If philosophy is questions like “What is life?”, then I should stop writing for fear of leading the question, “What is it about Birds?” in a particular direction. But I will. I don’t own the best glass for photographing birds. Sometimes I’m in a good position to get a clear crisp shot. I often see photos by other photographer that are crisp and colorful, as if they hired bird models to pose for them. Perhaps birds were created for man to photograph. They’re abundantly available when nothing else captures my fancy.
I have long suspected this as well. I have no doubt whatsoever that my white EF 100-400mm zoom will spook birds at least a 100 meters in front of me in the forest. Brave or stupid bird Note to self- get camo cover.....
Get as close as you can, with the best lens you can afford. Take photos on good light, and pay close attention to your photo technique. Frame the image so that the bird is as large as possible in the finder. It is difficult, and this is one of those cases where the right lens can be critical to success.
FWIW, I suspect that good bird photos depend on a combination on being in the right spot (perhaps in a hide and and patiently waiting) and equipment (lenses, extenders, etc.). IMHO it depends a lot on whether you're photographing birds (plural) or a close up of one bird. In the first case, a +/- 200mm lens may be fine. In the second case, you're probably want something in the 400-800mm range. I once decided that I was going to take more 'bird' pics and bought the cheapest 400mm prime lens with a 1.6x extender on a 1.6 crop camera. I figured that this would give me an effective reach of more than 600mm on a crop camera. I only ever took a few bird pics but the 600mm reach was great for wildlife/zoo close-ups.
I secretly pay them.....truth is out... 269A1036aa by Oscar Baez Soria, on Flickr LY2A9917aa by Oscar Baez Soria, on Flickr LY2A6838 by Oscar Baez Soria, on Flickr LY2A4890 by Oscar Baez Soria, on Flickr LY2A3984 by Oscar Baez Soria, on Flickr LY2A6287 by Oscar Baez Soria, on Flickr
Is one key sentence. Two other important points: We can't resolve their faster movements by eye, so shooting on and on might make sense. Is there any other field of photographic interest fueling GAS as infinitely as birds are doing?
I've got photos of Waxwings taken in Jenny Lind Park, Norwich - will that do ? (Jenny Lind was a singer known as 'The Swedish Nightingale' - and allegedly a 'friend of King Edward VII).
Yes, Tony knew that! But apropos of bird confusion, a rather famous couple, Romeo and Juliet, had some trouble themselves with Nightingale identification, specifically, telling the difference between the Nightingale and the Lark. After their rapturous first night together, Romeo claims to hear the Lark, heralding daybreak when he must leave her. Juliet tries in vain to convince him it's the Nightingale and not the Lark and that they still have time together. It resolves in favor of the Lark, since Romeo has to be out of town by daybreak or he will be killed. As he says ... Sorry, no pics!!!
David, et.al. - - If i am repeating something already posted, I apologize. To answer the OP question, human beings have to rely on such devices as airplanes and gliders to fly. We simply are jealous of birds.
