Field Mouse Invasion

diawl bach

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
9,578
It's a peculiar situation. What happens if you don't give the panda back?

796eefd6-4687-11eb-be92-09cd005df0bf_image_hires_171827.jpg
 

williegunn

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2006
Messages
7,362
Location
Carron Speyside
Where in Scotland are Land Rovers produced, the last car production was the Hillman Limp I believe. I realise I'm ignoring the Raptor and the Argyll.
 

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
31,656
Location
Embra
Where in Scotland are Land Rovers produced, the last car production was the Hillman Limp I believe. I realise I'm ignoring the Raptor and the Argyll.

Was the last one not the Peugeot Talbot?

In the words of the Reid brothers: "Linwood no moah!"

As for Land Rovers... I think you need to allow for it being an American piece... Scotland is part of England, so Land Rovers are Scottish too... yaeh, whatever...
 

Vintage Badger

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 16, 2021
Messages
2,391
Location
Cheshire
Watching that, I realise that is basically me when I am trying to photograph the leaping salmon at Buchanty - right down to the thumb poised on the remote shutter release cord. Waiting, waiting, waiting... and as soon as I look at my watch or blow my nose or scratch my arse or check the camera settings, or any other distraction, 3 salmon do a perfect leap right in front of me. 🤪

Coincidentally, just heard on the news that the zoo have extended their loan of the 2 pandas for another 2 years. So, I have 2 more years to work up sufficient enthusiasm to go and see them.
That's cause you've not gone mirrorless... it's the way ahead you know! :p
 
Last edited:

Vintage Badger

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 16, 2021
Messages
2,391
Location
Cheshire
How would that help?
They take much better photos than DSLRs, everyone knows that! :ROFLMAO:

To save you blowing a blood vessel, I was taking the whatsit out of the amateur photography world and their often ceaseless urge to follow the latest trend. Nowt wrong with DLSRs. However, that eye controlled focus on the new Canon EOS R3 does look tempting, and that might help nail the focus on leaping salmon as it's reputed to be lightning fast.

Mind you, at nearly £6K body only (plus the cost of chopping my EF lenses in for mirrorless versions to get the best out of it), I'll be giving it a miss! I'm glad ECF is back though, as I really missed it when I made the switch from my EOS-3 to a DSLR. Hopefully it will trickle down to some cheaper EOS R range cameras in a couple of years, and then I might be more tempted.
 

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
31,656
Location
Embra
They take much better photos than DSLRs, everyone knows that! :ROFLMAO:

Aye, well, my question, "How would that help?" was because of your reply to me saying I miss the shot due to scratching my arse, etc. Your answer made absolutely no sense, which was why I asked the question. I would miss the shot due to scratching my arse whether I was using a dSLR, a mirrorless, an iPhone or a Box Brownie. The shot is missed due to not pressing the shutter button at the critical moment due to being distracted.

I was taking the whatsit out of the amateur photography world and their often ceaseless urge to follow the latest trend.

Yeh - I already said all that on one of the photography threads. It wound up one of the gear fanboys. ;)

Nowt wrong with DLSRs. However, that eye controlled focus on the new Canon EOS R3 does look tempting, and that might help nail the focus on leaping salmon as it's reputed to be lightning fast.

I have not used an eye-controlled focus digital camera (I have an old EOS SLR with it). However, I would not rush out to buy one for the leaping salmon shots, which I have done every year for the past 10 years. I've got 100s of shots of leaping salmon. Anyone who arrives and attempts to get shots by standing, looking through the viewfinder, soon gives up and goes away. You might be waiting for 15 minutes before you get a chance. And you might be there for 4 hours, trying to build up a set of images. No one can stand, looking through a viewfinder, finger on shutter button, for 4 hours. But it's worse than that.... If you are looking through the viewfinder, you simply don't have time to react to a fish suddenly passing through the viewfinder. You need advance warning of when to hit the shutter. So, you look at the scene, watching for the fish starting its jump. The guys who get the shots are the ones who set up the camera on a tripod with the remote shutter release cord in hand and watch for the salmon starting to leap (very like yer man in the panda ad - which is why I said it was like me). In addition, I take a folding chair with me and get comfy for the vigil. (y) When you see the fish start to leap, you press the shutter button (drive set to hi-speed), and if your reaction times are fast enough, you capture it as it passes through the lens's image field.

The question of focusing comes down to whether the camera (and the human input) is fast enough to focus on the fish in the split second it is passing through the field. We found in the early days of trial and error that our gear just could not refocus on a fish as it passed through the image field. I did try panning with the camera in hand, and trying to focus on the fly, but the keeper rate was poorer than simply setting the camera on a tripod (or holding it on a monopod) and pre-focusing on a point in space in midstream. Obviously all the shots are then hit and miss. The ones towards the far side are out of focus and the ones closer to the near bank are out of focus. I would be very interested in whether the latest mirrorless bodies were capable of refocusing on the fish, mid-leap. They might be able to, but they might be just as inadequate as the dSLRs we have been using. Everyone I know who goes to the spots we go to do it is still using a dSLR. We need a mirrorless guy who can tell us whether mirrorless can refocus on a leaping salmon... or not. Or I could hire one for a day next October and try it myself.

Bear in mind...

I can capture lead shot in mid-air at 1/350 sec...

Lauder13Nov21_0309.jpg


But to capture a salmon proper-sharp, it takes 1/2000 sec. That is a struggle to get in the poor light we usually have. This was 1/1500 sec...

BuchantyOct21_0273.jpg


Here is a sequence of 5 shots, taken with the hi-speed drive on at 6 frames per second. So, from the first frame to the last is less than one second...

BuchantyOct21Sequence4.gif


The question for any photographer and any camera is whether the human reflexes and the latest technology are together up to the job of refocusing on that fish within half a second.

But we digress. We had better stop before we get pulled up for going off the subject of field-mice again... :whistle:
 

Vintage Badger

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 16, 2021
Messages
2,391
Location
Cheshire
Aye, well, my question, "How would that help?" was because of your reply to me saying I miss the shot due to scratching my arse, etc. Your answer made absolutely no sense, which was why I asked the question. I would miss the shot due to scratching my arse whether I was using a dSLR, a mirrorless, an iPhone or a Box Brownie. The shot is missed due to not pressing the shutter button at the critical moment due to being distracted.
Well don't scratch your arse then! ;)

Yeh - I already said all that on one of the photography threads. It wound up one of the gear fanboys. ;)
If the job depends on it and/or it makes things easier then I'm all for modern gear. I also like old stuff though, so I'd describe myself as a camera and photography enthusiast rather than a fanboy. As technological advances go, I think eye controlled focus was a really useful feature - just look through the viewfinder at the point you want to focus on and it's selected... no scrolling around to pick an AF point, it's done for you in literally a split second by tracking where your eye is looking. Apparently, with Canon's mirrorless R3 you can look anywhere in the veiwfinder and whatever you are looking at will be locked on as the precise focus point as soon as you half-press the shutter, and that now combines with tracking AF, AI Servo, etc.

Aye, well, my question, "How would that help?" was because of your reply to me saying I miss the shot due to scratching my arse, etc. Your answer made absolutely no sense, which was why I asked the question. I would miss the shot due to scratching my arse whether I was using a dSLR, a mirrorless, an iPhone or a Box Brownie. The shot is missed due to not pressing the shutter button at the critical moment due to being distracted.



Yeh - I already said all that on one of the photography threads. It wound up one of the gear fanboys. ;)



I have not used an eye-controlled focus digital camera (I have an old EOS SLR with it). However, I would not rush out to buy one for the leaping salmon shots, which I have done every year for the past 10 years. I've got 100s of shots of leaping salmon. Anyone who arrives and attempts to get shots by standing, looking through the viewfinder, soon gives up and goes away. You might be waiting for 15 minutes before you get a chance. And you might be there for 4 hours, trying to build up a set of images. No one can stand, looking through a viewfinder, finger on shutter button, for 4 hours. But it's worse than that.... If you are looking through the viewfinder, you simply don't have time to react to a fish suddenly passing through the viewfinder. You need advance warning of when to hit the shutter. So, you look at the scene, watching for the fish starting its jump. The guys who get the shots are the ones who set up the camera on a tripod with the remote shutter release cord in hand and watch for the salmon starting to leap (very like yer man in the panda ad - which is why I said it was like me). In addition, I take a folding chair with me and get comfy for the vigil. (y) When you see the fish start to leap, you press the shutter button (drive set to hi-speed), and if your reaction times are fast enough, you capture it as it passes through the lens's image field.

The question of focusing comes down to whether the camera (and the human input) is fast enough to focus on the fish in the split second it is passing through the field. We found in the early days of trial and error that our gear just could not refocus on a fish as it passed through the image field. I did try panning with the camera in hand, and trying to focus on the fly, but the keeper rate was poorer than simply setting the camera on a tripod (or holding it on a monopod) and pre-focusing on a point in space in midstream. Obviously all the shots are then hit and miss. The ones towards the far side are out of focus and the ones closer to the near bank are out of focus. I would be very interested in whether the latest mirrorless bodies were capable of refocusing on the fish, mid-leap. They might be able to, but they might be just as inadequate as the dSLRs we have been using. Everyone I know who goes to the spots we go to do it is still using a dSLR. We need a mirrorless guy who can tell us whether mirrorless can refocus on a leaping salmon... or not. Or I could hire one for a day next October and try it myself.

Bear in mind...

I can capture lead shot in mid-air at 1/350 sec...

Lauder13Nov21_0309.jpg


But to capture a salmon proper-sharp, it takes 1/2000 sec. That is a struggle to get in the poor light we usually have. This was 1/1500 sec...

BuchantyOct21_0273.jpg


Here is a sequence of 5 shots, taken with the hi-speed drive on at 6 frames per second. So, from the first frame to the last is less than one second...

BuchantyOct21Sequence4.gif
I've not tried photographing leaping salmon but have seen your photos and think they're very good indeed. I'd worked out that the photographic method was going to be zone focussing and 'motor drive', plus the knowledge of the subject to get you in the right place at the right time. And you'd certainly beat me hands-down on that last one there!

Capturing lead shot leaving the gun is another skill that depends on timing. I'm genuinely not decrying your ability there, but I've done similar capturing cannons firing at at a historic re-enactment event using a hand-held 1926 Kodak No2 Model F Box Brownie. It's certainly not as impressive using black and white film though, as you don't see the orange muzzle flash, just clouds of powder smoke!

The question for any photographer and any camera is whether the human reflexes and the latest technology are together up to the job of refocusing on that fish within half a second.

By all accounts the new ECF is split second fast, and (according the the AP Magazine review I read) combines seamlessly with the mirrorless camera's other focus features, allowing the user to pick the exact subject to focus on, which is handy if there are several similar moving objects in the frame (pheasants flying, perhaps?).

As you say, whether this would be good for leaping salmon remains to be seen; zone focussing with a reasonably wide depth of field also gives detail in the surrounding habitat, which adds context to the photograph. However, I'm glad ECF is back in Canon's list of options, as I found it very useful in the film camera days, and it's been absent since the advent of DSLR and mirrorless cameras.

But we digress. We had better stop before we get pulled up for going off the subject of field-mice again... :whistle:

Agreed, and we don't want to get pulled up by the mouse police! ;)
 
Last edited:

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
31,656
Location
Embra
I think eye controlled focus was a really useful feature - just look through the viewfinder at the point you want to focus on and it's selected... no scrolling around to pick an AF point, it's done for you in literally a split second by tracking where your eye is looking. Apparently, with Canon's mirrorless R3 you can look anywhere in the veiwfinder and whatever you are looking at will be locked on as the precise focus point as soon as you half-press the shutter, and that now combines with tracking AF, AI Servo, etc.

My money would be on that not working with the leaping salmon. Having watched 1000s of leaping salmon while trying to photograph them, you can't move your eyeball fast enough in the time the fish is in the frame, let alone allow time for the camera to respond to it. It might be good for other stuff, but give it up for this one. And besides, like I said, your eye is not looking through the viewfinder, it is one foot to the side of the camera, watching for leapers.

Capturing lead shot leaving the gun is another skill that depends on timing. I'm genuinely not decrying your ability there, but I've done similar capturing cannons firing at at a historic re-enactment event using a hand-held 1926 Kodak No2 Model F Box Brownie.

So, you've captured a cannon ball in mid-air?

By all accounts the new ECF is split second fast, and (according the the AP Magazine review I read) combines seamlessly with the mirrorless camera's other focus features, allowing the user to pick the exact subject to focus on, which is handy if there are several similar moving objects in the frame (pheasants flying, perhaps?).

Might work with the pheasants. Too slow for the salmon - fish is gone before the eye even reacts to it.

As you say, whether this would be good for leaping salmon remains to be seen; zone focussing with a reasonably wide depth of field

Forget wide depth of field. We are talking about wide-open lens apertures. To be able to get 1/1000 to 1/2000 sec without pushing ISO through the roof, I am using between f1.4 and f2.8 most of the time. On really bright days, I might have the luxury of managing f4.

1/2000s @ f2, ISO 320...

Buchanty02Oct20_3319.jpg


1/1000 s @ f4.5, ISO 640...

CP18Oct14_7782.jpg


also gives detail in the surrounding habitat, which adds context to the photograph.

I much prefer the shallow depth of field shot on the salmon anyway. Isolates the subject from the background. (y)
 
Last edited:

Vintage Badger

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 16, 2021
Messages
2,391
Location
Cheshire
So, you've captured a cannon ball in mid-air?
As I suspect you well know, they don't fire cannon balls at re-enactment events. Secondly, as well you should know, I'm hardly likely to capture a flying cannon ball at around 1/45th of a second, am I!

As I also suspect you'll know, I was making the point that it's a 'party trick' type photo that's dependent on firing the shutter at the right moment. I put it to you that it takes about the same level of skill and pre-emptive reaction time to do that with cannon fire and a hand held 1926 Box Brownie (which has a tiny little viewfinder around the size of your finger nail that you can hardly see through, and no ability to check to see if you captured the image successfully before taking the next photo), than it does with a shotgun and Canon 5Div DSLR at 7 fps at a very much faster shutter speed.

As for capturing leaping salmon, It would be interesting to compare the R3 with the 5Div in the same situation. The R3 has up to 30 fps (12 fps mechanical) and a max shutter speed of 1/64000 and, according to Canon, despite its 24mp, it apparently out resolves the 5Div's 30mp (the 'not all pixels are equal' factor).

So even if the ECF doesn't help, it sounds like there's a lot more in there that might? However, with a price tag nudging £6K, if you're getting results like you obviously are, then for all its bells and whistles, would it really be worth the additional outlay?
 

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
31,656
Location
Embra
As I suspect you well know, they don't fire cannon balls at re-enactment events. Secondly, as well you should know, I'm hardly likely to capture a flying cannon ball at around 1/45th of a second, am I!

Sorry, but you said you had captured the equivalent of the lead in air shot? And, it's 1/350 s to 1/500 s for the lead in air shot.

As I also suspect you'll know, I was making the point that it's a 'party trick' type photo that's dependent on firing the shutter at the right moment. I put it to you that it takes about the same level of skill and pre-emptive reaction time to do that with cannon fire and a hand held 1926 Box Brownie (which has a tiny little viewfinder around the size of your finger nail that you can hardly see through, and no ability to check to see if you captured the photographic shot afterwards), than it does with a shotgun and Canon 5Div DSLR at 6 fps at a very much faster shutter speed.

It really doesn't take any skill. I've done it over a dozen times - more or less by accident. It's all down to whether the physics of the whole alignment and optics and shutter fire allow it to be captured. Which is why I was intrigued as to whether you could get a cannon ball in mid-air. It might well be doable??? I'll bet Jaime and Adam on 'Mythbusters' would give it a go. They regularly fire cannon balls. 😜

As for capturing leaping salmon, It would be interesting to compare the R3 with the 5Div in the same situation. The R3 has up to 30 fps (12 fps mechanical) and a max shutter speed of 1/64000 and, according to Canon, despite its 24mp, it apparently out resolves the 5Div's 30mp (the 'not all pixels are equal' factor).

So even if the ECF doesn't help, it sounds like there's a lot more in there that might? However, with a price tag nudging £6K, if you're getting results like you obviously are, then for all its bells and whistles, would it really be worth the additional outlay?

What sort of ISO would you get down the valley, in the shade, shooting at 1/64000 sec, when it's already getting a bit high at 1/1000 sec?

As I said, send us a guy with a state of the art mirrorless and let's see what it can give us with those shots. My mates and I are all very interested to see... before any of us change all our kit! ;)

I'll not be buying an R3, though. It's proper pro kit. Besides, I can't get a camera with a battery grip into my fishing kit. 🤪
 

Vintage Badger

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 16, 2021
Messages
2,391
Location
Cheshire
It really doesn't take any skill.
Perhaps I was being kind! ;)

As I said, send us a guy with a state of the art mirrorless and let's see what it can give us with those shots. My mates and I are all very interested to see... before any of us change all our kit! ;)
Isn't that what most people say... before they change all their kit? I remember people saying that about digital cameras, and where are we now! ;)
 
Last edited:

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
31,656
Location
Embra
Isn't that what most people say... before they change all their kit? I remember people saying that about digital cameras, and where are we now! ;)

The way I see it, the difference is between film and digital is vast and reaches into every aspect of it. And you didn't need to change all your lenses - just your body. An EF lens from the late 1990s works exactly the same on a 2010s dSLR as it did on a 1990s film SLR.

The difference between a dSLR and a mirrorless is marginal by comparison, and some may prefer to stay with the optical viewfinder, if they don't need the newest bells and whistles. And yes, you can stay with your EF lenses and use an adaptor, but the RF lenses and R bodies are designed to optimise each other. I have not looked, but I am guessing the value of 2nd-hand EF lenses will have nose-dived in the last year or two, so is there any point in trying to sell them to buy RF lenses? So, if you want to keep with your EF lenses, you are as well to keep with your EF body, unless you simply must have the latest gear.
 
Top