Original footage is mine but all the clever stuff was done by Per Johan. His full name is Per Johan Naesje and I saw him first, OK? He's helping me to get a website of my own using his technology but in the meantime, from his website ....

http://www.video-film.no/snutter/brendan.html

All opinions/comments on image quality, size of picture, download times would be appreciated. Technical questions will be handled by Per Johan ..

Just to supplement Brendan:
It's not easy to calculate how you people are able to handle mediafiles on the internet. Some have fast internet connections (DSL) others have dial up connections.
People have different types of computeres in their homes. Some have PC others have MAC.
My question is: If we use the best-griffin example (see link on Brendan's thread above), this file is 47 seconds of length. As you can see the file vary between a file size from 1.25 to 6.3 Mb. The smallest file will give you a fast download on the net, but details will be lost when viewing. With the large one you got a longer download time (and someone maybe not able to download it!), but details begin to show up in a pleasant way.
What do you prefer?

I would also like to know from those who have looked to my site (see link in my signature below), how the flash streaming video performs on your computers. Will it play seamless without any stop? What do you think about the size and quality (technical) of these flashfiles?

I will appreciate if you could try to download a couple of these files, and replay your opinion.

Thanks.

I am using a Mac T-book with 1gig/1gig and Safari. I had no problems
downloading the files on our very fast T1 connection.

Personally, I don't like WMV as it (at least on my system) cannot
be stopped, rewound, etc. It plays when it wants and has to
rebuffer each time you want to see it again. No control over
playback is annoying.

Images: IMO, the time of day and the weather conditions
when the stork footage was shot was not optimal.
Therefore, the color was not as good as it can be.

I am not sure of the rig used, but the shot tracking on the Griffon was
a bit too 'wandering'. Yes, *I know* it is VERY VERY hard to track
a moving bird, especially if you are using a Canon XL with EOS.
I find the H1 with its centering cross makes this MUCH easier.
What tripod are you using?

I'd have to agree with Jacques - there is far too much shake and soft focus in the video footage, and light conditions were not optimal.

I use a shoulder/stomach support brace for handheld tracking with the 20X lens, but prefer to use a heavy duty tripod + smooth pan head if the big Nikkor lenses are in use (even then, I prefer to lock-up and let the subject fly in and out of the frame rather than pan with the bird. A smooth pan using a big lens takes a lot of trial and error to get right).

I am using a Mac T-book with 1gig/1gig and Safari. I had no problems
downloading the files on our very fast T1 connection.

Personally, I don't like WMV as it (at least on my system) cannot
be stopped, rewound, etc. It plays when it wants and has to
rebuffer each time you want to see it again. No control over
playback is annoying.


If you use Microsoft Windows Media Player for mac it's aweful, try getting the Flip4Mac plugin for Quicktime, this works great with Windows Media files

http://www.flip4mac.com/wmv.htm

Great to get your insights Jacques.

On a pc 6.2mb file downloads in 12 seconds for me and pausing & restarting are immediate. "Wandering" is a kind word to describe my videoing, thank you ... I usually refer to it as bouncing. The smooth cross-fades were made by Per Johan each time to eliminate an exceptionally bad "bounce".

I'm hoping to get XLH1 some time soon. Meanwhile my XM2 (GL2) does its best. I'm determined to keep practising but given the unpredictable level at which raptors fly into view I find it difficult to use my Benbo trekker + manfrotto head. I turn my bum on a shooting stick instead ...

It is difficult to compete with what we see on TV every day.
Many of those nature shooters are exceptional camera operators and
they use gear that we'd all hope to own one day (over the rainbow).

The H1 is considered expensive on this board, and the accessories
required to make it all work add many thousands to the price tag,
but compared to an Arri SRIII and even one long lens the H1 is
a good deal. For me the H1 is the only affordable choice.

IMO, the most important peice of the "flying bird footage" puzzle is
the tripod. I use a Vinten Vision 3 (~$2000), but there are
better ones out there.

Jacques,
Like everyone else, I find tracking flying birds to be the most difficult thing to do with Manfrotto equipment. If you really think that a centering cross makes a difference, try this. Flip open the XL2 viewfinder. Make an
X across the opening with two pieces of thread. (Hold them with Scotch tape). Close the viewfinder. Voila...cross hairs. I don't find this makes much difference.

Before investing in software I really would appreciate more comments but particularly on picture quality and plumage detail ... being an amateur I need comments from amateurs on these aspects too ... even a comment that the clips were too difficult to download would be extremely useful to me ...

Any opinions, references or comparisons to other footage of birds in actual flight would also be a great help and very relevant ...

Hi Brendan,

I'm new to this site and haven't even got a camcorder yet, so please ignore these comments if you want.

When I was learning stills photography of birds in flight, I got a few tips from other people. The main tips were:
1) Take time to know your subject - get to learn where they are likely to be - how the wind direction affects their behaviour (you'll often find raptors on the windward side of hills/ridges) - find favourite roosts/perches
2) Practise all the time on local birds - that big sand bar in Dublin Bay is great for waders. They're not as sexy as Vultures but any experience gained at a local site will pay dividends when you're on location with a strict time limit.
3) Be prepared to ditch 99% of your shots ;-)

Jacques has some of his Osprey footage here:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=67658

As to videos on the web, I prefer to download the file on to my computer to watch it properly, rather than have a stuttering stop/start imbedded image. File sizes of up to 5meg are ok, but I am prepared to download longer files if they have a couple of preview stills.

Grant

ps. Great site folks!

Thank you for your comments Grant.

Lundy must be amazing for birdlife, migrants and breeding and residents. Your observations may be more useful than you think ... because you have lots of opportunity to observe and no hang-ups about gear or storylines.

... I'd describe Jacques' opening flight/landing sequence in "Osprey" as sexy and he makes good use of it. My interest in vultures is inspired only by their beauty when gliding and soaring so I'm determind to get better at shooting that aspect of them and of other raptors. I'd love to read suggestions about how to improve the clips at the start of this thread ... I'm not thinking of a documentary or a storyline ... I want to hear how anyone with an eye for the beauty of flight would improve the shooting or the presentation of my clips to make them more interesting. Would a close-up-to-finish make a big difference?... Is a close-up final shot essential? How would you rate the clips 1 -5 (worst to best) ? And I want to hear from those who couldn't be bothered opening the links or who had trouble with WMP or who would have bothered if there was an Apple reader attached ... and How would you compare the clips with raptor footage on the Internet Bird Collection at http://ibc.hbw.com/ibc/phtml/news.phtml ???
Please take a moment to register a positive or a negative, thank you.

Hi Brendan,

I've just been googling some irish birding sites - I came across some footage of a Osprey in Dublin at this site:

http://www.birdsireland.com/pages/movies.html

It also says that there is one record of a Griffon Vulture visiting Ireland (back in 1848). I'm thinking that the Wicklow mountains might be good for Buzzards and Ravens.

Lundy is amazing for birdlife - although not as good as it used to be. I was watching Guillemots feed their chicks this spring. Hopefully I'll be filming them with an XL2 next spring!

Sorry, mate, can't watch any .wmv files.
If you want to be kind to your mac-user friends post it in Quicktime for god sake!

That's it Pedro. That's half of what I wanted to know. You have confirmed what Nick Weeks hinted at already. Thank you both for revealing that many videographers use mac not pc. I suppose that point has already been stated on DVInfo a hundred times ... I swear I never saw it or realised how significant it may be.

I wonder if the Master of the Hounds has any tally of the split between mac and pc on the Forum or is anybody prepared to hazard a guess at the ratio among videgraphers?? In your geographic area ?? In your company or firm or club or among your buddies?

This is not idle curiosity; I genuinely need to know how significant this split is so as to make it less difficult for viewers to see future clips on the Forum or elsewhere. It's hard enough persuading you to interrupt your philandering or whatever takes your fancy just to eyeball a flying turkey but I have no hope at all if you can't do so without hassle and stutter ... I know a guy who got a hernia during a far less complex manouvre ... never mind all that!

Any chance of a tally OR a link to an existing tally !!!

And thank you Grant for the link to Tom Shevlin's site.

I think my favourite clip is the slow-motion Griffon. It appears a lot smoother and you can see the plumage very well. This might be a newb question: is it possible to slow down small sections of a clip? Would this help to compensate for "bounce" on some of the shots?

Grant, I'm sure Per Johan will address your technical question when he comes back from the weekend but it sounds like a good idea to me.

Mountains in Ireland have in general been "flattened" by major ice ages so we have rolling hills rather than towering peaks. No cliffs, no gorges nor canyons, apart from one vertical sea cliff in Co.Clare called Cliffs of Moher which are spectacular and attract guillemots and fulmars but these birds are too small and fast for my cam & lack of skill .. yes there is good birdlife near Dublin, lots of curlews, oystercatchers, turnstones, gulls etc but trust me to be more interested in the less familiar !! Faraway cows have long horns ...

"Faraway cows have long horns..." I like it!

I've only been to your lovely country once. (To watch Scotland lose a rugby match - something about a Triple Crown?) I had the opportunity to visit the Wicklow Mountains and was very impressed. Ok, it's not Spain, but areas like Glendalough still have the steep hillsides that raptors love.

BBC Wildlife magazine have an article on photographing birds in flight in their sept issue. Top tip was to shoot when the wind and the sunlight are from roughly the same direction.

Well, Brendan, originally I come from the advertising agencies world where any decent agency uses mac and absolutelly BANS any PCs with their viruses from the networks. My second computer (after an MSX, off course) was an Amiga. After that I tried a few XTs and then the 286s but when I got my hands on my first Mac I could never go back to PCs again.
I don't know if might sound a bit "too strong" but whenever I see anybody using a PC on a graphic design or video editing project it just looks really "amateur" to me... It looks like they just can't afford to work with Macs.
I can't really understand why someone would actually CHOOSE to use a computer that crashes all the time and has a high risk of getting thousands os viruses than to use a Mac that "just works fine".
Well, that's what I think anyway.
I also have a question to you. We were discussing about camera brands on another topic and a guy said he always associated Mac users with Canon owners and PC users with Sony owners. I don't know if things are different there in the States but I always used Macs and Sony cameras. What's your opinion on that?
Cheers.
PP


That's it Pedro. That's half of what I wanted to know. You have confirmed what Nick Weeks hinted at already. Thank you both for revealing that many videographers use mac not pc. I suppose that point has already been stated on DVInfo a hundred times ... I swear I never saw it or realised how significant it may be.

I wonder if the Master of the Hounds has any tally of the split between mac and pc on the Forum or is anybody prepared to hazard a guess at the ratio among videgraphers?? In your geographic area ?? In your company or firm or club or among your buddies?

This is not idle curiosity; I genuinely need to know how significant this split is so as to make it less difficult for viewers to see future clips on the Forum or elsewhere. It's hard enough persuading you to interrupt your philandering or whatever takes your fancy just to eyeball a flying turkey but I have no hope at all if you can't do so without hassle and stutter ... I know a guy who got a hernia during a far less complex manouvre ... never mind all that!

Any chance of a tally OR a link to an existing tally !!!

And thank you Grant for the link to Tom Shevlin's site.

I want an hour to reply to you Pedro but it's half-time during the All Ireland Hurling Final between my home county Kilkenny and Cork and I'll be back to you again tonight. very exciting game, hurling ...

Yes, I'm sure it is mate!
Please just don't take my comments on a bad way as I just said what I really think (something that people doesn't really do most of the times...)
I'll read your reply tomorrow as it's 11pm here in Thailand by now...

Cheers and good game for your team!

PP

I want an hour to reply to you Pedro but it's half-time during the All Ireland Hurling Final between my home county Kilkenny and Cork and I'll be back to you again tonight. very exciting game, hurling ...

... I don't know if might sound a bit "too strong" but whenever I see anybody using a PC on a graphic design or video editing project it just looks really "amateur" to me... It looks like they just can't afford to work with Macs.
PP

That sounds familiar to me even though I'm years out of touch with commercial life ... I remember hearing 10 years ago that ad. agencies and graphic designers never even considered using a pc in those days because Mac specifically designed their technology to cater for the graphics, camera & film industries. I believe it is taking pcs years to catch up and, never having used a Mac, I don't know whether they have or not caught up ...

<<<I can't really understand why someone would actually CHOOSE to use a computer that crashes all the time and has a high risk of getting thousands os viruses than to use a Mac that "just works fine".>>>

I've been using pcs for 12 years, for private purposes only but on a daily basis; I don't know what a "crash" is; I've never had a virus. I use email, buy online, regularly browse, Google for hours, use several photoshop packages ... no problems except my own slowness at learning. But then I have an auto delete on every unsolicited email, none of which I have ever bothered to open in 12 years ... people say that helps a lot.

<<<<I also have a question to you. We were discussing about camera brands on another topic and a guy said he always associated Mac users with Canon owners and PC users with Sony owners. I don't know if things are different there in the States but I always used Macs and Sony cameras. What's your opinion on that?>>>

My honest answer to that must be, I don't know. I am guessing that Macs users are more common than pc users among camera, video, graphics professionals in the US and this, as you are suggesting, may be true all over the world. I would like very much to know the answer. I must do a few searches in this Forum and if you find any statistics or info on this I'd be glad to know about it. I'm too long out of touch to even make a guess at a comparison of Mac and Canon users with Sony and pc users. Sorry to have so little to offer but it might be worth trying a few searches on this Forum ... so will I.

Hello all, thanks a lot for all comments to this thread so far.

To Pedro: It will be no problems to provide quicktime-files of the footage. Whan Brendan got his own website up and go, he can provide both file-formats. Until then we have to live with only one file-format because of the diskspace I'm able to provide for him!

To Grant: Yes, it's possible to slow down part of a clip dynamacially. But if the footage bounce heavily the bird will still blur in slow motion.

The H1 is considered expensive on this board, and the accessories
required to make it all work add many thousands to the price tag,
but compared to an Arri SRIII and even one long lens the H1 is
a good deal. For me the H1 is the only affordable choice.

IMO, the most important peice of the "flying bird footage" puzzle is
the tripod. I use a Vinten Vision 3 (~$2000), but there are
better ones out there.

Jacques, you also mention a centering cross on the H1. I presume this is on the viewfinder. 2 questions please ... Is the H1 viewfinder better (for flight footage) than XL2? Does Vinten Vision 3 have some kind of smooth spring action that helps keep the viewfinder on the flying bird when the cam has to be tilted up and down?

Brendan,

I have not been able to get on the computer for weeks, just to busy, but have shot a few hours of footage in the mean time.

I like many people already had a high profile pc and when it came time to start editing video and such I couldn't justify buying a mac to just do that. I would reckon that more amaterurs use a pc than a mac, just by shear numbers in use.

Also, I have spent time with my partner with his mac and he has i movie and the professional version. it is a cool machine but in the end you can't tell which computer the vido was edited on.

As far as crashing, I only ever had that problem when I used pennicle products. I have not had that problem with the adobe products to date.

I think the pc world is progressing at a huge rate and I do not think the amateur need go to the Mac if they already are working on a pc.
I taught computers back in the commodor 64 days and the Apple 2 e. the world is tending to go windows, whcih is why apple is now making apples that run windows and use the new processors.
it is all very interesting.

Is anyone running linux as an operating system and using adober products?

<<< I presume this is on the viewfinder.>>>

Yes.

<<<Is the H1 viewfinder better (for flight footage) than XL2?>>>

No, not really. Focus is still difficult on all XL models without
the expensive optional viewfinder. I need to somehow afford it
or an external monitor, but workings one's way through brush
makes an external monitor problematic imo.


<<<<Does Vinten Vision 3 have some kind of smooth spring action that helps keep the viewfinder on the flying bird when the cam has to be tilted up and down?>>>

Yes.
But first off, the H1 is much heavier than the XL1 or XL2.
Mass seems to help stabilize things. Although some might
disagree, I have heard the
Vision 3's action described as
"walking on the moon in marshmellow shoes."
Finding and keeping a flying bird in the center of your shot when
using the EOS adapter and 100-400mm Canon EF lens takes a lot of
practice, but tilting down or up for me is pretty easy and the least
of my trouble. Getting locked on the bird to begin with is the hardest
thing IMO.

Thank you Dale for observation based on experience ...

<<<<I think the pc world is progressing at a huge rate and I do not think the amateur need go to the Mac if they already are working on a pc.>>>

... I wouldn't know where to start with a Mac and Premiere Pro works fine at a basic level on pc when I keep my head down.





<<<Is the H1 viewfinder better (for flight footage) than XL2?>>>

No, not really. Focus is still difficult on all XL models without
the expensive optional viewfinder. I need to somehow afford it
or an external monitor, but workings one's way through brush
makes an external monitor problematic imo.


<<<<Does Vinten Vision 3 have some kind of smooth spring action that helps keep the viewfinder on the flying bird when the cam has to be tilted up and down?>>>

Yes.
But first off, the H1 is much heavier than the XL1 or XL2.
Mass seems to help stabilize things. Although some might
disagree, I have heard the Vision 3's action described as
"walking on the moon in marshmellow shoes."
Finding and keeping a flying bird in the center of your shot when
using the EOS adapter and 100-400mm Canon EF lens takes a lot of
practice, but tilting down or up for me is pretty easy and the least
of my trouble. Getting locked on the bird to begin with is the hardest
thing IMO.

I am surprised by the extra weight of H1. I must try it out soon and the Vision 3 if I can find one. What I am really nervous about is what happens to a cam when one adds on the EOS adapter and a big lens ... if I just have to use a tripod to steady that weight how will I position the tripod and lock on to flying birds appearing from all angles at varying speeds, especially when my favourite location is on the edge of a cliff of needle rocks? I use Meryem's trick of a towel on top of the car or a rock at more convenient locations (nests & roosts), fair enough, and I do find the XM2 (GL2) is easy to lock on to flight when handheld. But once the bird lands and I have to go still every bloody pulse in my veins registers on the footage ... for a start I must learn how to extend speed/duration on PPro and then there's the matter of holding my breath (& stopping my heart) for a few seconds longer ... it is interesting that the movement of the cam while tracking flight seems to cloak the effect of being handheld. I wonder would Canon like to upgrade their IS accordingly!

<<<What I am really nervous about is what happens to a cam when one adds on the EOS adapter and a big lens ... if I just have to use a tripod to steady that weight how will I position the tripod and lock on to flying birds appearing from all angles at varying speeds, especially when my favourite location is on the edge of a cliff of needle rocks?>>>>

Don't worry, you will NOT be able to lock onto birds appearing from
all kinds of different angles. Essentially, when you use the
EOS/XL/100-400mm lens combo, a postage stamp at 30 ft
fills the screen when the lens is fully WIDE.
Like I said, the biggest trouble is actually getting
whatever object it is you are trying to record in the viewfinder. ;-)
That is why it was almost a miracle that I got any footage of the
eagle attacking the nest in "An Osprey Homecoming."

<<<I use Meryem's trick of a towel on top of the car or a rock at more convenient locations (nests & roosts)>>>

Yeah, you can forget about that trick with the rig listed above. The
slightest bump or hand shake turns into an 9. magnitude earthquake in the viewfinder when zoomed in. :)

<<<
.... you will NOT be able to lock onto birds appearing from
all kinds of different angles. Essentially, when you use the
EOS/XL/100-400mm lens combo, a postage stamp at 30 ft
fills the screen when the lens is fully WIDE.
Like I said, the biggest trouble is actually getting whatever object it is you are trying to record in the viewfinder. ;-)
... with the rig listed above. The slightest bump or hand shake turns into an 9. magnitude earthquake in the viewfinder when zoomed in. :)

I accept all you say about the requirements for using "the rig listed above". I may never get that far. But leaving "Osprey" aside, I found on a search under "contact points" that in 2004 you made good use of a piece of gear called Marztech or similar and did without a tripod at times. I'm sure you were not toting "the rig listed above" in those days. What cam were you shooting with then and would you recommend the Marztech gear or its modern equivalent now for an amateur using that cam today? A few upsides and downsides would be appreciated if you can remember ...

<EDIT) Marztech or similar and did without a tripod at times. I'm sure you were not toting "the rig listed above" in those days.

Two different things we are talking about here.

The Marzpak was a hand held support system similar to the EZrigII.
A back pack- overhead support system that holds/floats the camera
in front of the operator.
With the addition of an underslung weight who's mass helped
stabilize the camera and the bungee cord's shock absorbtion,
the Marzpak made 'going handheld' comfortable
and shots smoother. I used the 16X lens with good results even
zoomed in, but I am pretty good at keeping the camera still.


That said, the 100-400mm lens/EOS combo with its 7.2 magnification
factor is all together different. Even on a good solid tripod,
footage is hard to get smooth due to the incredible focal length.

Yes, if I were to go out handheld with my H1 and the stock
lens I would definitely use a Marzpak
(they're not available anymore except used), but for
EOS and 35mm glass I carry the camera on a tripod.

With the addition of an underslung weight who's mass helped
stabilize the camera and the bungee cord's shock absorbtion,
the Marzpak made 'going handheld' comfortable
and shots smoother. I used the 16X lens with good results even
zoomed in, but I am pretty good at keeping the camera still.


That said, the 100-400mm lens/EOS combo with its 7.2 magnification
factor is all together different. Even on a good solid tripod,
footage is hard to get smooth due to the incredible focal length.

Yes, if I were to go out handheld with my H1 and the stock
lens I would definitely use a Marzpak
(they're not available anymore except used), but for
EOS and 35mm glass I carry the camera on a tripod.

At last, lifted (no i didn't steal it) my first XLH1 yesterday ... 2.5 kgs (5.5 lbs) and that's with standard lens and smallest battery; more than twice as heavy as the XM2 (GL2). And the load of XLH1 seems to tip forward, making less use of the shoulder pad and putting more weight on the wrist. None of this would matter if I'd just get smart and 1. use a decent tripod +/- ronsrail, 2. stick to manual focus until I get it right ... or would it matter?

Would anybody who cares to please have a quick look at Griffon Vulture clip on this forum and tell me what sort of camcorder/lens/tripod +/-/settings/focus set-up [all gear costing less than $20,000] you would choose to shoot a proper 25 second job given the video opportunity shown in this clip?

Brendan,

if there was anything I dislike about my canon cameras it would have to be the focusing of them on flying birds!!
I think one should absolutely get a fu 1000 view finder (for xl2 or h1)!!! Consider it as part of the expense!! I did not and now wish I had.

If I had my druthers i would have an h1, eos adapter/ 100 400 lens
I would have a rons rail, rons sight, top shelf triopod, The usal nicities. that would make up about your 20 grand!!
would likly need a loan for petrol to go filming then!

[QUOTE=Dale Guthormsen]Brendan,

if there was anything I dislike about my canon cameras it would have to be the focusing of them on flying birds!!
I think one should absolutely get a fu 1000 view finder (for xl2 or h1)!!! Consider it as part of the expense!! I did not and now wish I had.

I have yet to see a fu 100 viewfinder but so far, Dale, you are coming up with answers I am looking for ...

If I had my druthers i would have an h1, eos adapter/ 100 400 lens

Again I believe you though I'm not attracted by the weight of XLH1

I would have a rons rail, rons sight, top shelf triopod,

Here's where I see serious limitations to my hopes of shooting birds in flight. Ronsrail (or Don DesJardin's equivalent) is probably the greatest thing for ensuring rocksteady footage of horizontal flight and I do need that, but the birds don't give a damn, they fly from all angles and at all angles. The mainly horizontal field of view permitted by the ronsrail is suited to sports where the participants are on a fixed horizon ... the law of gravity has ways of keeping all athletes/horses/polar bears/waterfowl etc near the floor... even in clips of golf footage when we see the ball flying through the air the flight path is usually predictable at pro level.

Please tell me I'm all wrong and that ronsrail works on a spring platform that means I can shoot the bird gliding gracefully over my head without falling slowly backwards (& probably falling sideways at the same time) ??


I would love to hear more on this last point hoping others would be interested as well ... I just don't want to settle for fixing "big cam with super lens on immovable tripod + extensions" and wait for the birds to return to a favourite perch or nest ... why? ... because some of the most beautiful images of birds in action are lost; we're failing to get the better messages across; we fill our screens with horizontal vistas, images, interviews, soundtracks, post-production, graphics ... might as well be watching humanoids on telly ...

Brendan,

I spent a month in Costa Rica in '92 with my Canon L1 (Hi8)with 2x extender, so I was up in the 1500mm (equivalent) range. I must say that the difficulty in capturing those awesome moments where lighting, composition and (the animals) cooperation come together are why we do it.

If it was easy... it wouldn't be so special when it does come together.

Incidentally, I am going back to CR in January for a month. I'll be taking the H1 this time. I'm just waiting for my EF adapter. I have a 70-300 4-5.6 EF lens

In '92 I opted for a lighter tripod. This time I'll take my Manfrotto 503/525. Also this time around I'll spend a lot more time on audio.

Ken,

Curiously, when you say more time working on audio, ae you taking a recorder and a shootgun or a small dish type mic? or just turning up your good mic?

Ken,

Curiously, when you say more time working on audio, ae you taking a recorder and a shootgun or a small dish type mic? or just turning up your good mic?

Shotgun Senn ME66 25' of XLR cable
Wireless Senn G2 (might pre-mic a popular bird hangout) I can also use both and mix the two.

I would like to bring a parabolic dish, but I doubt it.

Anything is better than an on camera mic. Last time I made a 27 minute doc, and I consitently heard that people (esp birders) wanted to hear bird calls etc. Camera lens = 2000mm while the camera mic reaches about 20 feet.

The audio in a tropical rainforest can be very intense, especially at night.

... the difficulty in capturing those awesome moments where lighting, composition and (the animals) cooperation come together are why we do it.

If it was easy... it wouldn't be so special when it does come together.

Incidentally, I am going back to CR in January for a month. I'll be taking the H1 this time. I'm just waiting for my EF adapter. I have a 70-300 4-5.6 EF lens

In '92 I opted for a lighter tripod. This time I'll take my Manfrotto 503/525. Also this time around I'll spend a lot more time on audio.

If I was not a bird-watcher I would have no idea of and presumably no interest in videoing big birds in flight ... but having spent happy hours studying wing control (quite unknown to NASA) and plumage detail at speed through very good glass I would like to share those many "awesome moments" with everyone ... all help would be appreciated.

Ken, I look forward to any specific comments from experience with your Manfrotto, for example, Have you already made up your mind not to pan or tilt in the dim light of the rainforest? What's Manfrotto like for pan or tilt away form the rainforest? How little of the time do you expect to handhold the XLH1? And between ourselves, isn't it a fact that your just scooting off to CR to make us all drool with envy? Seriously I'm half-thinking of going to CR sometime soon and I would also be thankful to hear about birding sites and modest accommodation in any remote areas you visit ?

If I was not a bird-watcher I would have no idea of and presumably no interest in videoing big birds in flight ... but having spent happy hours studying wing control (quite unknown to NASA) and plumage detail at speed through very good glass I would like to share those many "awesome moments" with everyone ... all help would be appreciated.

Ken, I look forward to any specific comments from experience with your Manfrotto, for example, Have you already made up your mind not to pan or tilt in the dim light of the rainforest? What's Manfrotto like for pan or tilt away form the rainforest? How little of the time do you expect to handhold the XLH1? And between ourselves, isn't it a fact that your just scooting off to CR to make us all drool with envy? Seriously I'm half-thinking of going to CR sometime soon and I would also be thankful to hear about birding sites and modest accommodation in any remote areas you visit ?

Brendan,

I live on the Wet Coast of Canada. The wet is OK but this time of year it doesn't get much over +10 C. Though born here, I spent 7 years on the North Island of New Zealand, so I'm a bit of a sissy in the cold. The trip is really a family vacation. My wife and I have a 10-year old son (kind of a Steve Irwin jr) and a 3-year old daughter. That's why we scouted a particular beach village where we will pretty much stay the entire time. They have a bird count near the village of 300 or more, as well as abundant wildlife (monkeys, gators etc), and one of the most importantant turtle nesting beaches in the world. Also for the non-squeamish, the insect life is simply amazing.


Re: the Manfrotto, I have the 525 legs with the 503 head. The head is the ball type (so you can quickly swivel it to level), As long as your frictions are set right it is very good. I have a bad habit of tightening it to lock more often then I should, so then when I return to pan/tilt, I have to tweak the tensions to set them right again. One caveat, the 503 head has an annoying habit of the screws underneath it loosening. It's a simple fix but it requires removing the head from the legs and tightening the slotted screws with a small screwdriver.

For the cost, weight, portability, stability, I've been happy set up. I will really see how it works when we put the EF 70-300 on. That put's it at a little over 2100mm in full zoom. As Jacques mentioned earlier, that focal length (2100mm) is really only usable when a bird is perched, preening, or feeding. I would expect some beautiful shallow DOF with it though.

I have the dual rear battery mounts which adds weight to the rear of the camera and balances it nicely (on both the tripod and my shoulder). I have shot some very reasonable footage from my shoulder, though for anything othan full wide, a tripod is far better to use. I don't know if it's the HD or the wide screen, but I find any camera movement is more noticeable with this cam when playing back. Maybe that's just me.

I have rarely seen dim light in the tropical rainforest. On the contrary, I find that you need the filtration from the canopy to offset the harsh tropical light, especially near midday. Of the 27 miutes that I finished with the last time I went, 90% of it was shot from 5am to 7am or in the fading light of the evening. Another point, based on my experience, I saw far more birds on the outside edges of the forest than actually inside the forest. The canopy is where the action is. From inside the jungle you would have to shoot straight up. Ideally you find a ridgeline (or clearing) of a falling slope, which puts the canopy near eyelevel. Now that puts you in the full sun, that's why midday 9am-4pm is pretty much a write-off, unless you can find some interesting stuff in under the canopy.