great. I am saying you’re thinking that using a 400mm on a full frame camera system is a longer telephoto than a 300mm on a 4/3 system is not correct. I am saying that any system on the market, and I don’t care what sensor it uses, is capable of dead sharp images. If you want to do the comparison that you are alluding to, you’ll need to buy a Nikon 600mm f/4. That lens has the same field of view as your Oly 300mm and gathers exactly the same amount of light (f/4). That will set you back a bit more than $2700…….

1 Like

Hi James! Awesome shot. I also think it would benefit from an enlargement. I think I understand why you framed it the way you did. I am curious about alternate framing with just the birds and either less or no background.

Thanks Cameron. I will never forget seeing these elegant birds in that setting. I was out there by myself for almost three hours.
The framing at the Owens Lake bird ponds is a little tricky. As the ponds are man made, you can often get dikes, vehicles and pumping stations in the background. When things are just right, you are shooting down from a dike onto the birds, and the whole frame can be reflected sky and mountains. I tried a lot of different frames. These Avocets would startle, rise and fly away as a flock, land as a flock, and then one brave bird would start foraging back toward my location. The others would follow, and soon they were spread out, closer and better framed. I will attach some examples (small files).
Hey, are you located in southwest Michigan? Those dunes are a world class landscape subject. My wife’s family is there, so I have shot all kinds of great stuff there over the years. But not enough!

1 Like

You are correct Keith and I apologize – my Oly lens is the 40-150 PRO, which gives me the 300MM. I don’t have the Oly 300MM, that gives 600MM.
I was saying “300” in my previous emails so that I wouldn’t have to explain how I got to 300MM with a 150MM with micro 4/3.
I actually rented a huge, Nikon 200-500 after I got my Z6II to see what it would do. Heavy beast. Very uncomfortable compared to my beautiful, lightweight Oly 40-150! Used it to photograph a Yellow Warbler near Mono Lake and was impressed. I felt I got a shot that the Oly kit couldn’t have delivered. I attributed the shot to the long lens plus the full frame sensor.
But you certainly have given me something to think about as to sharpness and how to get it. As I said earlier, I’ve been very impressed with the sharpness of the Oly 40-150MM, particularly when I’ve been close to the birds. I did seriously consider getting the Oly 300MM prime instead of the Nikon kit. I should probably rent the Z100-400 before I spring for the $2700 to see if it delivers significantly sharper files than my Oly.

These are great too James. The one with the cluster of birds in the upper left grabbed my attention first, but the mountain reflection especially in the last one is really great too. I am actually way up in Upper Michigan in Marquette on Lake Superior. I have not been to the dunes of southwest Michigan, but we do have some up here in Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore that I have visited. I’m actually headed to a photo workshop at Sleeping Bear Dunes in a few weeks. The Great Lakes have some interesting geography.

Ahhh… Don’t know if you’ve considered it, but adding either the 1.4 (MC-14) or 2.0 (MC-20) teleconverters with the Olympus 40-150 f/2.8 is an incredibly versatile option. Adding the 1.4 creates a full frame equivalent of 112-420mm f/4, or adding the 2.0 creates a full frame equivalent of 160-600 f/5.6. I have both converters and regularly use both options. The 2.0 on the 40-150 would add 1 inch to the length of the lens and 5.2 ounces. If you want to see results using that combo look at any of the hummingbird images on the first page of hummers on my website. Those were all this summer using the 40-150 with the MC-20

https://www.keithbauerphotography.com/Animals/Hummingbirds/i-3t2z2ND
You could buy both converters and have $2000 left over compared to the lens you’re looking at! :grinning:

Have a great trip Cameron. I’ve visited Sleeping Bear but not for long enough!

1 Like

I could use the $2,000 for some photography lessons!
I have the 1.4 but became convinced it was reducing the sharpness of my Oly images. So I stopped using it.
Obviously I didn’t give it enough of a chance to perform.
Wow – those are wonderful hummer images and so sharp. Shot with flash or natural light?

Flash - Multi-flash as I shared in my very recent article here on NPN about Photographing Hummingbirds.

The 1.4x and 2.0x converters are extremely good and if you can see a degradation image sharpness using either, you’re eyes are better than mine!

[quote=“James Hendon, post:12, topic:30423, username:james7”]

Have a great trip Cameron. I’ve visited Sleeping Bear but not for long enough!

[/quote] Thanks James! It’s a beautiful place.