Capturing close-ups of birds, advice needed on lenses

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Jerry West wrote:
>I don't know much about camera lenses. I do know what type of shots
> I'd like to capture. I'm certain someone here will know more about
> lenses than me.
>
>
> One specific shot I'd like to capture is of birds. My wife has a very
> active area in the yard she maintains for our feathered friends and
> we'd like to be able to pull in some nice close-ups of the birds
> feeding. I'm certain I could station a camera within a range of 15ft.
> - 35ft. I was considering the purchase of an Oly Evolt E-300. It
> comes with a 14-45mm f3.5-5.6 lens and apparently a 40-150mm f3.5-4.5
> lens as well though I'm not certain on the latter. Will either of
> these lenses capture some nice close-ups of birds from the
> aforementioned range? Keep in mind that many of the birds are small
> and are easily lost in background "noise".
>
>
> I did look for additional lenses for this camera as Oly is
> recommending the Zuiko line specifically for this E-300 camera. I see
> they sell some 150mm f2.0 & 300mm f2.8 telephoto lenses but they are
> $2400 & $7000 respectively!! There is no way I would spend that kind
> of cash for a small hobby w/o winning the lottery.
>
>
>
> Is there a way I can accomplish the goal of capturing well defined,
> nice looking close-ups w/o spending a boat load of cash using the
> parameters advised above? Would the lenses that are shipped with the
> camera I indicated enough to get the job done? If not, what would be
> the minimal type of lens I'd need?
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance for this NG's advice!
>
>
>
> JW

You have chosen a challenge. Your budget and equipment will make it an
even greater challenge. However it is not impossible. What you will need
to do is to get the camera, and maybe you, very close. With that 150mm
lens, I would guess you are going to want to be about 6 foot from lens to
bird. That means you need to have some sort of blind type position and a
lot of time.

I suggest stopping at the library and look for nature photography books.
Also try the book store.


--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Jerry West wrote:

> I don't know much about camera lenses. I do know what type of shots I'd like
> to capture. I'm certain someone here will know more about lenses than me.

Your best chance is afocal photography with a half decent birding scope
or at a pinch binoculars. That is quite cheap and works pretty well with
any digicam (ie you don't need interchangable lenses).

Various aftermarket shops sell adaptors for most generic digcams to sit
behind the eyepiece of a telecope. This is way way cheaper than buying
an SLR and prime lens capable of isolating birds from a distance.

> One specific shot I'd like to capture is of birds. My wife has a very active
> area in the yard she maintains for our feathered friends and we'd like to be
> able to pull in some nice close-ups of the birds feeding. I'm certain I
> could station a camera within a range of 15ft. - 35ft. I was considering the
> purchase of an Oly Evolt E-300. It comes with a 14-45mm f3.5-5.6 lens and
> apparently a 40-150mm f3.5-4.5 lens as well though I'm not certain on the
> latter. Will either of these lenses capture some nice close-ups of birds
> from the aforementioned range? Keep in mind that many of the birds are small
> and are easily lost in background "noise".

For an SLR you probably need something around 500mm or even longer for
wildlife photography. The cheapest option I can think of offhand at that
length are mirror lenses which are OK provided you don't need depth of
field and can live with the donut shaped out of focus highlights.

Regards,
Martin Brown

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Have you considered a camera such as the Panasonic Lumix FZ5?

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Charles Schuler wrote:
> Have you considered a camera such as the Panasonic Lumix FZ5?
>
>

Good Advice!
The Panasonic FZ series cameras (FZ 5, 15, 20)are perfect for birding.
They have 12X optical Zoom Leica lenses that are Image Stabilized.
This allows you to hand hold the camera when shooting at FL=432 mm
(equivalent). The FZ15 and FZ20 also let you shoot at f=2.8 at all focal
lengths. This is unheard of in any other prosumer camera.
I have had the FZ15 for about 5 months and bought it mainly for birding.
It is a dynamite camera and I have no complaints at all.
Bob Williams

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 28 Jun 2005 14:05:16 -0700, "Bill Hilton" <bhilton665@aol.com>
wrote:

>>Jerry West .......I am not a photo buff, but before I would consider the 'expensive route', look into this,
remote control for the shutter. Then place the camera as close as
you would like it for the picture you want, and then wait, and 'clic'.
ps, cover the camera,,,, bird droppings. : ) just my thoughts cl.
73


...
>>
>>One specific shot I'd like to capture is of birds ... we'd like
>>to be able to pull in some nice close-ups of the birds feeding ...
>>Keep in mind that many of the birds are small
>>and are easily lost in background "noise".

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Superb shots Bill.

Jean

"Bill Hilton" <bhilton665@aol.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:1119992716.597291.248790@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >Jerry West writes ...
> >
> >One specific shot I'd like to capture is of birds ... we'd like
> >to be able to pull in some nice close-ups of the birds feeding ...
> >Keep in mind that many of the birds are small
> >and are easily lost in background "noise".
>
> For shots like this on a feeder I'd suggest putting up a couple of
> natural looking perches (snags or limbs) close to the feeder so the
> birds will perch on them as they come in, however briefly. Then try to
> get a clean uncluttered background behind the perch, and you should be
> able to get the birds nicely isolated, hopefully with abstract looking
> out of focus backgrounds, if this is what you want. Try to get the
> light directly over your shoulder in either early AM or late PM
> (ideally, two sets of blinds or perches so you can shoot both times).
> If it's overcast use a fill flash set about minus 1.3 stops.
>
> It's easiest to do this type shot with fast long lenses shot wide open
> but if you can get close enough (maybe have a remote release or cable
> on the body or use a blind?) you can do OK with shorter lenses, up to a
> point, but you'll have to work harder.
>
> >Will either of these lenses (Oly 40-150 mm) capture some nice close-ups
> >of birds from the aforementioned range?
>
> For me, that's not long enough, it's the equivalent of 300 mm in 35 mm
> terms. In the price range you mention, for birds I'd recommend either
> a Nikon or Canon with a minimum 300 mm lens, 400 is better but starting
> to cost a lot more money. With the Canon Rebel for example and say the
> 75-300 (IS if possible) you have the equivalent of 480 mm in 35 mm
> terms, plus there are good used lenses available for this system at
> reasonable prices if you get the 'bug' and want a 400 f/5.6 L or
> 100-400 IS L. There is some risk that the Oly is a dead end system
> since the parent company is losing a lot of money (24 billion yen last
> quarter for the imaging division), while Canon and Nikon are very
> profitable.
>
> Here are a couple of recent bird photos of mine with various
> backgrounds and comments ... I'm not sure if this is what you had in
> mine (I don't shoot over feeders, I just follow birds around until they
> get used to me) but here goes ...
>
> http://members.aol.com/canyonimge/q2.jpg ... I poked along after this
> quail for about 20 minutes, shooting nothing, until he jumped on this
> rock with a clean background for just a sec ... 1,000 mm lens, wide
> open, Canon 1Ds (500 mm w/ 2x converter)
>
> http://members.aol.com/canyonimge/q3.jpg ... same bird, couple minutes
> later ... then he threw his head back and sang and I got that too
>
> http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/bowl.jpg ... full frame image taken
> earlier this week, I was 'working' these guys for about an hour while
> they were on the ground, hoping they'd get used to me and I did OK with
> shots near the burrow, then this one flew to a mesquite with tamarisks
> in the background and I knew I had a chance for a special shot as I
> moved over to him, and I got 3 shots before he flew. I was very
> careful with the background ... 700 mm lens, 910 mm equivalent ... I am
> very happy with this shot.
>
> http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/bowl_detail.jpg ... detail from the
> above image. Prints great large.
>
> http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/T9D8069_quail.jpg ... full frame, a
> more difficult background since it was lighter and I had to move around
> a bit to get something that worked, plus the bird was constantly
> moving, but I like this one. Another 700 mm shot with a 1.3x body (910
> mm equiv).
>
> One other tip, if your camera has multiple focus points learn to move
> them quickly since at close range you'll ideally want to put the focus
> sensor right on the eye, often with birds the center sensor is
> elsewhere (typically the breast) and the eye is slightly soft, but if
> you can move the focal point off center quickly it will pay off. Also,
> I use AI mode instead of One Shot most of the time because the birds
> are often moving their heads and AI mode will at least try to track
> them.
>
> Bill
>

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Bill,

Thank you for the welcome and considered comments. Thank you to all that
answered here on my post.

Viewing the images you provided was a real treat; they are *outstanding*. I
checked out what the cost is for the hardware you used to capture those
images and, well, that's clearly over my budget. I was hoping to spend no
more than $1500. I decided on the Oly I mentioned only because I've been
very happy with the 3030Z I bought new back in 2000 for almost $1K. It has
been a great camera and I have always been happy with the optics, though, I
think it doesn't do very well in low light situations. At any rate, I'm not
dead set against choosing another quality digital if I can get something
that will do a quarter of what you have displayed here in your shots. Again,
they were amazing.

JW

"Bill Hilton" <bhilton665@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1119992716.597291.248790@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >Jerry West writes ...
>>
>>One specific shot I'd like to capture is of birds ... we'd like
>>to be able to pull in some nice close-ups of the birds feeding ...
>>Keep in mind that many of the birds are small
>>and are easily lost in background "noise".
>
> For shots like this on a feeder I'd suggest putting up a couple of
> natural looking perches (snags or limbs) close to the feeder so the
> birds will perch on them as they come in, however briefly. Then try to
> get a clean uncluttered background behind the perch, and you should be
> able to get the birds nicely isolated, hopefully with abstract looking
> out of focus backgrounds, if this is what you want. Try to get the
> light directly over your shoulder in either early AM or late PM
> (ideally, two sets of blinds or perches so you can shoot both times).
> If it's overcast use a fill flash set about minus 1.3 stops.
>
> It's easiest to do this type shot with fast long lenses shot wide open
> but if you can get close enough (maybe have a remote release or cable
> on the body or use a blind?) you can do OK with shorter lenses, up to a
> point, but you'll have to work harder.
>
>>Will either of these lenses (Oly 40-150 mm) capture some nice close-ups
>>of birds from the aforementioned range?
>
> For me, that's not long enough, it's the equivalent of 300 mm in 35 mm
> terms. In the price range you mention, for birds I'd recommend either
> a Nikon or Canon with a minimum 300 mm lens, 400 is better but starting
> to cost a lot more money. With the Canon Rebel for example and say the
> 75-300 (IS if possible) you have the equivalent of 480 mm in 35 mm
> terms, plus there are good used lenses available for this system at
> reasonable prices if you get the 'bug' and want a 400 f/5.6 L or
> 100-400 IS L. There is some risk that the Oly is a dead end system
> since the parent company is losing a lot of money (24 billion yen last
> quarter for the imaging division), while Canon and Nikon are very
> profitable.
>
> Here are a couple of recent bird photos of mine with various
> backgrounds and comments ... I'm not sure if this is what you had in
> mine (I don't shoot over feeders, I just follow birds around until they
> get used to me) but here goes ...
>
> http://members.aol.com/canyonimge/q2.jpg ... I poked along after this
> quail for about 20 minutes, shooting nothing, until he jumped on this
> rock with a clean background for just a sec ... 1,000 mm lens, wide
> open, Canon 1Ds (500 mm w/ 2x converter)
>
> http://members.aol.com/canyonimge/q3.jpg ... same bird, couple minutes
> later ... then he threw his head back and sang and I got that too
>
> http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/bowl.jpg ... full frame image taken
> earlier this week, I was 'working' these guys for about an hour while
> they were on the ground, hoping they'd get used to me and I did OK with
> shots near the burrow, then this one flew to a mesquite with tamarisks
> in the background and I knew I had a chance for a special shot as I
> moved over to him, and I got 3 shots before he flew. I was very
> careful with the background ... 700 mm lens, 910 mm equivalent ... I am
> very happy with this shot.
>
> http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/bowl_detail.jpg ... detail from the
> above image. Prints great large.
>
> http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/T9D8069_quail.jpg ... full frame, a
> more difficult background since it was lighter and I had to move around
> a bit to get something that worked, plus the bird was constantly
> moving, but I like this one. Another 700 mm shot with a 1.3x body (910
> mm equiv).
>
> One other tip, if your camera has multiple focus points learn to move
> them quickly since at close range you'll ideally want to put the focus
> sensor right on the eye, often with birds the center sensor is
> elsewhere (typically the breast) and the eye is slightly soft, but if
> you can move the focal point off center quickly it will pay off. Also,
> I use AI mode instead of One Shot most of the time because the birds
> are often moving their heads and AI mode will at least try to track
> them.
>
> Bill
>

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Nice.... but it is a very BIG bird ;-)

Guy

Charles Schuler wrote:
> "Bob Williams" <mytbobnospam@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:42C1BC9D.5080306@cox.net...
>>
>>
>> Charles Schuler wrote:
>>> Have you considered a camera such as the Panasonic Lumix FZ5?
>>
>> Good Advice!
>> The Panasonic FZ series cameras (FZ 5, 15, 20)are perfect for
>> birding. They have 12X optical Zoom Leica lenses that are Image
>> Stabilized. This allows you to hand hold the camera when shooting at
>> FL=432 mm
>> (equivalent). The FZ15 and FZ20 also let you shoot at f=2.8 at all
>> focal lengths. This is unheard of in any other prosumer camera.
>> I have had the FZ15 for about 5 months and bought it mainly for
>> birding. It is a dynamite camera and I have no complaints at all.
>> Bob Williams
>
> Same here with the FZ5 ... no complaints at all. Here is a sample:
> http://home.comcast.net/~charlessc [...] te1059.jpg

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

[..]
>> http://members.aol.com/canyonimge/q2.jpg ... I poked along after this
>> http://members.aol.com/canyonimge/q3.jpg ... same bird, couple minutes
>> http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/bowl.jpg ... full frame image taken
>> http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/bowl_detail.jpg ... detail from the
>> http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/T9D8069_quail.jpg ... full frame, a
>>
>> Bill

Great shots, really. Now let's hope the Bokeh Appreciation Secret
Society will not start finding faults with your lenses...

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Jerry West wrote:
> I don't know much about camera lenses. I do know what type of shots I'd like
> to capture. I'm certain someone here will know more about lenses than me.
>
>
>
> One specific shot I'd like to capture is of birds. My wife has a very active
> area in the yard she maintains for our feathered friends and we'd like to be
> able to pull in some nice close-ups of the birds feeding. I'm certain I
> could station a camera within a range of 15ft. - 35ft. I was considering the
> purchase of an Oly Evolt E-300. It comes with a 14-45mm f3.5-5.6 lens and
> apparently a 40-150mm f3.5-4.5 lens as well though I'm not certain on the
> latter. Will either of these lenses capture some nice close-ups of birds
> from the aforementioned range? Keep in mind that many of the birds are small
> and are easily lost in background "noise".
>
>
>
> I did look for additional lenses for this camera as Oly is recommending the
> Zuiko line specifically for this E-300 camera. I see they sell some 150mm
> f2.0 & 300mm f2.8 telephoto lenses but they are $2400 & $7000 respectively!!
> There is no way I would spend that kind of cash for a small hobby w/o
> winning the lottery.
>
>
>
> Is there a way I can accomplish the goal of capturing well defined, nice
> looking close-ups w/o spending a boat load of cash using the parameters
> advised above? Would the lenses that are shipped with the camera I indicated
> enough to get the job done? If not, what would be the minimal type of lens
> I'd need?
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance for this NG's advice!
>
>
>
> JW
>
>
Good question- unfortunately no easy answer. Longer focal length means
you can make bird appear larger without getting closer. However, longer
focal length means less field of view, less depth of field, etc. The
longer the focal length, the more necessary a good tripod is. In fact,
for this kind of photography, I think the tripod is of equal importance
to the lens. Ease of panning and stability will be important.

For digicams, more pixels allows you to crop more, which also makes
final image of bird larger.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"David J Taylor"
<david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> a écrit
dans le message de news:leswe.58438$G8.12077@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Jerry West wrote:
> > I see that I've been very naive; given that my budget is around $1500
> > I suspect I'd better have a look a close look at your suggestions for
> > an adapter for the camera to mount on a telescope (which I already
> > own!).
> > Thanks for the tip!
>
> The Panasonic FZ5 and FZ20 cameras that others have recommended would only
> set you back one third of that $1500! The older Nikon 990, 995 and 4500
> series were highly regarded for fitting onto telescopes and microscopes.
>

I don't want to be a party pooper, but long lenses like telescopes require a
LOT of light which means either high ISO settings or long exposure time.
The Coolpix series do not do well with high ISO and long exposure times do
not work well with live birds. As others have mentionned, a Drebel XT or
even a used Drebel would work very well. As far as lenses, the 75-300 with
IS is quite good. If you can afford it, the "L" series lenses are a cut
above the others.

Jean

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Bill Hilton wrote:

>>Jerry West writes ...
>>
>>Viewing the images you provided was a real treat; they are *outstanding*.
>
>
> Thanks Jerry (and Jean and DDT) ... sometimes it goes my way, usually
> they fly off just as I'm setting up
>
>
>>I was hoping to spend no more than $1500.
>
>
> If the telescope adapter route doesn't work for you, in this price
> range I'd suggest the Canon Rebel XT (8 Mpixels, $900 at B&H with the
> 18-55 mm lens) plus the 75-300 f/4-5.6 IS (~ $400 at B&H, less than
> half that if you skip IS). The main problem with birds is having a
> long enough lens and even 300 is short, but since it's your garden you
> can probably set up perches near feeders and fire the camera remotely
> with the 30 ft cord Canon sells or maybe the IR trigger, which I
> *think* the Rebel ships with (not sure).

Bill's advice is very good. The advantage of a DSLR is that you
can buy other lenses later as your budget permits. Then
after you have a collection of lenses, and you want to upgrade
the camera your lens collection still works.

If you go the telescope route, it is called digiscoping, and you can
get very nice images of *stationary* subjects. The f/ratio
of a digiscope setup is f/11 and slower (typically). So
if the perched bird twitches even a little, you'll get blur.

Whatever method you use, a tripod is often a limiting factor,
especially for those starting out and not wanting to spend
many hundreds of dollars on a tripod (hint: spend the money
needed to get a good tripod).

Roger Clark
Bird photos at: http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

jean wrote:
[]
> I don't want to be a party pooper, but long lenses like telescopes
> require a LOT of light which means either high ISO settings or long
> exposure time. The Coolpix series do not do well with high ISO and
> long exposure times do not work well with live birds. As others have
> mentionned, a Drebel XT or even a used Drebel would work very well.
> As far as lenses, the 75-300 with IS is quite good. If you can
> afford it, the "L" series lenses are a cut above the others.

I agree that small-sensor cameras do not produce as good results at high
ISO settings due to noise. What you may not know is that the $500
Panasonic FZ20 has an aperture of f/2.8 even at full zoom (432mm), thus
alleviating some of the exposure time issues.

Yes, in this case, if you pay a lot more you can get better results.

David