Fill flash for bird photography?

Hi,

Another question. I don't own a flash, but I read a lot about fill

flash. Some photographers say that the animal won't get disturbed

when you use a flash, but I hardly can imagine that. I mostly do bird

photography. They are bound to fly away when you just make a shot.

Can you use a fill flash for birding?

I also wonder if a fill flash works with a 400 or 400+1.4X (560)mm?

Especially when you're at quite a distance? Is there a golden rule on

fill flash and distance?

 

Again all info is welcome.

 

Grz Peter

I think fill flash is both useful and useless in bird shots - depending on the situation and environment you're shooting.

 

Obviously when shooting in wilderness, you won't be able (most of the time, depending on the bird) to get close enough to your bird subject for flash to make a difference. If I understand flash theory, it is possible to make use of a flash regardless of your distance from the subject as long as the flash itself is within range. (Of course, I may not understand flash theory at all!) But to achieve success would be improbable, at the very least, without monumental planning and equipment. Even so, it would still be a very difficult thing to do.

 

On the other hand, if you're shooting captive birds, fill flash can be a necessity. Some of the best portrait shots I've ever seen have been taken in re-hab centers with fill flash employed.

 

As far as the flash distressing the animal; well, I've never seen a creature (other than humans) flee at the sight of a flash discharge. With birds, it seems to get their attention, but other animals seem to ignore it. Perhaps bird brains process flash discharges as lightning? In either event, I feel they probably respond to the noise of the shutter/drive more than the light from the flash.

Peter

 

I hope I say this correctly. Simply put, light falls off in intensity at the square of the distance of change. Thus, if you have a certain intensity at a distance of 5 feet and you move the flash to 10 feet, then you have not halved the intensity, but rather you have quartered it. Or in other words, you would not have to add 1 stop of expsosure, but rather two stops of expsoure to make up for the change.

So, with that in mind, the answer to your question is that of course flash will help you at reasonable distances, and maybe even at far distances if you have a powerful enough flash. What reasonable and far distances are depends on the starting power of your flash unit. I would venture that for a unit that you are going to want to carry outdoors reasonable is going to be in the neighborhood of 30 feet and far is going to be in the neighborhood of 60 feet. Of course, alot depends on the speed of your film and the widest aperture of your lens as well. Kevin

My experience has been similar to Bill's. Suprisingly, most animals ignore the flash unit, they seem to be spooked much more easily from a persons movements. If you can get within photographic range of animal (birds included) without distressing them, then fill-flash is unlikely to scare them.

 

A good place to start for using fill-flash with birds is to get a flash with a powerful output to begin with. This means at least Cannon's 540EZ or 550EX, or the Nikon etc. equivilent. The smaller flash units just will not have enough power. You can then extend the range of the flash by placing a lens in front of the flash unit that converges the light to concentrate the output into a smaller area. This is useful of course only with telephotos that have a narrow field of view. You can buy these flash extenders pretty cheaply, $30 to $50, I think. The extended distance is not huge, but when shooting with a telephoto the extension may mean the difference between being able to use fill flash or not.

 

Yes, fill flash will work just fine with a 400-600 mm lens. Again, this is the situation where a flash extender is helpful. You will definitly want to mount the flash on a bracket above the camera when using a flash with lens this size. Putting the flash on a bracket will 1) reduce the likliehood of blocking the lower portion of the flash output with the lens hood and 2) help reduce the effect of red-eye that a flash may cause. In my experience, red-eye is not a problem with most small bird species, even with a camera mounted flash. However, red-eye does show up in some birds and definitely in things like squirrels when the flash is camera mounted. Hope this helps.

Peter,

 

The golden rule you seek is the flash guide number. Divide guide number by distance to get the required aperture. Example: If your GN is 35, and your subject is 17 meters away, you would have to use f/2 to obtain a full flash exposure. Minus 2 fill would therefore require f/4, or f/2.8 for -1. (GN is usually expressed for iso 100 film, just modify the calculation for faster/slower films. Likewise a flash extender will increase your effective GN.)

 

For more info, search the main archive under GN or guide number, or look in any good photography guide.

I better buy a flash than for my trip to Africa next June.

I will try to find the differences between the Canon 550EX and EZ then.

Let's get rid of the shade ;-)

Thanks, but any info is still welcome.

 

Peter

Regarding the effect of flash on the bird itself, there is no simple answer. Roughly in order of their significance, a few of the many variables include the type of bird, the amount of light produced by the flash relative to the amount of ambient light (i.e., the "shock" effect), and the position of the flash relative to where the bird is looking.

 

Birds which are shy to begin with, such as Catharus thrushes, are most likely to be disturbed by a flash, especially when it goes off in their preferred dark, shady places. Birds which are not shy, such as many smaller birds, are likely to show no reaction at all, especially if the flash goes off in an open, already brightish place.

 

You specifically talk about "fill" flash, which by definition means the flash will only supply a fraction of the total light during the exposure. This should result in less disturbance on the average than if you were using "pure" flash.

 

If the bird happens to be looking at the camera (which most photographers prefer and await) and the flash is camera-mounted, it means the bird is essentially looking at the flash, and in that case any impact will be maximized. If the flash is off to one side, its impact will be lessened (and besides that, the possibility of red-eye will be reduced). In this respect, birds are no different than people, right?

 

Your own experience will be your best guide. If you take a flash photo of a bird and it is startled, make a note of it and try a shot without flash. The reaction may or may not be different. As has been mentioned, your own proximity, movement and noise will often have a greater impact than your use of flash.

 

Regarding the general feasibility of fill flash for birds, it really isn't as difficult as you might think to use it. With today's powerful units, especially when fresnel-assisted, we have plenty of reach for many situations, and with sophisticated metering combined with TTL, we don't need to worry too much about exposure issues.

 

So, the easy answer to you is to try it and see !

While in the UK over Christmas I had the opportunity to try fill

flash out on a nearly tame English Robin (much smaller than the

American Robin, they're not even related). The good news was

that the bird is people friendly and this one was well fed by the

custodians of the <i>Rollright Stones</i> so I was able to get

close enough with my Nikkor 300mm f4. The bad news was that

is was December in England and I was using Astia, so the light

was not much in evidence. I mounted my SB-28 and fired away.

the robin was not disturbed and the photos came out a whole lot

better. <a href="http://focalplane.com/catalog/02-01-03.html">

This example</a> also shows the effect of the flash on the bird's

eye.

It is possible if your strobe is strong enough.

 

Nikon 400mm f/3.5 with fill flash from an sb-28 speedlight.

You may want to +/- the flash to adjust to distance or effect.

I've had success with fill flash with a SB-28 and a 420mm @ 5.6. Two problems I see with your 400+1.4X TC is the maximum aperture and if you use a TC, it's probably because the bird is farther, maybe out of flash range. But if you can get close enough with your 400mm to fill the frame, it shouldn't be a problem, as long as your flash unit is powerful enough.

 

Mike's answer on effect of flash on birds is true. Some birds fly away and some simply don't care. I'd say that most don't like it, just like humans.

From my experience, the duration of the flash is so short it rarely if ever spooks anything, bird or mammal. You do need a flash extender. See Arthur Morris's page BirdsAsArt.com for the one to buy (he sells them for about the same price as other suppliers.) I forgot the name but have owned both the brand he sells and the competition and there is no question, the brand he sells is the best. Real simple to use and it packs absolutely flat. If you are shooting Nikon just set the flash to TTL and dial in -1/3 or - 2/3 compensation and your home. You might want to read Moose Peterson's page on using fill flash. You can also get real creative and under expose the background (stop down the main settings on the camera and let the "fill" make it up). The key is to experiment and keep notes. Your art will expand and you will be making bird pictures rather than just taking them. Have fun.

I have found the most success using both Canon and Nikon equipment using the following flash exposure compensation settings while using fill flash on birds:

 

Very dark bird -1/3

Neutral darkness -1

Very light bird -1 2/3

Peter, generally speaking, using flash for bird photography is not always feasible because birds move a lot, and if you are using a tripod mounted camera with flash, then moving everything is not that easy. <p> Fill flash can be used with even longer lenses e.g. 600x2 = 1200mm, however, remember that to get a decent shot of a small bird, even with a 1200mm lens, you will have to be within 30-60 feet. Bird photographers do force a flash to reach further by using 'flash extender'. <p> <b>golden rule for FLASH and DISTANCE :</b><br>

<ul><li>The higher the film speed (ISO), the further flash will reach.

<li>The more you Zoom in your flash(e.g. from 24mm to 105mm), the further flash will reach.

</ul>

e.g. 1> with ISO 100 film your flash may reach upto 140 feet, but with ISO 25, it will reach only upto 70 feet. <br>

2> with 105mm zoom head, your flash may reach upto 180 feet, but with 50mm wide head, it will reach only upto 138 feet.<br> Do a search on this site for 'fill flash' and 'flash extender', you will get atleast two dozen threads to keep you busy for a long time!

Peter, fill flash works great on birds. For long distances, you can use a Better Beamer which is a fresnel lens that focuses the light. It is made and sold by Arthur Morris, author of Birds as Art. You might want to get a copy of his book, also, as it goes into a lot of details.

 

Mentioned above was Moose Peterson's web site, which I believe is http://www.moose395.net though I may be mistaken. With the camera and long lens mounted on a tripod, there is no more difficulty in using a flash than not. There are also extenders from Really Right Stuff which will position a flash well above the lens so as to add shading and help eliminate red eye.

 

By the way, fill flash on mammals is usually horrible as the flash causes guard hairs to become illuminatetd.

Actually the Better Beamer is manufactured by a guy named Walt Anderson. Arthur Morris is one of several folks that distribute this very convenient accessory.

Since nobody has mentioned it, you not only will probably need a "better beamer", but an auxilary battery pack as well. I often use a 600/f4 + 2x with fill flash for birds, BUT I also have a Quantum TurboZ. (The regular Quantum Turbo is better, but it's very heavy). There are other manufaturers for battery packs, and I'm not qualified to discuss their relative differences, but you will need one of them. Without a battery pack you can't expect a reasonably fast recycling time between shots or not to have to change batteries in your flash unit several times during a roll of film. Even with a freshly charged Quantum TurboZ, I get about 4 rolls of film on a 1200mm f8 lens with the "better beamer" at 40 ft. and under (even less if it's very cold).<div></div>

What a nice discussion. This is what this site is all about. I did not mention it but you should also get a flash bracket so that your flash is not mounted on the cameras shoe. You want to get the flash off axis a bit to avoid things like red eye. You will also need a flash extension cord to go between the shoe an the flash. The best bracket I have seen is the new one by Wimberly. It is available from Wimberly, from Morris and others. I believe Moose talks about it on his site. It is really neat.

Totally agree on the Wimberly flash bracket, it is far superior to anything on the market if and only if you are using a Wimberly head.

Both the Better Beamer and the complete line of Wimberly products (including a review and complete specifications of their new flash bracket system) are available on the <a href="http://www.naturephotographers.net/gs.html">Nature Photographers</a> web site.

You might want to buy, or at least take a look at the book "The New Complete Guide to Wildlife Photography." McDONALD. He goes into a fair amount of detail about flash for wildlife photography and uses it in most of his shooting.

Dave

The Wimberly flash bracket does not require that you use the Wimberly head. It attaches easily (and that is much of the simplicity and beauty of it) to any arca swiss plate used for long lenses. It clamps onto the plate (no bolts or screws--just twist a knob). Although, IMHO the Wimberly head is the best long lens head out there. As to whether one should be using the Wimberly head - it is heavy but is a joy to use and gives great results especially with large bird flight shots. The mass of the head and wrapping you arm on it and pushing your body up to it really sinks those nasty vibrations that my Nikon long lenses can not deal with like those Canon IS lenses many other wildlife shooters chose to own do.

There must be two diferent Winberly flash bracket if my memory serves me, the one I was comenting on attaches to the swing arm or the Wimberly head and will not work with any other tripod head. I do believe Winbelry also sells a version of this that attaches to the arca swiss plate.

The new Wimberly plates can be used with the Wimberly flash bracket, the RRS bracket, and the Kirk bracket. I really like the Wimberly bracket I have. It is the universal one, not the one just for the Wimberly head. I use it when I am using the Wimberly head, but it is useful in other situations also. Some serious thought went into the engineering of the bracket and the plates.

 

Robert Royse is right about the battery. I was out two weekends ago with only AA batteries, and went through them at an alarming rate. The recycle time is also very slow with AA's.

I certainly second the need for auxillary battery packs for birds.

There is a comment within <a

href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0

01HYW">this thread</a> that the Audubon Society has banned

the use of flash at the Smith Reserve, High Island, Texas. I am

sure the reason given by the AS is that flash disturbs the already

distressed migratory birds. I just wonder, however, if it is not the

non-photographer enthusiasts who are the ones most disturbed

by flash? My experience in photographing animals is that flash

does not seem to bother them as much as it does humans.