Bird Photography

The 100-400L was my first lens for birding and I used it for ages before finally getting the 500mm. I still have it and wouldn't dream of parting with it - it's a cracking lens with a wonderfully flexible zoom range and easily hand holdable if need be. The IS is a big bonus too.

The only alternative I'd recommend is the 400mm 5.6L which is a tad sharper and actually cheaper, but you'd lose the flexibility of that zoom range.
 
I agree. The 400mm f5.6 is an excellent lens, but the 100-400mm L is far more versatile and probably a better choice than the prime for someone who wants to try bird/wildlife photography. The OP will still have a first class lens if he doesn't pursue this, and the big primes will still be available if he gets hooked!
 
Not as popular a lens as the Canon 100-400 but thought I'd just chuck in a suggestion of the Sigma 50-500mm that I use. I've never had a 100-400 to compare it to but for me it's brill, great reach even though a lot of places say it's actually more like 470mm and not 500 and pretty damn sharp even at max zoom. It's never going to be as sharp as a dedicated prime I know but I find it to be a very versatile and sharp lens.

Tommy.
 
It's worth remembering too, that splodging out that big wedge of dosh on a super tele lens is only the beginning. You'll need some sort of soft long lens case to protect it in transit and to hump it around if any amount of walking is involved. Then you soon realise you need a gimbal head and your current tripod may well need replacing to meet the demands of that heavy lens.

All this gear has to be carted about and it does require a level of commitment which not everyone may want to make. A 400mm lens makes a lot of sense to get some experience and see if you're likely to want to take it further.
 
if anyone is going birding dont go with the cheaper end canon 300 lenses. Just to spare u alot of dissapiontment and possible well wishes of slamming the damn thing.

Just today this beautiful rare Great Cormorant was flying about a 100 meters wareabout and I took about 20 photos which non came sharp at all. I had to recognize it through the mess of pixels that i got. Damn thing wouldnt focus properly so in panick i changed to MF and i didnt do a good job anyway :bang:
 
Can I just add for garden birds, once they get familiar with the feeding spots then you can setup a 100-400 with 1.4tc, manual focus and trigger with a remote, especially if you've got a branch very close that they perch on first.

F8 gives a decent depth of field for this.
 
Byker28i said:
Can I just add for garden birds, once they get familiar with the feeding spots then you can setup a 100-400 with 1.4tc, manual focus and trigger with a remote, especially if you've got a branch very close that they perch on first.

F8 gives a decent depth of field for this.
Click to expand...

What do you need the 1.4x for in your garden? Take trigger in through a window and sit indoors...
 
P-Chan said:
if anyone is going birding dont go with the cheaper end canon 300 lenses. Just to spare u alot of dissapiontment and possible well wishes of slamming the damn thing.

Just today this beautiful rare Great Cormorant was flying about a 100 meters wareabout and I took about 20 photos which non came sharp at all. I had to recognize it through the mess of pixels that i got. Damn thing wouldnt focus properly so in panick i changed to MF and i didnt do a good job anyway :bang:
Click to expand...



Do you mean the 75-300 USM mk3 and the non mk3? Cause I have the 100-300 USM, and it has what I think is called ring type USM, and it is certainly very fast and accurate on my 30D.:thinking:
 
lawrenceots said:
Do you mean the 75-300 USM mk3 and the non mk3? Cause I have the 100-300 USM, and it has what I think is called ring type USM, and it is certainly very fast and accurate on my 30D.:thinking:
Click to expand...

yes i mean the 75-300 mk3 USM. Yes it is fast ok but it changes focus on other objects even between clicking. With flying birds or rare birds who land for a few seconds it is a killer. Lens somehow knows it aint a common bird hence then it starts acting up.

Get a common Stonechat or a robin and the photos are bird forum quality, get a kestrel or the above mentioned bird and u are left with this


2drard2.jpg


granted the photo is cropped and the situation was a bit outta the car and start shooting. That is the best i manged in 20 photos and its with autofocus bbefore applying manual
 
If that is cropped then i think you were asking a bit much of the AF. It needs some contrast on the target, which at that distance is going to just look black to the sensor and the only contrast is the sky behind so what is it expected to do, the bird at 200ft of the sky at infinity. Autofocus can only make a best guess at what it thinks you want it isn't a miracle working machine. There is of course manual focus, which is what we used to use before we came to rely on electronics to do it all for us. :)
 
tried manual focus :nuts: but the ferry had just docked in and people around me were passing comments about that dude taking pics of pigeons and the bird was getting further away and it came even worst. Such birds u cant really relay on them to come at 10 ft away from u luring them with seeds. If 300 cant do the job hope the 400 can do a tad better when i sell almost all of my belongings to afford it :shrug:
 
End of it all, use what you can to get the results you want,if that means a 600, all well and good, if it means a 300 so be it.There is no answer to the argument.
 
Richard Peters said:
Herons are quite easy to get near a lot of the time. Bit like Pelicans, you can pretty much stroke them on the head so a frame filler is possible with a wide angle lol
Click to expand...

Maybe in London :shrug: but not in proper woodlands. Every time I got within 50m they would fly off. 400mm would have handled that (which would be about same as 8MP crop with 5D mkii).

With 200mm I managed to get close enough to tits and other small common birds but they were always in the shade, too little light, and at 1/60s there was camera shake all over place. IS is really a must in these cases.

Geese, goslings, ducks and coots are very approachable though, even with 100mm macro - I've shot their teeth macro! But I doubt OP would be interested in these breeds.

If I ever try myself birding I think about 300mm f/4 IS + 1.4x, or 100-400mm IS. It may be a while though as I am more into landscapes, macros and hope to do weddings shortly.
 
http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnfish/

I follow his photostream and I think it doesn't get much better than that. I am not sure what he uses, but living in East Asia makes a difference to what he can shoot.
 
man those flickr photos make me hide myself in shame. They are amazing
 
Richard Peters said:
Herons are quite easy to get near a lot of the time. Bit like Pelicans, you can pretty much stroke them on the head so a frame filler is possible with a wide angle lol
Click to expand...

We've got a heron on our local lake. I often see him around the area as I walk the dog, but you can't get very close to it.

The closest I could get was at 300mm

117134629.jpg
 
Richard Peters said:
Herons are quite easy to get near a lot of the time. Bit like Pelicans, you can pretty much stroke them on the head so a frame filler is possible with a wide angle lol
Click to expand...

Richard you will not get within 100m of a Heron at Belvide, unless you are in a hide and one wanders by, maybe the ones on inner city parks have become tamer and used to humans, certainly the ones out in the wilds have not.
 
Richard Peters said:
Herons are quite easy to get near a lot of the time. Bit like Pelicans, you can pretty much stroke them on the head so a frame filler is possible with a wide angle lol
Click to expand...

Hi Richard, how are you ?


The majority of herons on the rivers up here are very difficult to get near. As are the gooseanders, but i`m sure you know the reason why.Both these species have amazing eyesight, I put that down to years of persecution and ,alas, ongoing persecution.

PS....That stag in the mist you took is one of my all time favourites...........:thumbs:
 
Nice shot

Ours is generally in the same place everyday at dawn, but I've spotted him around a few different ponds recently as well.
 
I'm glad that I stumbled upon this thread :). I've been trying to do some bird photography, to fill in time in the winter months and to capitalise on the many visitng (and hungry) species that appear in my local forest at this time of year.

The trouble is, I'm trying to do everything without the aid of a hide or (even) a tripod and remote. What's worse, my main camera is a D700 (not often anyone says that on TP :D) - being full-frame and only 12MP, limits the amount of cropping that I can to do. Then there's the glass :|.

After struggling along with the Nikon 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 VR for a year and constantly having problems with poor focusing and softness over 200mm, I went and and bought a 70-200mm f2.8 VR II and 1.7x TC, in the hope that I might get sharp images at 340mm and quick focus. To some extent, I have (the focus is much better and the VR really works), but it doesn't alter the fact that even at 340mm (FX) most small woodland birds still don't come up very large in the frame when you can't get within 10 feet of them :(.

What this thread confirms (the way that I've read it ;)), is that this is one area of photography where the equipment really does dictate whether or not your end result will be 'good enough' - in certain situations, at least.

Still, I do find bird photography has greatly increased my appreciation of nature and the environment (not normally big concerns of mine, as a city-dweller) and I really enjoy my little trips into the woods. So, having been warned about how expensive this branch of photography can be, I think that I'll just try and scale down my expectations, instead of scaling up my lens collection :D.
 
Get yourself some camoflage cloth to drape over you and the camera, get a monopod then sit quietly and wait for them to come to you, some food as enticement works here :D
 
Martyn... said:
It will be if you can get close enough. Set up some feeders in the garden, put up some camo net between a couple of poles, and sit or stand still and wait.

Patience is one of the most important requirements, and you cannot buy that :D
Click to expand...

Very true about Patience

Kirk
 
Naboo32 said:
Still, I do find bird photography has greatly increased my appreciation of nature and the environment (not normally big concerns of mine, as a city-dweller) and I really enjoy my little trips into the woods. So, having been warned about how expensive this branch of photography can be, I think that I'll just try and scale down my expectations, instead of scaling up my lens collection :D.
Click to expand...

Hmmm.. slippery slope methinks. I think you've discovered the simple pleasure of being far from the madding crowd and getting that bit closer to nature, which I'm sure is more than half the attraction, and why wildlife photography is so damned compelling. ;)
 
No matter how much patience you have, sometimes you need the longer stuff. I`m not arguing with anyone about it,but in my opinion that is a fact.
 
fracster said:
No matter how much patience you have, sometimes you need the longer stuff. I`m not arguing with anyone about it,but in my opinion that is a fact.
Click to expand...

I agree Ade .... but you can buy the longer stuff, you cannot buy patience.

The point I make is that there are some out there that think the only answer to wonderful bird images is a 500mm or 600mm lens, venture out for an hour or two and get jaw dropping results.
 
Martyn... said:
I agree Ade .... but you can buy the longer stuff, you cannot buy patience.

The point I make is that there are some out there that think the only answer to wonderful bird images is a 500mm or 600mm lens, venture out for an hour or two and get jaw dropping results.
Click to expand...

Agree completely Martyn.No matter what lens you have, patience and an understanding of the subject is of great importance.
 
I've spoken to some hunters in my areas (damn some of em to hell :razz: ) and they tell u the best part of the hunt is actually waiting out in the country with all the peace quiet and serenity around them. The kill for some is a bonus.

I can understand them very well. I do not have the pretty juicy 500s and 600s but I can say that birding is one huge hobby I found me. Lucky me I have the patience and only a cheap 300mm. Now all im trying to do is sell my remote control nitro cars, my pet snakes and my old collection of warhammer figurines and will get me closer to a 400 L :love: to suppliment my patience.



P.S the page before I posted a crepy pic of a black looking bird and was complaining alot vs my cheap 300. I cliamed it was at 100 meters away. In reality it was 300 meters away according to google earth
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top