Foto at top: Holland cloudy black-necked Grebe (Geoorde fuut) size 30cm distance 30m equivalent 1050mm D500 Nikkor 500mm f/5.6E PF VR standard camouflage. One of the most beautiful birds in Holland. APERTURE mode Birds 1/1000 f/8 ISO 2000 -1/5EV. @dik chk

F11: full screen

At this page we will review ten examples of estimating actual Reach (Bereik) so you can familiarize yourself with this method of estimating actual reach (bereik).

The overall idea is: (while photographing) try estimating the amount of pixels (not the number) of the bird image in the actual picture with the bird image in the benchmark picture. (If it helps you use in your mind some kind of rectangle containing the entire body of the bird but not more as illustrated in this sketch):

Once more our “benchmark picture”:

The “height” of the bird image of the Kingfisher is about 50% of the total height of the picture.

Our “estimating method”

While making the photograph of a certain bird and comparing the amount of detail of the bird image in the actual picture with the amount of detail in the bird image of our benchmark picture, we compare either height or width bird in actual picture with respectively height or width bird benchmark picture. In both cases we are in using the “length” of the bird body, something like head-through-tail-excluding extraordinary long beak or neck or tail feathers of the bird as ameasure for the amount of sufficiently resolved pixels of the entire bird. The bird itself is either vertically situated or horizontally situated in the picture as you can see in the following ten example pictures.

We deliberately exclude a possible extraordinary long beak or tail because these body parts can be extraordinary long with certain species like Stork, Heron, Swan, Phaesant, Long-tailed Tit and the like and they do not really contribute to the amount of detail in the bird image. In the end we are considering either net height or net width of the bird body as being representative for the size of the entire bird image in the picture. After all this estimate is no exact quantification. This may all sound a bit complicated but it works out fine and it is definitely effective in our bird photography, years already. So take your time to understand it. Aftrer sometime you will automatically perform thios “‘estimating” in a split second. Compare it with how a tennis player “estimate” what would be the best spot to return the ball in the opposite half of the field: in a split second while repositioning his racket in his hand and hitting the ball with a certain force…

Example 1 Anser Fabialis

Our estimate: About comparing length of actual bird head-to-tail-excluding-beak-or-neck in this picture with length head-to-tail-excluding-beak-or-neck Kingfisher benchmark picture: 40% over 50%.

Example 2 Kingfisher

Our estimate: About comparing length actual bird head-to-tail-excluding-beak-or-neck in this picture with length head-to-tail-excluding-beak-or-neck Kingfisher benchmark picture: 40% over 50%.

Example 3 Buzzard

Our estimate: Roughly comparing length head-to-tail-excluding-beak-or-neck of actual bird in this picture with length head-to-tail-excluding-beak-or-neck Kingfisher benchmark picture: 50% over 50%.

Example 4 Great Silver Heron

Our estimate: Roughly comparing length head-to-tail-excluding-beak-or-neck of actual bird in this picture with length head-to-tail-excluding-beak-or-neck Kingfisher benchmark picture: 35% over 50%.

Body Great Silver is not really large and distance rather large in this case. The amount of detail is largely thanks to the supreme quality of the Nikkor 500 PF in this case. Notice also the wonderfully visible gradation in the white feathers.

Example 5 using cropping level 2700 x 1800

Our estimate: About 90% detail benchmark picture (roughly comparing relative head-to-tail-excluding bird this picture with amount of detail bird image area Kingfisher benchmark picture).

Example 6 using cropping level 2400 x 1600

Our estimate: About 40% detail benchmark picture (roughly comparing relative height bird this picture over relative height Kingfisher bird benchmark picture).

Example 7 using cropping level 2700 x 1800

Our estimate: About 50% detail benchmark picture (roughly comparing relative height bird this picture over relative height Kingfisher bird benchmark picture).

Example 8 using cropping level 1900 x 2700

Our estimate: about 100 % detail benchmark picture (roughly comparing relative height bird this picture over relative height Kingfisher bird benchmark picture).

Like always the spot of light in the eye makes the picture being alive!

Example 9 using cropping level 1900 x 2700

Our estimate: About 60% detail benchmark picture (roughly comparing relative height bird image his picture with relative height bird benchmark picture: about 60% detail over 50% benchmark picture). Notice wondeful nuances blue in this picture by Nikkor 500 PF!

Example 10 using cropping level 1900 x 2700

Our estimate: About 90% detail benchmark picture (roughly comparing relative head-to-tail-excluding bird this picture with amount of detail bird image area Kingfisher benchmark picture).

If you want to exercise more in using this method for quantifying reach (bereik), pleas use some of the examples in the following galleries of Kingfishers and various bird species:

Gallery of Kingfishers, examples Reach (Bereik):

Gallery of birds at various distance, examples reach (bereik):

Workshop Lightweight bird photography:

• WS1 Reach (bereik)
• WS2 Estimating reach
• WS3 “Big Three”: APERTURE, ISO, EXPOSURE time
• WS4 APERTURE
• WS5 ISO
• WS6 EXPOSURE TIME

…