Handhold for birding

So I'm reading Arthur Morris' book "The Art of Bird Photography", in his books there are many pictures with

unbelievable slow shutter speed for long focal lengths (300mm-500mm) using handhold technique. Not clear to me

how it can be done, my understanding the shutter speed has to be faster than 1/(crop factor * focal length). I

understand the lens were IS or VR versions. so he can use slower shutter speed to take pictures but they couldn't

be so slow. He is also using Canon 1D series that has very fast focus which is true. Now I'm not sure what the

100% crop pics look like ?.

 

Thanks!

 

John

John there are many myths and pseudo rules created by people who simple cannot handhold many things. BTW for stating that I handhold long lenses I was banned from this forum for a week or so a few years ago. One of the reason I just canceled my membership here after that.

 

‘True rules’ are:

 

1) Technique

Stationary object: practice

Moving object: practice ‘perfect’ panning - better you match movement, sharper photo

2) Equipment - you always get what you pay for

3) Exposure (and quality of light)

 

Usually I can handhold 500mm f4 IS L plus 1.4X on 1.6 sensor (all day long when hiking) even at very slow shutter speed.

 

You can check last issue of Nature’ Best Photography - full page photo taken at 1/100 sec right after sundown with above setup.

 

Native pixels crop - here are some action at almost 100% crop. As you know birds you know skimmers and they movements. I was just working on some skimmer photos taken this summer. All on the wing handheld 500mm+1.4X 40D.

 

All the best and always try to find your limitations by experiments, and not by believing myths. Mark<div></div>

Catching fish<div></div>

Skimmer on the wing with fish<div></div>

I can't match those images, which are stunning, but I don't have much trouble hand holding a 300/f4+1.4x at all. If you're crossing broken ground with a long lens, the addition of monopod makes it that bit more difficult.

 

<a href=" title="Great Crested Grebe - Podiceps cristatus by Peter Meade, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3086/2315764277_b968d0ff92.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="Great Crested Grebe - Podiceps cristatus" /></a>

@Mark, beautiful images you have there. I'm familiar with panning technique and you're right equipment does matter in this type of shooting.

 

@Peter: what kind of PP you've done to it, looks beautiful.

 

I recently acquired 300mm + 1.4X TC. Went to the zoo for handholding practice yesterday :-).

 

http://flickr.com/photos/dallascowboysfan/2683143937/sizes/o/

 

It doesn't seem as sharp as my 70-200mm f/4 IS USM though. It could be the TC that causing it, I'll try without it next week.

Some people are steadier than others. Some get worse with age, some better (I got much better, for some reason). On the average, the camera is going to shake (yaw/pitch) about 2 moa/sec which is going to limit the sharpness based on (effective) focal length and shutter speed. You have to shoot about 3x faster than the "focal length rule" to get consistently sharp results. No matter how steady your hand, getting a sharp image at slower speeds is a matter of luck. You have to kiss a lot of frogs, so to speak, to find a prince.

That said, image stabilization is a god-send for hand-held shooting. I get a good percentage of keepers with my 70-200/2.8 VR at 1/30 second or less (good enough for theater shots), and near tripod clarity at 1/125 in daylight.

<I>Some people are steadier than others. </I>

<P>

true

<P>

<I>Some get worse with age, some better </I>

<P>

true

<P>

<I>You have to shoot about 3x faster than the "focal length rule" to get <B>consistently</B> sharp results. No

matter how steady your hand, getting a sharp image at slower speeds is a matter of luck. You have to kiss a lot

of frogs, so to speak, to find a prince.</I>

<P>

Not quite true, see ‘rules’ above. Champion marksman is not hitting target most of the time handheld from a few

hundreds yards because of luck or kissing frogs but because of his/her skills and practice. Not everybody can be

a marksman, astronaut, pilot etc. Again, testing and knowing own limitations can help to not waste one’s own

time. But on the other hand, to limit yourself because somebody else said so does not seem to be a smart move.

Best, Mark

Actually with a long, heavy lens, even if I could hand-hold, I do recommend and use a monopod. That is much easier to do for hours on end, rather than "hand-hold" and get stiff and grouchy. With VR or not ... : monopod!

While some people can handhold long lenses at slow shutter speeds and get good results some of the time, I think

it's misleading to lead people to think that anyone can do it. It's by far the exception rather than the rule.

 

It's like anything else. Just because you practice all day every day at tennis, you're not likely to win Wimbledon.

You'll get to be a better tennis player, but if you don't have that inbuilt ability, you can't learn it. I could practice the

guitar 4 hours a day and I'm not going to be able to play like Eric Clapton or Jeff Beck (or whoever your guitar god is).

 

I do not think that

90% (or more) of photographers have the physiology required to hand hold long lenses at slow speeds and get

images as sharp as they would from a tripod. To suggest otherwise is misleading and can lead to disappointment

and the usual questions of "why aren't my images sharp", to which the answer is "because you're not using a tripod"

much more often than "because you don't spend several hours a day practicing handholding your 500mm lens".

Thanks all for replying. I believe there are people like Mark that's so lucky to have steady hands but most of us will have to use monopod/tripod for help.

There is a fundamental difference between skill in marksmanship vs. photography (besides the obvious). In marksmanship, you see the point of aim (poa) wander over the target in a circle of 2-5 moa. The key is to minimize this motion (it cannot be eliminated) and squeezing the trigger a little tighter each time the poa crosses the bullseye.

 

In photography it is the motion itself which affects the quality of the photograph. The changes in poa have no significant effect on the composition. As in the shooting sports the motion is sometimes faster, sometimes slower, sometimes wider and sometimes less, in a semi-random pattern. The techniques of minimizing the motion are very much the same - physically and psychologically. The luck, as I see it, is shooting when the velocity is at a minimum. As with a rifle, you learn to anticipate these events, and your "luck" improves.

Lets reverse some statements to see if they are also true:

 

Because you do not practice all day every day at tennis, you're not likely to win Wimbledon. But yes, if you practice you will become a better player and, at least, you will have a better chance to win. If not a Wimbledon then perhaps a smaller competition.

 

My photography improved drastically (no matter how strange that might sounds) when I learned to handhold long lenses. I can visit and shoot in places not accessible with tripod and without disturbing or scaring away wild life. I can choose angles not possible with tripod and I stopped to lose so many interesting and hard to repeat moments. I can say that all my best photographs are taken handheld and it will be very hard or even impossible to take them with camera mounted on tripod. And no, I am not missing at all the luxury of the tripod when you can contemplate nature around and press the shutter from time to time getting the same, or almost the same, usually not so interesting, aov (angle of view) as 99% of others waiting in line of the edge of pond waiting for something to show in the front of a los (line of shooting).

 

As I pointed gentle, and others named it straight by a name most people cannot be a champion of everything they choose to practice. But even if one will not become a champ one can become much better player and even get ahead of the pack presenting results more original, not possible to take even with the help of the most heavy tripod. As always choice is to be done. Stay with the pack and enjoy the discussions how sharp are the individual pixels on all so similar images or try to learn something new even if it is for your own satisfaction. BTW I mostly shoot because it is an incredible help to document observed events and photos are becoming a very valuable data for later analysis.

 

Bottom line is, as always, that the final result is what counts the most. How it was achieved is a secondary thing. Theories are good to be discuss when sipping drinks. They will be just what the name says: theories. Quality of the real images brought from the field trip are a different story. The only reason I answer question in similar discussion is to encourage those few who are eager to learn new approaches but for some reason are intimidated by myths created by others who are not capable to do it so they want rest of the world to be not capable as well.

 

Best, Mark

@Mark: do you have specific posturing when taking pictures standing ?. Thanks.

Yes John. But the most important thing is to be completely relax. No tension on your muscles and very, very important no thinking about if you can do it or not (you will lose your concentration and relax). Learn to have a fluid motion. That habit will help you to get and be accepted in close range by many animals as well. Even that large part of my photos are taken with absolutely no support I will use anything available for support if only possible. Tree, rock, ground etc. This will allow you to have lens ’aimed’ when waiting without much extra effort. When shooting from squad position put your elbows on your knees etc. Shooting with long lens handheld is very similar to shooting long gun (I hate this comparison but it is true). 500mm or 600mm might not be for every one, but 400mm f5.6 or shorter it is possible for most people to mastered. Best, Mark

@Mark, could you be more specific in the posture :-) ?. I know people recommend things like tuck your elbows, point your feet sideways, put your forehead down, etc, etc. How about yours ?

<i>"Shooting with long lens handheld is very similar to shooting long gun (I hate this comparison but it is

true)."<p></i>

I imagine studying marksmanship technique might prove useful: Aiming, Breath control, Trigger control,

Follow-through/Recovery. <p>

The second and last are likely significant contributors - trigger while holding ones breath because breathing

creates body movement. A shooter also has to hold steady until the projectile exits the barrel (follow-through)

akin to holding steady for the shutter duration. The Recovery is the keeping of ones target within view for a

rapid repeat shot.

I have only few birds posted they are all hand held taken with 70-300 VR or Sigma 400 NON VR. I have a stand that carry in my car but don't use it. I boost the ISO to get shutter at >1/100 I get dent picture at that level but faster the shutter better it is. Photography is a hobby for me.

Mark, those images are just beautiful! Thanks for sharing your experience as well.

There is a science to shooting? Just aim the camera and shoot. If you take 500 shots in a day handheld, you will get some keepers at slower speeds. Eventually. My personal rule for handheld shootin, have fun. Personally I will have fun with or without the camera.

 

John, I imagine that Arthur Morris has taken millions of photos handheld at somewhat slower speeds. I will also bet that his rate of keepers is much lower handheld than it is with a tripod. Then again he probally takes a lot more photos handheld due to the agravation created with a tripod. One way or the other, he is not getting 100% keeper rate. Nor is any other photographer in the world.

 

Shoot a lot and you will get them too. Eventually, even I will get them.

This is the very important cocerning point in terms of photography techniques.

 

This is not easy to use always a tripod in wild life photogaphy, even in some low light conditions when using long focal lengths.

 

We can improove the speed by using fast lens and higher ISO, but if still we don't get a sufficient handheld speed than what...?

 

I think there should be some excercises to improove handheld studdyness. Is there something...? I don't know...!

@D.F.: Yes, that's what I've been doing..shoot and shoot, only 1% keeper though :-) but I think I'm getting better. It seems my limit is 1/30s right now for static object.

 

@Pankaj: possibly low breathing technique so your body won't move a lot.

I am one of those that needs at minimum a monopod, but with sufficient light. I can do fairly well hand held, do not have IS except on my G9 and 24-105 and if the object is not moving I can lower by at least 2 stops. It is great to be able to carry a tripod all of the time but it just does not lend itself well to a lot of shooting situations. Only way one can learn his limitations is by trial and error, go and take photos and see what works. I think the rule was developed during film days because digital makes it so easy to practice and learn.

John, 1/30s is awesome! Once I managed to get a shot of 1/45s at 420mm, without VR. I really believe that luck plays a bigger role than skill. No matter how skilled you are you will come home with some ugly blured shots.

 

My next purchse will be a monopod.