Long Lens Bird Photography

[jhewitt15]

Do you need an obscenely long lens to photo birds?

I have a Kodak Z650 with 10x optical zoom and I have been gifted with a fe good photos but then I look at the Gallery and see amazing pictures of kingfishers and night herons that make my photos look like rubbish!

How do these people get such good photos. I only have a 35-50mm lens and can't afford a DSLR with a lens as long as my arm, so how do I photo birds from a hide?

[zan]

You dont *need* a long lens, but the shorter it is, the more you're going to have to rely on luck and tame animals.

You can give digiscoping a try if you like. You can buy a scope and attachment for fairly cheap, and while it won't be as good as using a DSLR with dedicated long prime lens, you'll get good results for a lot less cash. I'm no expert in this area, but I think there's a thread in teh critiques bit (or further down this section) on digiscoping that you should check out.

Zan

[DOXHOPE]

Ive talked to some very good wildlife photographers, all preach its the camera, and knowing how to use it, you dont need this, you dont need that..what a load of utter rubbish. Yes you need the best gear, which for a lot of wildlife photography situations means long lenses. the same photographers Ive taked to are using 600mm f4`s, 500 f4`s 400 f2.8`s thousands of pounds worth of gear to get their best shots. These lenses are only a dream for me, anyone with this stuff who disagrees, and who wants to swap me for my lense for a week or so, and see who has the best shots at the end of it, step forward.... Give me a Nikon 600mm f4 and I will post you photographs beyound your wildest dreams..Until then I will have to stick to what Ive got, use bush craft, stealth and good luck, and get decent wildlife snaps..

[BruceP]

Originally Posted by jhewitt15

Do you need an obscenely long lens to photo birds?

Generally yes! but many of my best photos have been taken with a 300mm lens where birds are bribed to land on nice logs etc by food. In fact my 500mm won't fit through the narrow viewing slots at my local reserve.

This weekend i'll be using my car as a hide in a local car park where birds get fed by the locals and i'll be using a wide angle lens to photograph them in flight. I'll set up the camera on a tripod and remotely fire the camera as they fly onto the feeders, downloading the image straight back onto a laptop so that I can review the image and histogram immediately. All the software and cabling cost me less than £100 so this isn't an expensive technique only suitable for Pros.

Not owning a lens with the power of the hubble telescope isn't the end of the world, you just have to adapt your photography and become a master at what you can do. Remember, your smarter than the bird so entice them closer!

Don't feed them whole peanuts as they fly of with them and ram them down the chicks throat. Peanut butter, spread thin won't show up in your photos and they have to stand there to eat it, and most birds seem to like Atora shredded suet. I also find mealworms excellent. This of course won't attract a water rail out of the reeds onto your log, but like I said...specialise with the equipment you have and master that.

[jhewitt15]

thanks everyone for all the tips. I appreciate it!

[Ukwildlifeo]

Originally Posted by jhewitt15

Do you need an obscenely long lens to photo birds?

Alot of the time if your not digiscoping. or you can 'cheat' and just go to urban parks where the birds are tame

[ron1863]

It's not so much the camera, you can pick up a decent DSLR for a few hundred pounds, but the lenses that make the difference.
Check the Gallery, some of the really good photographers on WAB will leave information on the camera and lens used.
The Sigma 50-500mm is a popular one, as are prime lenses such as Canon 400mm.

[Chris Hammond]

Originally Posted by DOXHOPE

Ive talked to some very good wildlife photographers, all preach its the camera, and knowing how to use it, you dont need this, you dont need that..what a load of utter rubbish. Yes you need the best gear, which for a lot of wildlife photography situations means long lenses. the same photographers Ive taked to are using 600mm f4`s, 500 f4`s 400 f2.8`s thousands of pounds worth of gear to get their best shots. These lenses are only a dream for me, anyone with this stuff who disagrees, and who wants to swap me for my lense for a week or so, and see who has the best shots at the end of it, step forward.... Give me a Nikon 600mm f4 and I will post you photographs beyound your wildest dreams..Until then I will have to stick to what Ive got, use bush craft, stealth and good luck, and get decent wildlife snaps..

I think there's an element of both really isn't there? I mean I agree that owning big, prime Nikon lenses will definitely give you the scope to take much better pictures, but you stil have to have a certain something to take exceptional images that stand out from the crowd.

I struggle to take the odd half decent image with my set-up (D200 and Bigma.) but the occasional picture I take convinces me that if I had more time available, and more experience, I could take saleable pictures with it.

[Chris Hammond]

Going back to the original point, if you have access to a garden I think you could quite feasibly get a decent variety of birds well within the range of a 50mm lens. Of course you'd need to build a hide, or utilise an existing shed, and you'd need to build the birds confidence with religously regular feeding. Then it's just a matter of setting up backgrounds and predetermined perches and yoiu are in business.

I've been feeding the birds in my little town garden for several years now. Last weekend I removed a strategic window pane from my back door and replaced it with a permanent hinged wooden shutter. I've put several natural looking and interesting perching spots in place. All I need now is a decent bit of light and I'll have a few images to post up.

I've found the whole process of wildlife photography to be a huge learning curve. I feel the actual photography is by no means the most important aspect to consider. When I first started taking a few snaps I could only see the subject in the camera. Now when I look to taking a shot I'm considering the direction and quality of the light, the background to the shot, prevailing wind direction, even the likely position of my intended subject and consequently the composition.

If I had one piece of kit to reccomend to the begginer it would be a reliable compass. I'm completely lost in new locations without mine.

[Paul Miguel]

The simple fact is that yes, you generally need a long lens to get good shots of birds - the small size of most birds means that you can't get a frame filling shot without one. It's also the only way of achieving out of focus backgrounds that make so many wildlife images stand out. If you're stuck with using a short lens, then try and use it to your advantage - you could set up your camera close to a bird table etc. and fire from further back with a remote release. This could give you some great wide angle shots of birds and their surrounding environment that would make your pictures look different from most.