Some bird photography questions

If you can afford a Tesla

Hahaha! You're funny. ;)

I'm lacking in the proper camo clothing. ;)

 

Try hunting outfitters stores. Here is one site:

 

Women's Hunting Clothing & Girl Camo Hunting Clothing : Cabela's

 

Looks like you could get an outfit for around $50 - for warm weather.

 

Or on Amazon there are camo ponchos for around $15.

 

If you cannot find anything in Women's clothing, try the men's clothing in the smaller sizes.

Hahaha! You're funny. ;)

 

And sympathetic. But a guy I met in Yellowstone with a 600/4 and D4 had one, and I presume it worked. (I'll have had more reach, but he'll have had better pixels...)

Welcome to the wonderful part of photography that is birding! I have been a birdwatcher for about as long as I have been into photography. Birds are definitely one of my favorite subjects to photograph. Like most subject matters, understanding your subject is key. Why not join a couple of birdwatchers on your next outing? Patience gets you a long way, as do purpose-built blinds/hides. I do not use camo, other than LensCoat for my 300 and 600 mm lenses, but I do try to wear clothes that have no bright colours. I sometimes bring a foldable tripod stool.

 

A monopod with a tilt head (against many recommendations, I know) is worth trying in a store before you order a gimbal. I have tried using my gimbal on my monopod but found it too unwieldy when walking. If you have a good ball head, I second 2Oceans’s recommendation for the Wimberley side kick.

 

I use a very heavy camera, a D850 with a grip and a 600 f/4 VR lens (sometimes with the TC-14EIII/TC-17EII). Whenever possible, I rest it on my tripod (carbon fibre Gitzo systematic with Wimberley WH-200 gimbal). However, since I am also a birder, my spotting scope is often on the tripod and the camera on a (Gitzo carbon fibre) monopod. I have a tilt-head and find it works quite well. It may very well be because my camera is heavy, because I use a low profile foot and because I have the tilt-head nearly locked down. I can change the tilt angle when tracking but it does not flop if I happen to let go off the camera (which I try to never do). (I would like to try the Wimberley monopod head.)

 

Whilst a D850 could be your single camera, it may cost you more than adding a D500 (which is excellent for birding) to your current D750 (which is also a very capable camera). The ”downside” to the D850 is that perhaps not all of your photos may not need to be that big. I.e. it is a matter of discipline with the shutter or a matter of disk space for storage. There is a medium RAW-setting that produces somewhat smaller files with less resolution, but I have not really tried it.

 

Why not rent a Z7 and see for yourself what you think of its af for birds? I found that its viewfinder could not keep up with the faster flying birds against foliage and therefore went with the D850 but you might come to another conclusion. The Z7 has the same DX crop mode resolution as the D850.

AKAIK the D5's AF module is identical to the D850s. This difference in coverage is important with unpredictable BIF.

AKAIK the D5's AF module is identical to the D850s. This difference in coverage is important with unpredictable BIF.

 

Swings and roundabouts - on full frame the AF sensors offer more precision as a fraction of the frame per AF sensor, whereas the D500 obviously covers the extremes. The D850 gives you the choice, but you really need the grip to get the AF performance up (at least, I think it makes a difference).

BIF???

 

most of my shots are BoS (Birds on Squat).

here in August, everyone takes shelter....

 

However I was serious about a hide ( e.g., one from B&H at LINK). These can be jury rigged yourself with some camouflage cloth and a little ingenuity).

 

BAITING, on the other hand is topic of much controversy. LINK2 is a good discussion. "Do no harm"

BAITING, on the other hand is topic of much controversy

Oh, is baiting a thing? It wouldn't occur to me to do that...Absolutely Do no harm.

Even worse are the use of audio lures. The spread of small Bluetooth speakers placed in bushes next to a small blind playing the territory or alarm call of a bird. The others come to investigate and the 'photographer' gets a nice close shot.

 

When used in the breeding season it really messes with the birds heads regarding finding a mate.

 

Grrrrr.......:mad:

Even worse are the use of audio lures.

Sigh. I guess jerks are everywhere. Disappointing. I seriously thought most nature-type photographers had, you know, ethics and stuff.

I'm looking to get binoculars that me and my wife can share when we travel around by car looking from spots that have bird activity from shore birds to forest to local trees. Also close up within 10-15 feet in my backyard. I wear glasses, my wife doesn't. So we have to be able to adjust the eyepiece and have enough distances for both of us. What's recommended?

What's also recommended as far as stabilized glass vs. regular?

I'm looking to get binoculars that me and my wife can share when we travel around by car looking from spots that have bird activity from shore birds to forest to local trees. Also close up within 10-15 feet in my backyard. I wear glasses, my wife doesn't. So we have to be able to adjust the eyepiece and have enough distances for both of us. What's recommended?

 

 

Hmm... two pairs of binoculars...?

http://bayouline.com/o2.gif

Not a birder, per se, but I would rate OIS as highly desirable.

 

Large lenses are generally mounted on a support using a foot on the lens. This causes the viewfinder to traverse a large distance as the lens is raised and lowered. Chances are it's never at the right height when you need it. With OIS you can hold the lens by hand without ridiculously fast shutter speeds, and point it while keeping the viewfinder against your eye.

 

I have a similar problem with video, where a tripod is de rigeuer. However I have a bright, 7" screen which can be seen from any angle.

And then, at the end, you get this:

 

Flirting with my lens,

Cardinal promised a pose

Laughed, and flew away

Well, if you turn the lens towards the sky, and it's mounted on a tripod, then the ocular is lowered and you have to bend down or bend knees to be able to continue shooting but this is usually not so much of a problem if the event lasts only a few seconds. I think hand-holding a long lens ready to shoot for a long time waiting for something to happen is quite arduous and personally I find that even with VR, I can't hold the lens steady for a long time without getting tired and frustrated. The tripod helps in this by taking the weight of the kit from my arms and holding it steady while I wait (and it can also help with stability during the actual shooting, making movements more controlled). I might watch and wait for 2 hours and I'm not going to hold my camera and lens in front of my eye that long. With a shorter lens, this wouldn't be so bad as the precision required in holding the lens in terms of degrees is less with a shorter lens than a long lens suitable for bird photography. But I'm not suggesting that one purchase a tele without VR. Hand-held shooting is sometimes necessary because of various reasons and with a 300mm or longer lens, VR is a big help in hand-held photography. But I get too tired and frustrated quickly if I try to photograph birds hand-held. I quite enjoy the waiting experience with a tripod. Edited January 25, 2020 by ilkka_nissila

I would suggest if you are considering a DX body to first use the DX mode of your current D750 to get a feel for whether that's even the best route to go. I shot for several years on a DX body (D300) and got decent enough results to print 30X40 (minimal cropping) and 24X36 heavily cropped and resized in Photoshop. The D750 is 10. something mp in DX mode compared to the D300 which was 12. something so for practice with your chosen lens and deciding whether a higher res DX body is worth while will save you some $$. Another way to consider your decision is shooting FF on your D750 and cropping. The end result will be about the same as shooting in DX mode. What you want to do with the final images is a consideration as well. If you are posting online and not printing, you may find the equipment you already own is adequate for bird photography. Rather than spending money on a DX body, solid support- tripod, monopod, window pod, beanbag... may give you better results than a new body.

Final observation is shutter speed makes all the difference! Most of my early bird photos were soft until I started shooting at high shutter speeds. Even though I had to sacrifice ISO for SS it was a worth while trade.

-Chris

Sadly, there are plenty of reasons why many birdwatchers frown upon photographers. But on the other hand, I sometimes meet fellow birdwatchers with questionable behaviour as well.

 

As always, respect for your subject matter is key.

 

Binoculars are a matter of taste and OIS may seem tempting. However, it is very, very rare among birders. I would say that I have met birders with stabilised binouculars once or perhaps twice. Compared to a camera with the same magnification, the field of view is much larger with binoculars. This makes the need for stabilised binoculars more of a marketing ploy than something you have real use for. (Naturally, VR is great for bird photography.)

 

While 8x magnification is ”normal” for walking around in a forest, most birders prefer 10x for shore birds. Many consider 42 mm the sweet spot between weight and brightness. There are many options and most binoculars today have twist-in eyecups, which makes changing from wearing glasses to not a breeze. I use a pair of Zeiss 10x42 but have considered replacing them with a pair of Swarovski 10x42.

Edited January 25, 2020 by heimbrandt

Somewhere in the States where Condors live (?) they did a trial whereby a group of observers in a small plane had to read the ID numbers on the the coloured wing 'clips'.

 

Half had stabilised Canon bins, the others non stabilised of the same mag and objective size. The stabilised group were something like 50% more accurate.

 

Talking to a friend the other day, she said they now use a D500 and a 500mm PF.

 

I guess a Z7 with IBIS would be an even better combo now.....:cool:

 

Anyone confirm this?

 

10 x 42mm my choice too, although the apparent visual acuity of a nice pair of 8 x 42mm Leica's is pretty neat.

As I get older (which is my preferred choice over the alternative), I find my upper limbs trembling very slightly, so I use Leica 7x42 bins, so that involuntary movements are less of an issue.

 

I also carry a Leica APO 77 scope, with x20 and x32 eyepieces on a Manfrotto tripod. I currently carry a Pentax K20D body, with a few lenses (Tamron 28-105, Pentax 50 f1.7, Sigma Macro 105 and Tamron 70-300, so I can swap the scope for the camera when I wish, and, using it from permanent hides on reserves, I have had a modicum of success.

 

As I use almost exclusively Public Transport, not being a motorist, this is about my weight limit for a seven or eight hour day.

 

The RSPB, or your local Wildlife Trust (both well worth joining), will not only have hides situated at strategic places, but sometimes run inexpensive courses in Wildlife Photography.

 

Major requirement, however, is to have fun. As a current advert says - 'When the fun stops, stop'. There's always another day.

If all you need is a bird image for record or Internet purposes, the Nikon Coolpix P 900 or P 100 or the newly announced Coolpix P 950 may be all that you need (with a stable support like a tripod or monopod. ) Many"birders' in Texas use this camera or an equivlaent from another manufacturer in lieu of their binoculars or spotting scope. Print size is limited by the small sensor. And some use it instead of the heavier DSLR and tele lens

 

Nikon P950 Review

Concerning binoculars, if you don't want something too heavy, a pair of 8x30 or 8x32 should be quite good. That is what my wife uses. I also have 8x40 or 8x42. Those are much heavier. Nikon is actually a very good brand for mid-priced binoculars. They vary from $150 to $500 or so. Nikon also makes high-end, $2000 binoculars, along with Leica, Zeiss, and Swarovski.

trembling very slightly

I think the frequency of photographer/camera 'tremble' is the key here.

 

A loaded monopod is far from motionless, but absorbes/translates any high frequency vibration to slower swaying, which a modest shutter speed can negate or VR can remove.

I think the frequency of photographer/camera 'tremble' is the key here.

 

A loaded monopod is far from motionless, but absorbes/translates any high frequency vibration to slower swaying, which a modest shutter speed can negate or VR can remove.

 

Thanks, Mike, but I was referring specifically to binoculars here. I do use either a monopod or tripod when necessary for photography, but rapid reactions are often essential when just birding, and although adapters are available to mount bins on a 'pod, I don't feel they'd be much help. With my limited equipment (currently - I have hopes for the future !) and certainly limited skill and ability, if I'm trying to take photos when birding, I do use the tripod, preferring a few reasonable images to a larger number that struggle to be even mediocre.

 

I also find that heavier optical equipment (bins or camera) help ameliorate the trembling to an extent - there is probably some reason in bio-physics to account for this !

It's just Newton's second law; F = ma. Given a force that affects an object, the acceleration experienced by the object is inversely proportional to its mass.