What is the best lens for shooting birds?

[phil_johnson]

I am planning on shooting birds, mostly smaller birds. I live in NJ and every year a pair of orioles comes to a tree in my yard. Well anyway, what would be the best lens for shooting those and other birds from 50-200 feet? Thank you for all your contributions.

[bob_atkins]

I'll give you the standard photo.net answer. The best lens is

an 800/5.6, second best a 600/4 and so on. Basically the longest,

fastest lens you can afford.

 

<p>

 

<em>

[Note that even at only 50ft, a 600mm lens won't be enough to fill the frame

with a small bird though (an 8" bird will be 8mm long, i.e.

about 1/4 the length of a 35mm frame).]

</em>

 

<p>

 

However, that's probably not a lot of use to you, since you are

(from your other posts here) clearly a beginner. The <em>useful</em>

answer is to get a good 400mm f5.6 lens (around $500-$600) and

a good tripod to put it on ($100). The other, cheaper, but not

as good, alternatve is a 500mm f8 mirror lens (get a decent one

made by Canon, Nikon etc, or Tamron, Sigma which should cost about

$200-$300).

 

<p>

 

Getting closer (by using some sort of blind) is a much cheaper

(and in many ways better) way to go than buying a huge lens, and

as I pointed out earlier, even with a huge lens you will still

have to get closer.

[anthonty_debase]

Phil, besides considering the proper lens to you there are two other avenues you might persue:

 

<p>

 

1. Bring the birds closer to you. Find a window that you can shoot through and use feaders, bushes and whatever to attract the birds within 20 feet of the window. I do this and it works fairly well. Check out some books from the library on how to make you yard more appealing to wild birds.

 

<p>

 

2. Use a fine grain film like the ISO 100 chromes or Velvia. The quality of these films is so good that you can greatly enlarge the image and still get a fine 4x6 or even 5x7 print. This is the cheap alternative to an expensive 600mm f/4 lens. If you have problems subject motion you can move up to ISO 400 print films. I have used Fuji Super G and the Kodacolor Gold and they both enlarge very well at least to 8x10.

 

<p>

 

I used Sensia 100 with my 400mm f/5.6 to capture a kingfisher sitting in a tree. The bird was a small spec on the slide, but it enlarged to 4x6 very well. It's not tack sharp and some grain shows, but I got the image. And I didn't have to capture any wild birds or setup a fake situation.

[ric_raymond]

I agree with Bob on getting the 400/5.6 lens. Even here, make sure that you get something with "macro" capability. The advantage of this is that it will allow you to focus much closer, somewhere in the 1.5 to 2 meter range. The 800/5.6 lens will have a close focus of about 10 meters. The 600/4.0 will focus down to about 6.5 meters. Both of these distances are still too far to get good size images of small birds. To overcome this most will use extension tubes to bring the focus distance closer.

To get close use blinds...tents, camo cloth, anything to break up your outline. Set up your equipment and then sit quietly. The birds will be back.

Even with long lenses you need to figure out how to get close.

[jeff_hallett]

small birds are a real challenge if for no other reasons, they

are small and they rarely stay still. being of high metabolism

and encoded paranoia they require much patience,a fairly long

and affordably fast lens + a quality 1.4x converter. 400 5.6 is fine.

set your gear as close as possible to the shooting site and leave it

there, covered if you have to, for several days(bring in at night).

you may want to stand out there too and have a beer or two. this

is to get them accustomed to you and your gear. when they don,t

fly away at your presence..... start shooting. if you can approach

a kingfisher this way, you have done a job. good luck, jeff hallett

[don_baccus]

I'll just toss in my observation that Bob's hypothetical 8" bird is actually a big, not small, bird.

 

<p>

 

Of course, we have giant herons and raptors and the like, but most songbirds are much smaller than 8".

 

<p>

 

This means you need to get closer with your longer lens. I find that people always overestimate the size of birds until they actually try to photograph them, unless they're banders...

[dan_smith]

One way to tell what lens you can actually live with is to test it. Get a duck decoy, a small, life sized carved bird and a life sized carved mouse. If you can get the lenses, first set one up on a camera body so the duck decoy fills the frame with your normal lens & then with the largest lens. You might be surprised by how close you actually have to be even with a 600. Then, switch to the small bird & repeat with the mouse. Analyze the distances carefully & think whether or not you can really get THAT CLOSE to the sized subjects you want to shoot with the lens that is realistic for your use. Blinds, feeders, rehabilitation stations & other options start coming to mind quickly. If you have to be withing 35 feet(my 600) to fill the frame with a good sized duck at nest, how realistic is it to think a real bird will hold still for you to get 17 feet or so from it with a 300?

If you set this experiment up in your back yard with a few friends, cameras on tripod & compare it makes a good learning experience. It is also a real surprise to many just how close you actually have to be even with big lenses. The smaller the subject the more difficult it is. Good luck. Just remember, big fast lenses break both your back & bank acct and the difficulty in using them multiplies with their size. For those unused to & unexperienced in using big glass, just finding the subject in such a narrow field of view & such shallow depth of focus is difficult at best. Good technique is paramount. Good luck

[anthonty_debase]

I can't disagree with Shooter's comments. He hit the nail on the head. However, don't be discourged. I would like to add that you should consider who you are shooting for. I shoot for myself and for friends and relatives who get an occasional gift of one of my photos. I use the Sigma 400mm F/5.6 APO Macro. Yes, it is very tought to get a reasonalby size image in it when shooting even medium sized birds like flickers or killdeer. Small Chickadees and swallows are specks only 1/4 inch high on the slide or negative at times. BUT, I use modern films such as Sensia 100 for slow or stationary subjects and Kodacolor 400 print film for moving subjects. These films are have very good sharpness and grain. I read recently that modern 400 print films are sharper than the older ASA 80 print films of 20 years ago. I can get quite acceptable 4x6 and 5x7 prints from those small images. I mean acceptable to me. They would not be considered "stock quality" but then I don't shoot for stock I shoot for my own pleasure and the pleasure of those around me. Ah, the joys of being an amateur!

[howard_moon]

Whatever lense your using getting it close to the bird is what will get you the shot you want. When viewing a small animal through the lense you brain makes it look like a great shot as you're concentrating on the the quarry. When the prints come back you're disappointed at the small image size. Do the math or measure your lense to subject distance and try to get the animal to land on an appropriate twig, allowing a little room around it in the viewfinder for subject "travel". I use a gradually advanced black dummy 2x4 and tin can camera on a tripod to accustom the subject to the hardware and, when it's close enough, substitute an F3 with motor drive for the dummy and fire it remotely from a window or remote blind. Works great in getting close to the subject.

[bluesky_1972]

well i am also new in the photo filed even so i have a sigma 50-500 with a X2 teleconvertor and it works fine for me , you may like to view prices at www.dealtime.com for it.

 

i have few photo's of birds taken with 70-300 nikkor :-) well this birds did not give a damn about me so the lense was fine.

 

good luck.<div></div>