Full on screaming “Arrrgh, make it stop” I think :)

Indeed - I would contend taking up bird photography has the great benefit that you look again at all the common birds, and usually find them beautiful in a certain light or pose (Crows and Pigeons come to mind).

Nice mix of textures.

That’s the way to avoid aperture issues - flat subjects :)

Though I suppose an irritating person might argue that if you had an even smaller depth of field the rather cluttered background would be softened further, emphasising the subject!

Oh, and nice rust!

On RAW format - it is an interesting format, if you’ve got something that can process it. Very very very loosely, it contains the photon counts, rather than a JPEG which puts the counts into a set of 256 buckets and tells you the bucket numbers. As such, changing things can be done with much more precision. It also has a far better chance of recovery from overblown or underexposed photos. You also get the picture before computed sharpening and mosaic removal. That said, you must be using something to understand Canon’ RAW format! You might want to check it for additional facilities! In passing, the information in RAW format transfers pretty closely to TIFF format. And finally, RAW format files are huge - be warned!

On the F number - yes, though I’m a little surprised you can’t choose to have a smaller aperture, depending on the lens you have. A kit lens for that camera is EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6, but perhaps you have something different.

Alas, DPP4 serves my purposes so well for all the processing I want to do, and also being on Windows 11, I’ve not looked at alternatives.

If you can bear to look in Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/photography/wiki/postprocessing/#wiki_which_raw_.2F_post_processing_software_should_i_get.3F

On Aperture - sorry for going over old ground for you.

I should have been more careful with my jargon, on rereading my comment.

And I’d guess you are seeing two F numbers because of something to do with a “crop” APS-C sensor, so there’s the whole “Actual F number” vs. “Effective F number if had a full sensor”.

And do try RAW shots - I’m guessing you have access to Canon’s Digital Photo Professional for free, and that will allow playing with the RAW format image (lots more info in those) and saving to JPG.

But anyway, higher F numbers soften the sharpness of the “best” parts of the photo, in exchange for “OK” focus over a greater depth, and loss of brightness. You may well try the experiment and decide you’ve gained nothing by it, but experiments are a good way to learn. I have to admit to usually forgetting to consider if I should change the aperture in my shots (with the excuse that I take wild bird photos, so loss of light is usually really bad news).

A good start to your plan in terms of subject :)

Trivial critique time:

1. Perhaps play with the “Shadow” settings of any luminance histogram tool you have to get a little definition (pupil vs. retina) in Stellar’s left eye - e.g. to match the definition of her right (will work best on RAW mode photos).
2. Given the distance you’re taking this at, it’s unsurprising Stellar’s right eye, etc. is drifting out of focus due to “Depth of Field” issues, but you could try going to a much higher aperture for more depth of field (e.g. perhaps you are at around F4 try seeing what happens at F20 - though you may run into lighting/ISO issues.

To a UK bird book, it’s just a “Goldfinch” Carduelis Carduelis, I’m afraid. Wikipedia has it as “European Goldfinch” , but that I suspect is just to help confused folk across the big pond.

Male and female broadly look the same, so that’s quite possibly a mated pair.

Yes, and Reading is not so far away from the Oxfordshire release station, so they got to us fast.

And this photo might explain the acrobatics:

There were six Red Kites over Prospect Park, Reading, UK, engaged in something somwhere between playing, dominance displays and out right squabbles. None of the birds fled the scene over the twenty minutes or more they were at it, so I have to assume there was not an serious fight going on!

Canon R5 MkII RF200-800mm lens 1/1250s. ISO 500-640.

The camera was still the right way up at this point…

I’d let the size get too big!

Humph. Picture doesn’t seem to be loading. I’ll try again later.

Some decent weather and so some decent bird shots (go see a couple in /c/birding).

Good luck - they are a delight.

Mmm, repetitive squawking or song, only a jay could tell you.

The RSPB have it as a conventicle, and alas, I wasn’t close enough to hear their chatter.

Kayaking sounds more like you need water-proof than water-resistant. For interest, the following is from the “water-resistant” Canon R5 MkII:

Oh, if I’d had a good single shot I’d have posted it - I have been blessed by such in previous years, so I keep clicking and keep hoping.

When you actually get the device manuals, the suppliers are remarkably coy about what “water-resistant” actually means and when it applies, beyond “less prone to water damage than those that are not”. So just be aware what you might mean by the term may well not be what the supplier means - and second hand items may have lost some resistance as well.

Also, if you are in rain or drizzle, you’re probably not going to be taking the best photos regardless of kit!