Shooting Birds

People will say use a long lens but I prefer only a 135mm equivalent prime. I balance it on my knee and use the remote camera feature to angle it so I can see up their skirt while they never know I'm photographing them.

Stop being such a weakling.

>>2942699
Ah, you got me

File: man vs wild.jpg (100KB, 581x386px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 581x386px

Like I even needed an excuse to post this.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

choose a spot, set up tripod and preferably a hide and wait.

I don't shoot birds but I've always seen it as being rather like fishing. It requires patience and quiet

>>2942719
but waiting sucks

>>2942692
That's why most people use long telephoto lenses from a point of vantage where it's quite likely that the desired bird(s) will get into view?

As for less shy birds, you just get somewhat close to and shoot 'em with some prime or telezoom. Even birds don't always feel like running at distances of 30m or whatever, eh.

>>2942722
>I want instant gratification
Shoot lamp posts and cups of coffee then,

>>2942709
reminds me of a pentax shooter that got a 'amazong' shot of a raptor eating a pigeon, but then it turned out he had personally brought and nailed that pigeon to the tree

Use a monopod, or get a beanbag window mount for your internal combustion mobile blind.

>>2942692
I use high shutter speeds, aim, focus and shoot the photo. It's not very hard really.
Also having body with IBIS I can tell it performs much better than lens OS. The few lenses I have with OS I always turn it off.

>>2942797
>nailed the pigeon to the tree
I presume the guy frequently posts on /soc/

Go where the bird is, then wait. Tripods, monopods, 200mm (for swans and geese and what-not, from under 10m off) and up, high ISO. Optimize for the most tolerable compromise; it's generally in the ease of focusing / depth of field area, rather than not having much noise.

Start with larger birds. Swans around where you live? They've got big cygnets right now, and much of the time they're OK with people coming within 15m. Even if the subject is boring in itself, watch it through the finder for long enough and the photos will come. Birds have a fascinating spectrum of behaviours when not in flight, and all of them are worth at least a quick snap.

>If you shoot handheld with a telephoto its too shaky

You shutterspeed is too slow. My shooting starts at iso 400 even in bright conditions.

>>2942699
I giggled

>>2942692
>What do you do?

Sigma 70-300/4-5.6 OS (it's pretty mediocre, but it works well enough IMO)

1/250
f/5.6
ISO 400-1250
100 - 300 mm

Entirely in aviaries though: saheedphoto.com/birds

>>2943584
>saheed
Do you photobomb them?

>Handheld is too shaky
>not doing all your wildlife at 1/1000th or less

>>2943584

>aviaries

Fuck right off with that shit.

>>2943584
faggot

File: DSC_2322.jpg (664KB, 1000x664px) Image search: [Google]

664KB, 1000x664px

Real men handhold with no IS

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D300
Camera Software	Capture NX-D 1.4.1 W
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	1000
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	450 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:08:15 10:32:59
Exposure Time	1/1250 sec
F-Number	f/7.1
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	320
Exposure Bias	-1/3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	300.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1000
Image Height	664
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>2944335

Handholding a 300mm... your arms must be huge!

File: DSC_4171.jpg (596KB, 1000x662px) Image search: [Google]

596KB, 1000x662px

>>2944352
300mm f4s are friends, the older Nikkor is optically similar to the 300 2.8 but at a fraction of the cost, weight, and size.

300mm for me is the sweet spot of diminishing returns. It's not hugely different from 400mm but quite a bit more practical, and if you're respectful of the bird's space you can still get close enough to shoot songbirds.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D2Hs
Camera Software	Capture NX-D 1.4.1 W
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	882
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	450 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:06:15 21:51:26
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/5.3
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	1000
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	300.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1000
Image Height	662
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

File: 5493609006_d79d8e7aee_b.jpg (229KB, 1024x678px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 1024x678px

>>2944355
Pic related, Bigmas and Sigmonsters can blow me. My dad's got one and after using it several times the 300 f4 wins every time.

>>2944352

I do believe this is sarcasm.

File: tair-phs.jpg (25KB, 625x416px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 625x416px

Also you can get cheap tair-3 300mm f4.5. Heavy and great for handheld stabilization.

>>2944356
>Bigma vs 300/4
I got a Bigma and very satisfied with it. But I got it because my budget limitations i could only buy used 300/4. When I finally found one the seller outright refused to ship it outside of UK (in spite of not stating any shipping limitations) because lolbrexit, outsiders go fuck yourself.
So not wanting to get involved in the shitflinging I opted for the other in-budget option of the Bigma. At 300mm it is actually quite nicey nice. I got the focal length I wanted and I won't complain.

File: IMGP4323.jpg (798KB, 1200x798px) Image search: [Google]

798KB, 1200x798px

>>2944356
>>2944635

Pic related, Bigma at 300mm after AF microadjustment calibration

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.
Camera Model	PENTAX K-3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Windows)
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	435 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:09:06 19:12:13
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Not Defined
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	-0.7 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	290.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Distant View

File: IMGP2640.jpg (738KB, 1200x798px) Image search: [Google]

738KB, 1200x798px

>>2944637
And same Bigma minutes after unboxing, no AF adjustment, at 500mm

As I said, I have no reason to complain.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.
Camera Model	PENTAX K-3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Windows)
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	750 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:06:21 18:37:52
Exposure Time	1/1000 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Not Defined
ISO Speed Rating	320
Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Exposure Bias	-0.7 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	500.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Distant View

File: IMGP2214.jpg (681KB, 1200x798px) Image search: [Google]

681KB, 1200x798px

>>2944637
>>2944640
Here's a Tamron 70-200/2.8 with 1.4x TC for comparison

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.
Camera Model	PENTAX K-3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Windows)
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	420 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:05:22 00:57:56
Exposure Time	1/1250 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Exposure Bias	-0.7 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	280.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Hard
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Distant View

File: IMG_2154.jpg (666KB, 1200x790px) Image search: [Google]

666KB, 1200x790px

>>2944571
And some shots with him.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 50D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.3 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2015:12:27 18:53:30
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/1.4
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Exposure Bias	-0.7 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: IMG_2063.jpg (761KB, 1200x727px) Image search: [Google]

761KB, 1200x727px

Tair-3 also. Got it for 20$, awesome for that price.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 50D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.3 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2015:12:27 18:06:58
Exposure Time	1/1250 sec
F-Number	f/1.4
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Exposure Bias	-1/3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

Patience is the biggest key, I've staked out spots for hours to get pictures up close. I've stalked mud flats to get decent shots. I'm shooting a pentax 320mm on aps-c, it's not the sharpest but step it down and it does alright.

Watch the birds you want to shoot, you'll figure out when and how to get the shots.

>>2944637
>>2944640
>>2944643
>>2944762
>>2944764

I'm not trying to be an asshole, but these are all throw-away shots. Or at least they would be if I'd have bothered taking them to begin with.

>>2946042
But you didn't. Instead you go on third rate anonymous internet forums to tell people off.
So here's the (You) you are craving for so much.

>>2946050

Just because it's in your viewfinder doesn't mean you have to shoot it, keep it, and post it.

I used to have a lot of shots like these with good ones scattered throughout. Now I know not to bother.

Just raise your standards, Anon. You'll end up with much fewer photos, but much better ones.

>>2946056
>>2946042
>I don't like these shots, maybe if you take less shots you would have better shots

First of all, nobody cares about your opinion. Second, nobody cares about your opinion.
Also, telling hobby photographers to have less experience to take better photos is just stupid. Please fuck off.

>>2946056
>Just raise your standards, Anon. You'll end up with much fewer photos, but much better ones.
Nah, he'll just end up delusional like yourself, constantly trying to portray yourself as something you're not- a good photographer.

>where are all the other photos?
>I deleted them lol
>why?
>I only show my best work
>...? So don't put them on your portfolio, I paid you for 10 shots, not 5, you dumb asshole

>>2946903

>nobody cares about your opinion

You do, or you wouldn't be responding. It seems like you care quite a bit.

>>2946905

Samefag much?

Also, who mentioned paid jobs or portfolios, especially for birding? Even if it were the case, you don't pad your portfolio with shit photos, son. In this case, it's not padding it's blatantly filling it. All 5 shots posted were pure shit. Shit lighting, shit angles, shit composure, shit focus.

You're an amateur with low personal standards, and you post shit photos. Expect more of this kind of treatment if you keep posting shots that should be deleted.

>>2946934
You post and behave like a Sony faggot. Fuck off and please make america great again by killing yourself.

>>2946042
Why don't you help us out then? Show some of your work and tell us what makes it good.

>>2946966

>maybe brand fagging will distract from my shit photos

My opinions:

>>2944335

Sharp, good composition, maybe a bit of color cast issue.

>>2944355

Great shot, especially in seemingly challenging light (1/60, ISO 1000).

I agree, 300 f/4 is the perfect balance of reach, speed, and weight. I'm always recommending it.

>>2944356

Difficult birds to shoot in backlit conditions, due to black eye and head. Walking around the tree would have helped.

>>2944637

Dark and muddy... eye wanders up away from subject in search of some color. I would have waited for him to be in the light. That or used fill flash if it were too rare a subject to wait for.

>>2944640

Framing is good, but nothing is sharp.

>>2944643

Too backlit, mane.

>>2944762

Backlit again. Shame.

>>2944764

One half of the face is blown out highlights, the other lost in shadow. Focus was missed. Colors are nice though.

I'd post something recent, but haven't shot in 2 weeks as my free time has consisted of realtors, lawyers, inspections, banking, and all the fun stuff associated with moving.

>>2947033
>I agree, 300 f/4 is the perfect balance of reach, speed, and weight. I'm always recommending it.
How good does your field craft have to be to pull this off with birds though?

Will the 300 f4 AFD be a fast enough focuser, especially with the continuously variable focus limiter, or is it better to not waste time and get a AFS model? Have you tried the PF VR?

>>2947057

If you ask me, most good bird shots aren't in-flight, so AF speed isn't all that crucial. I used to use this slow ass (and very loud) piece of shit with my F80, and got plenty of good shots:

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/camera-lenses/af-zoom-nikkor-70-300mm-f%252f4-5.6g.html

Obviously though, AF-S would be preferable, and VR is nice too. I tried the PF in-store, and was really impressed. It's so light and small, I can hardly believe it's a 300mm. Would be perfect to bring camping, when space and weight capacity are at a premium. Will end up getting it for that purpose. For everyday birding though, I'm perfectly happy with the 300 f/4 AF-S.

>>2947033

either post some photos or fuck off. nobody cares for your opinions

>>2948030
Someone is buttmad. Don't worry, Ambilamb is 50% reason and 50% troll. Or 70% troll and the rest is reason. Hard to tell most of the time.

>>2948057

Except they took issue with a post that was 100% reason.

>>2948116
>100% reason
Not really. Do you actually know where you are?

>>2948118

I do, but point out the unreasonable parts.

>>2948120
The whole thing of him supporting Isis photos. Has to be 100% troll.

I feel like I can never get close enough with a 300 , idk how to not spook birds so easily I try to get close but they fly off even when they are like 20 feet up

I am thinking of getting a 500mm and a 1.4x TC

>>2948203
>>2948205

>all this bait

>>2948207
How I am being bait , a longer lens = better bird/wildlife pics right ,why else would national geo use 6 gorillian mm lenses

>>2948215

If you take shitty photos with a 300mm, you'll take shitty photos with a 800mm. Just a different kind of shitty.

>git gud, faggit

>>2946903

I have to agree with other anon here. I do alot of wildlife and often I shoot hundreds of shots,process maybe a dozen and end up keeping 2 or 3. Those aren't particularly good photos.

Most of my earlier photos are pretty soft and I wouldn't even consider keeping them now, I would probably delete them without them without even leaving the camera.

I'm using a 50-250mm IS lens on a crop sensor for birds. IS helps but I still need faster shutter speed and bump up ISO to get it there. I rarely zoom in too tight because I'm losing light and because it's already tricky to get a bird in flight in frame. Going a touch wider makes it easier to get in frame and track.

It definitely makes it easier if you study the bird behavior so you can prefocus, position yourself to reduce their lateral movement relative to youself, and plan the shot for a moment when they have less movement.

Idiots not realizing some of those shots were posted for reference on lens performance, not for photographic merit.
I don't know how Ambush does this but he always knows where and how to strike for good bait.

>>2948537

Bullshit. Want to test lens performance? You do it indoors, in controlled lighting, and shoot the same subject with each lens.

You don't point it into a backlit tree and take horrible snapshits with bad camera settings.

>>2948540
>lens primarily used for outdoors
>better test it indoors

File: IMG_3968-Edit.jpg (95KB, 1000x562px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 1000x562px

100-400L Dust Pump version

This lens can be had for like $600-$800 - really versatile lens. I think the push pull zoom is weird looking but does have advantages in zooming in and out quickly, it's a lot easier to track flying birds and jets.

Use it all the time at air shows and when I go out for birds.

Not exactly the best shot I got with it but it's visually pretty.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72
Vertical Resolution	72
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	562

>>2948592

IQ has nothing to to with outdoor testing, weather proofing does.

To test IQ, you remove as many variables as possible, such as light, temperature, wind, and heat shimmer. That's why it's done indoors, on the same subject. This is common sense, Anon.

If those are your "test shots" up there, then congratulations. You made decent lenses look like utter shit.

>>2948604
I think it is muddy, the eye is wandering to the left in search of some colors. Too bad nothing is in focus.

>>2942719
I all ways walk around. Just like fishing at the coast, its sometimes best to move and find the swarm. But it depends on what kind of bird you shot.

When I walk I mind the position of the sun and the places where birds could be or appear. If you stick to know routes you get a pretty good idea of the kind of light and birds you can usually encounter.

>>2948609

>heat shimmer

Especially with telephotos

>>2948612
>Too bad nothing is in focus.
You write that but the focus is clearly on the bird (there is some backfocus, its not "nothing in focus). You might think its soft (I do), but why do bicker about focus? The softness could just as well come from bad downscaling or lens movement.

>>2948628
>not realizing it was sarcasm

>>2948782

Your comment was obviously just a word-for-word dig at Ambush's comment because it bothered you. He was right about the muddy color and weak subject though.

You were right about the focus whether you knew it or not. It's way off.

>>2948796
Yeah, I was about to say something about the backfocus, then it suddenly clicked and worded differently, adding the rest.
I know it is a shitty snapshot, it doesn't bother me, I am still surprised something came out of it and being that sharp, it was literally a split second snapshot.
Some people like to badmouth sigma zooms and there was the Anon above who complained 300mm cannot be handholded.
This is not a bird thread though, just another thinly veiled gear thread more specific to birding.

>>2948841
Nice, too bad the head has motion blur.

File: C7D_0054.jpg (127KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1000x667px

7D + 70-200/4L IS + 1.4x TC (replaced with a 70-300L)

IS is handy for stuff like this.

I rarely use this kit anymore though, I'd just sell the whole damn lot if it wasn't for occasional motorsports use

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 7D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 7.4 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.7
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2013:05:04 03:09:48
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	-1 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	280.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

Bit of a stupid question: Can birds smell?

I'm sure years ago I read that when stalking/hunting birds you didn't need to be down wind of them as they don't have the same sense of smell that mammals do.

It said they have exellent eyesight so camouflage, movement and stuff is more important. Also birds can just fly off if you get too close for comfort, a rabbit will have scurried away with just a whiff of you at 200 yards or more.

File: DSC_0091.jpg (316KB, 664x1000px) Image search: [Google]

316KB, 664x1000px

>>2948862
Yup. They're lacking in smell but compensate with excellent eyesight and very sensitive directional hearing.

Acting casual and disinterested while slowly, indirectly edging closer can get you pretty close if you don't look at the bird. They've got a pretty good sense for when they're the subject of attention. It's also worthwhile to pick a spot you like and just wait there for a while. The longer you're a nonthreatening fixture of the environment, the closer they'll come to you.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D300
Camera Software	Capture NX-D 1.4.1 W
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	1000
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	450 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:06:06 17:31:17
Exposure Time	1/1000 sec
F-Number	f/9.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	500
Exposure Bias	1 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	300.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	664
Image Height	1000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

File: tfw.jpg (715KB, 1000x663px) Image search: [Google]

715KB, 1000x663px

>tfw you miss focus

>>2948866
>inb4 someone tells you that the shot is ruined because of the slight motion blur on some of the wings.

Nice, love fledglings.

>>2948866
sky is blown

>>2948881
yeah sure preserve a featureless sky and not the subject of the photograph.