|
 Yellow Warbler by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr Yellow-rumped Warbler by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr Northern Harrier by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 00:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 21:07 |
|
|
Hi thread, Well I inherited a 50D with its 18-55mm kit lens, and I've spent the last few weeks really learning and exploring it (by "it," I mean the camera and photography in general), chiefly on neighborhood wildlife such as these severely cropped birds that I was really excited to capture. I read the first few pages after the helpful OP, and I've been hard at work trying to learn what telephoto zoom lenses are out there. I want to spend no more than about $500 and I've got no illusions about filling the frame with something like these pictures on that money, but if I can meet it halfway... Seems like about 300mm is about as far as an average Joe like me can go before the money gets big. And the major price break point seems to be whether there's IS, which at first I was thinking of going without so I can save the money while I force myself to develop better skill with a steady hand. But now I'm thinking more along the lines of that being a fool's errand and IS being essentially mandatory at these focal lengths. What say you? Recently I learned that IS is only good on still subjects, which in retrospect seems kind of obvious because if it's moving, there's nothing to stabilize on. So it wouldn't help me with birds in flight. But even more recently, I learned that some lenses have a mode 1 and mode 2 IS, where mode 2 only stabilizes in the axis perpendicular to panning, so you can track objects while panning and it fixes the cross wobbles but doesn't mess up your tracking. Is this something that's good for my purpose? Of the lenses in my price range, it looks like the Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM has this, but it's a discontinued lens, while its current follow-on the II doesn't have it. https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/products/compare?models=11922,40290 Wassapwiddat? Reading Amazon reviews, both of these lenses (the old one being available used only) are generally well-reviewed and it seems would fit the bill. Any comments to my specific questions, or more general advice for the person in my position (i.e., answers to the questions I didn't ask but should have) would be welcome. Thanks. Also can somone tell me what kind of bird the middle one is?  IMG_3853_2 IMG_5282 (2) IMG_5067 (2)
vessbot fucked around with this message at 15:45 on May 22, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 06:36
|
|
|
vessbot posted:Also can somone tell me what kind of bird the middle one is? That's a starling! Very pretty(and noisy) birds. They're an invasive species in North America unfortunately.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 10:10
|
|
|
IS is less necessary a) when you're on a tripod b) when your shutter speed is really fast because you have lots of light. So if you're taking photos mid-day in the sun, you can maybe get away without it. But you're probably not going to be happy with that solution eventually, since bird activity is often better and lighting is more attractive in the morning/evening. And using tripods/monopods a lot is pretty constraining unless you are going somewhere like a short boardwalk through a wetland where you don't have to move much and the birds come to you... I haven't explored all the lens options, but you are actually getting pretty close to used Tamron 150-600 G1 territory. I think I got started on that older Canon 70-300 EF lens you mentioned and it was pretty good although I ended up upgrading. I'm not sure how it compares to whatever the recent Tamron or Sigma 70-300's. Those might be pretty much as good and possibly save you a little money (although I'm not sure exactly how a used Canon vs. new Tammy/Sig would stack up). I don't have experience with any of the older Sigma zooms but they had some models that were, e.g. 50-500 or 150-500. I'm not sure what the used market is like for them but that's probably the best option for something longer than 300 that's more or less a walk-around lens. With the 50D and Canon EF 70-300, you'd have basically the setup I started with 10 years ago. This means it's perfectly capable, but there are real improvements in both lenses and bodies that have happened in the meantime that you'd need a little more cash to move to.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 15:48
|
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:IS is less necessary ... Yeah, I should specify that I'm interested in handheld only. And even in keeping to beginner to mid level gear, I don't want to hamstring my ability to shoot closer to dusk, which points me toward IS. If your old EF 70-300 is the one I'm looking at, do you remember anything about the mode 2 IS? If it does what it seems to do from my surface level of understanding, it's weird that they took it off the newer version, because it would be a shoe-in for helping stabilize moving animals. Maybe it turned out to be a useless gimmick, but OTOH maybe it was so good that they took it off the mid level gear to leave it only on the pro stuff? I looked at the Tamron 150-600, and after I got past the woozy fantasies of having something like that to shoot with, I think that it's at a level beyond where I'm looking to be, in terms of walking around ability. It says it's so heavy that you shouldn't have it unsupported from the body, so now if need to temporarily let go for some reason I need a tripod (or I let go without needing to, like we've become aware wrt. subconscious face touching in the last few months...) What about the buying process? I'm thinking about used for the obvious reason (after getting over my hangup over it not being "perfect") but I've been told for that that you definitely want to try the lens out at a store. But then I'm so excited about this that once I've made a decision, I don't wanna wait weeks or even months for stores to open up!  (edited to add, this is actually in good in forcing me to do some more thorough research instead of shooting my load too early because I want to have one in the mail tonight! I'm loving the filtering tool on dpreviews, any other must-use resources in this journey?)
vessbot fucked around with this message at 19:18 on May 22, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 18:58
|
|
|
vessbot posted:Yeah, I should specify that I'm interested in handheld only. And even in keeping to beginner to mid level gear, I don't want to hamstring my ability to shoot closer to dusk, which points me toward IS. Rent the lens first if you can.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 10:53
|
|
|
vessbot posted:
Sorry, no, I don't think I used it. quote:I looked at the Tamron 150-600, and after I got past the woozy fantasies of having something like that to shoot with, I think that it's at a level beyond where I'm looking to be, in terms of walking around ability. It says it's so heavy that you shouldn't have it unsupported from the body, so now if need to temporarily let go for some reason I need a tripod (or I let go without needing to, like we've become aware wrt. subconscious face touching in the last few months...) quote:What about the buying process? I'm thinking about used for the obvious reason (after getting over my hangup over it not being "perfect") but I've been told for that that you definitely want to try the lens out at a store. But then I'm so excited about this that once I've made a decision, I don't wanna wait weeks or even months for stores to open up!
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2020 15:53
|
|
|
 Barn Swallows by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr Tree Swallow by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr Killdeer by Tyler Huestis, on FlickrMissed the focus on this one, but still like how it turned out  Yellow Warbler by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2020 16:38
|
|
|
I went to go trim a bush by the back patio this afternoon, I guess I won’t be doing that for a while!  
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2020 01:11
|
|
|
Hey guys! So I did something irresponsible. Tamron 100-400 came in the mail this morning. I was just floored. Also I appreciate it that much more after spending a few weeks cropping thumbnail sized birds out of a 55mm shot. Most of these were in the shade, looking into the sun, etc. I can't wait to get my mind re-blown the first time I have good light.  [/url]IMG_8322 IMG_8098  IMG_7756Overexposed and overfed:  IMG_7691 IMG_7737 IMG_8159e: if it's got wings and is airborne, can it be an honorable bird? Also I got ID's on all of them but one, does anyone know the messy looking black one below the crow? vessbot fucked around with this message at 05:06 on May 28, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2020 04:38
|
|
|
vessbot posted:Also I got ID's on all of them but one, does anyone know the messy looking black one below the crow? Congratulations! It appears to be an immature grackle.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2020 19:12
|
|
|
 tui by Marc, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2020 05:53
|
|
|
Raikyn posted:
Such a character, Tuis are great fun to photograph.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2020 09:00
|
|
|
Finally managed to get out to shoot some birds. A trio of little brown jobs  Linnet by Aves Lux, on Flickr  Nesting by Aves Lux, on Flickr  Male Reed Runting on a reed. by Aves Lux, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2020 17:54
|
|
|
 DSC_0068-Edit.jpg by Steven Sarginson, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 05:55
|
|
|
Nice moody pigeon in East Berlin. Let me counter that with this cute little guy in this pretty, dreamy setting:  After a few outings with my new lens, I got some birds doing things slightly more interesting then just being birds. I count "flying" as one of those slightly more interesting things, because holy drat, it's hard to get! With the kit lens at 55mm, I could actually pretty reliably whip over to track something (especially because I had great situational awareness with my other eye open and at the same zoom level) but of course everything is tiny. I did get some close ups of robins I snuck up on until they took off, that would have been great, except they're all against the ground as background, and flying directly away from me. Now with the 400mm lens... absolutely no way. After a few days, it feels like it set at about 125-150 mm is about the closest one might have any realistic hope of whipping up and tracking something. (And I mean mostly smaller things like robins and starlings.) How does this match up with everyone else's experience? The only bigger, slower bird around here is the occasional crow, which it feels like after enough practice I could be able to start tracking and then zoom tighter. But it only happens rarely enough that any time I get one, the excitement shakes up everything immediately. It seems the only way to get a flying bird at the tighter zoom levels is to frame it up sitting on a branch with some space in front, try to guess when it'll take off, and start shooting in burst. (It was a nice surprise when I turned off raw that the burst buffer went from 10 to 40 shots, and would write off faster too.) So this way, I finally got a few flyers. Any other flyer tips/general discussion? I feel like there surely must have been before in the thread, but if anyone might have some page numbers... Anyway let's start with this cardinal shaking the poo poo out of this poor little worm (I love how the light caught the water droplets... or worm juice, whatever)  ... and flying away! Sorry about the severe overexposure, but it was my first flyer with the new lens, and I don't want to let it go...  It's falling, with style!  Robin back with the kit lens, but I felt worth including  I'd say my best flyer to date. Starling?  Can anyone get an ID?  Here he is on the ground for reference  A  And fully embroiled  edited to remove a few more ones I'd posted before, oops! vessbot fucked around with this message at 19:57 on Jun 6, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2020 05:55
|
|
|
Your black bird is a grackle, as is the juvenile, I think.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2020 08:31
|
|
|
I keep scoring "grackle" on all these unknown birds!
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2020 15:39
|
|
|
The last two are House Sparrows not Song Sparrows.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2020 16:26
|
|
|
Fart Amplifier posted:
really like this one Photographed a Bobolink for the first time, they have the coolest call - they sound like random 1980s computer noises  Bobolink by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr Eastern Kingbird by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr Tree Swallow by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2020 04:18
|
|
|
 Puffy by B. B., on Flickr Planting Chickens by B. B., on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2020 17:34
|
|
|
Yesterday was a good day, had rained the night before, was due to be nice for a day guess Barn Owl might be out earlyish evening with good enough light for the 400 + extender even at f/8 etc. Barn Owl Flight by Aves Lux, on Flickr  Barn Owl Talons by Aves Lux, on Flickr jarlywarly fucked around with this message at 12:30 on Jun 14, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2020 12:28
|
|
|
Great shots. So I picked up an 80-200 Nikkor f/2.8 with some other lenses I bought from my buddy WILD EEPROM. I tend to use a Tamron 150-600 (the bad, early version) and I'm wondering if I might be able to use a 2x teleconverter on the 80-200 and have better results, since the Tamron is so soft even at f8. Is f2.8 too small an aperture to really consider using a TC with?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 07:55
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:Great shots. I don't know what you mean by too small, f/2.8 is a wide aperture for a telephoto and wide apertures tend to teleconvert the best in terms of resultant aperture and AF points. For specific experiences with lenses on bodies with telelconverters it's best to read reviews or hire the teleconverter. With a 2x you will lose 2 stops so you'll be at f/5.6 and possibly will lose a certain amount of focus points AF may become slower or not work depending on your body. https://www.nikonusa.com/en/learn-a...20of%20f%2F5.6. http://www.nikon-asia.com/kdb/EN/2006/4909/nikkor_teleconverters.pdf
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 09:47
|
|
|
jarlywarly posted:I don't know what you mean by too small, f/2.8 is a wide aperture for a telephoto and wide apertures tend to teleconvert the best in terms of resultant aperture and AF points. For specific experiences with lenses on bodies with telelconverters it's best to read reviews or hire the teleconverter. Hey, yeah sorry I understand how they work and losing stops and such, I should have worded my question better. I guess I'm actually curious if a 400 f/5.6 is fast enough because I think I'd be shooting it at 1/1000 anyways so even with good light that's a little high on ISO probably. The lens also doesn't have VR so it's 1/1000+ maybe faster.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 10:18
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:Hey, yeah sorry I understand how they work and losing stops and such, I should have worded my question better. I guess I'm actually curious if a 400 f/5.6 is fast enough because I think I'd be shooting it at 1/1000 anyways so even with good light that's a little high on ISO probably. Not having VR is a problem handheld. 400mm f/5.6 is pretty standard for longer "cheaper" handhold able telephoto zooms, it's what I use generally 100-400 f/4.5-f/5.6 IS L II (except I put a TC on and go down to f/8 when the light is good) high ISO is just the price we pay for handheld tele. That owl shot was was handheld 560mm shutter prio at 1/1600, with the camera selecting f/8 and ISO 500, I did have very nice light though and Barn Owls are very bright, so you can turn the exposure compensation right down. When I was photographing the owl there was another guy there shooting with me, he had an older 400 prime f/2.8 with the same teleconverter so he was at 560mm as well but at f/4 but that lens is so heavy he was on a tripod with gimbal. Now the owl flew around a bit and got a mouse and went to sit in a tree but it was too far away and the sun was behind a cloud and as it was later on the shots were not good (ISO was unacceptable). 560mm, f/8, 1/1000, ISO 1250  Then the sun came out and the light was glorious the owl could fly from the perch at anytime and given the location the Owl would have to fly generally towards us now I looked at the positions and reckoned the owl would fly directly towards me if I was 200 meters down the track, so I was able to just walk there and keep an eye on it in case it flew while I was moving the guy with the tripod stayed where he was as otherwise he would miss the shots if the owl moved and he had to plonk down his gear. In the end I was right and the owl flew directly at me and I got the shot I got. whereas he was further away. jarlywarly fucked around with this message at 12:26 on Jun 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 12:16
|
|
|
jarlywarly posted:Not having VR is a problem handheld. Thanks for the time spent writing. Sounds like it'll be acceptable at least most of the time with good light, guess I'll keep my eyes open for a 2x tele in F mount.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 12:29
|
|
|
I was just cropping my owl shot for Instagram (ugh 1080 pixel square crop but the only way my friends will see some of my work) Just for a laugh I tried to figure out what focal length I'd have needed if I only wanted the same crop at 100% pixels i.e. shooting for Instagram with no resizing. Barn Owl wingspan + a small amount of breathing room is say about 1 meter, approx focal distance from EXIF is 43 meters, 24 megapixel APS-C (6000x4000) 1.6x crop factor. Online calculators reckon I need 200mm to do that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2020 13:11
|
|
|
 Close Pass by B. B., on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2020 00:36
|
|
|
Guyz! Hey guyz! I just left the neighborhood for the park, and got some of my first serious flying bird shots!      Iiii'm just gonna go ahead and count this one.     
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2020 01:21
|
|
|
I've not been out photographing much and even worse at actually posting stuff here. Best thing that's happened this spring is having some luck with some local owl nests. The first was right in the parking lot of my local park. There were ravens in it lat winter and then I checked on it again a bit later and there was an owl. Finally a few days ago the owlets left the nest. The first two pics are of one of these chicks. Still in the super fluffy stage... Wildcat Owl Nest-3764 on Flickr Wildcat Owlet-3747 on FlickrAbout a month ago I heard another bunch of loud babies elsewhere in the park and they've stuck around for a few weeks for some photos.  Wildcat Owlet pair-3864 on Flickr Wildcat Owlet pair-3873 on FlickrI'd occasionally still see one or both of the parents around too.  Wildcat owl golden hour, on FlickrBonus vulture from near my house  Gyuto TV-3482 on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2020 01:31
|
|
|
Fledgeling Red Winged Blackbird Cedar Waxwing  Northern Shoveler  Whitebreasted Nuthatch 
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2020 23:28
|
|
|
Nice set, Waxwings are the best!
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2020 23:43
|
|
|
Someone loaned me a camera and I have no idea what I'm doing, but these came out well.  
Tanith fucked around with this message at 02:40 on Jun 22, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2020 02:37
|
|
|
Back out today, this time with the sun out    
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2020 05:33
|
|
|
 DSC_0571.jpg by Steven Sarginson, on Flickr DSC_0807.jpg by Steven Sarginson, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2020 05:52
|
|
|
I don't often take photo of birds but sometimes I do if I spot one nearby. I also don't often post on the forums but I lurk a lot and like to look at you guys' bird shots. With the whole 'forums might be going away but then possibly not now going away' I decided I should post more. So here are some birds I've got over the past year. I took this out of my car window while eating an icecream, I like how the flying one is looking at the other one like he's gonna attack him or something but really he just landed next to him.  A robin! Robins rock cos they're the only birds in my local woods that will come super close and chill out while i'm chilling out with my friend and his dog.  I took this one in my back garden, I learned recently that starlings are invasive in the US so are uncool but they're native here so this guy is cool. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2020 08:36
|
|
|
Post 'em if you got 'em! Love the robin. Nice stuff Fart Amplifier and vessbot too (that great blue with the fish, awesome). Some almost grown up birds  Black Phoebe juv-3949 on Flickr Young Raven-3916 on FlickrAnd I'm pretty stoked about this wrentit. I hear them all the time but they're usually hiding.  Wrentit-4014 on Flickr Wrentit-4031 on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2020 00:19
|
|
|
 Edited to add the lady, who is (to my eye) uncharacteristically yellow: 
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 18:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 21:07 |
|
|
 Juvenile Thrush on Flickr  House Sparrow on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2020 23:33
|
|
