|
Slotducks posted:Dunno if this is warranted but I started doing this to my bird shots and the results have my shots pop way more than I would just in Lightroom: Good tips! Followed that channel and already tried out some of the techniques. I think this dude is a willow warbler: 
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2021 10:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 22:32 |
|
|
Gnabbed this nice Tree Swallow last week:
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 14:05
|
|
|
Sorry for spamming the thread but here's a young great tit waiting to be fed:
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2021 05:59
|
|
|
Hello bird thread. Willie wagtail.  Wedge-tailed eagle. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2021 04:22
|
|
|
Here's some Barn Swallows Barn Swallow by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr Barn Swallow by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr Barn Swallow by Tyler Huestis, on FlickrAnd a ton of Warblers  Yellow Warbler by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr Yellow Warbler by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr Yellow Warbler by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr Yellow Warbler by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr Yellow Warbler by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr Yellow Warbler by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr Yellow Warbler by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2021 15:38
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2021 00:08
|
|
|
A lucky shot Tui coming in by Marc, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2021 06:47
|
|
|
 This Heron gave me a lesson in how to fish - about 25ft away from me; caught about 6 fish with ease.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2021 17:55
|
|
|
This chick's about to fledge. I've got one more chance to catch it tomorrow morning before going away for work for 4 days   Better build up that strength!  Lotsa fighting going on Crow getting mobbed by Baltimore oriole and (look closely) bluejay.    
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2021 03:54
|
|
|
That last shot!
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2021 13:31
|
|
|
So, as someone who is newly into birds but doesn't have $15,000 to spend on an amazing camera and an amazing lens, is there a pretty good "beginner" camera I can get? I just want to be able to get fairly sharp pictures of birds from a nice distance. If my budget is < $1,000, what is the best option? P.S. I don't want the sassy, "for under a thousand dollars you may as well just use your cameraphone har har" answers. I'm a beginner on a budget, there must be some satisfactory camera that I can have fun with for that price.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 03:05
|
|
|
fawning deference posted:So, as someone who is newly into birds but doesn't have $15,000 to spend on an amazing camera and an amazing lens, is there a pretty good "beginner" camera I can get? I just want to be able to get fairly sharp pictures of birds from a nice distance. If my budget is < $1,000, what is the best option? Used m4/3 camera. Drop into the mirror less thread for some more specifics. We're not gear snobs here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 03:13
|
|
|
fawning deference posted:So, as someone who is newly into birds but doesn't have $15,000 to spend on an amazing camera and an amazing lens, is there a pretty good "beginner" camera I can get? I just want to be able to get fairly sharp pictures of birds from a nice distance. If my budget is < $1,000, what is the best option? This was taken with a used X-T20 and a new-from-ebay 50-230mm f/4.5-6.7, total cost about $500: TheFluff posted:Bird: This was taken with the same used X-T20 and a circa 1980 Soligor 400mm f/6.3 with manual focus and manual aperture via an M42 screw mount adapter (lens probably worth less than the adapter):  (can't recommend doing this though, manual focus birding is really hard and these old lenses kinda suck, unfortunately.) It's much harder to take bird photos with a 230mm lens than with a 400mm, but it's certainly possible. You can do a lot better for under $1k than I did though; if you go Fuji there's not much in the way of upgrades beyond the 50-230 except the 100-400, which is like $1800 new. The lens is probably going to be the bigger part of the budget, so consider looking at prices for used lenses first. e: if you just wanna dip your toes in the water there are used superzoom compacts that are really cheap, like the Lumix FZ series cameras, but these... kinda suck, in a lot of ways. Fun if you just want to point and click at birds but the image quality ain't great and they're not good at learning good photographer habits on. TheFluff fucked around with this message at 10:28 on Jun 21, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 09:44
|
|
|
fawning deference posted:So, as someone who is newly into birds but doesn't have $15,000 to spend on an amazing camera and an amazing lens, is there a pretty good "beginner" camera I can get? I just want to be able to get fairly sharp pictures of birds from a nice distance. If my budget is < $1,000, what is the best option? Look in to options such as Nikon P950, P1000, Canon SX70, Sony HX400V, Panasonic DC-FZ1000 II. The camera section of BirdForum.net has threads on most of them populated with experience by birders. The challenge with recommending interchangeable lens systems, even when going second hand, is the lenses. Lenses depreciation is a lot slower, so finding a cheap lenses that is a big step up in quality is the limiting factor. You could pick up a used Canon DSLR and Canon 100-400 mark I for under $1000. The question is should you? Dedicated bird photography really is a whole change in mindset from 'general bird watching complimented with some photography as you go'. It justifies the cost, complexity and weight of high-end gear. But for the casual user, it could just be a burden. A great camera won't take great photos if it gets left at home. Only you can answer the question of your dedication. Will you leave heavy or bulky gear at home? Will the novelty wear off? Will the reverse be true where you fall down the bird photography rabbit hole?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 11:05
|
|
|
A superzoom would be my starting point for someone who is not already a photographer. Generalising there are 3 sorts of bird photogs People who just want to take the odd shot of a duck or a robin etc they see on a walk are not too worried about quality, superzoom is great here. Start here. The "f/8 ISO 1600" crew, Budget enthusiasts who know where to go and when but just don't quite have the budget and time to invest past 2-3k or so. Occasionally getting some great shots when the light is right and the luck is with you, generally using a crop DSLR/mirrorless and the midrange teles (100-400/150-600mm) 7Dmk2 and a Sigma 150-600 tele is common here as is M4/3rds. You can really bridge the gap here with post processing knowledge, bird/location knowledge and knowing your gear well. Most of use here basically. The entry level f/4 camo gear and a tripod crew, gear probably cost between 6k - high quality images but with no ergonomics, really heavy older FF cameras with older generation f/4 lenses and extenders and a big heavy tripod limited by weight but the quality is good, pick a spot and stay there for a while, or drive around twitching, helps if you are retired/single. Then there are people with infinite (15k) budget, Canon 1DxIV or R5 - 400mm f/2.8 III and 2x extender or 600mm f/4 IS III with the 1.4x the weight is less (3-4kgs) but still significant, you are not walking too far/fast with this setup but it is much more handholdable This guy has that setup if you want to see what it does. https://www.flickr.com/photos/robamyphotos/ jarlywarly fucked around with this message at 13:11 on Jun 21, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 12:15
|
|
|
jarlywarly posted:The "f/8 crew ISO 1600" crew, Budget enthusiasts who know where to go and when but just don't quite have the budget and time to invest past 2-3k or so. Occasionally getting some great shots when the light is right and the luck is with you, generally using a crop DSLR/mirrorless and the midrange teles (100-400/150-600mm) 7Dmk2 and a Sigma 150-600 tele is common here as is M4/3rds. You can really bridge the gap here with post processing knowledge, bird/location knowledge and knowing your gear well. Most of us here basically. f/8 ISO 1600 crew  This is a good thing to point out tho - most of the photos you see ITT are taken with gear that's closer to the $1500 price class on the used market, not in the $15000 class. The widely used Tamron 150-600 is like $1300 new, but you can find older models on the used market for much, much less. TheFluff fucked around with this message at 12:44 on Jun 21, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 12:40
|
|
|
TheFluff posted:This was taken with a used X-T20 and a new-from-ebay 50-230mm f/4.5-6.7, total cost about $500: Don't skip the new 70-300 Fuji. That thing is scary sharp (once you update the firmware so the IS works right) and not that expensive. Faster than the 230, too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 12:59
|
|
|
These are great responses. I live in Connecticut and my house is surrounded by woods. I see 10+ species at my feeder setup every day and there's endless great hiking around me. I'm not going to be the person who brings a bulky camera with me every day to try to catch birds in action, but I will be shooting a lot from home and a fair amount on hiking trails, too. So, my dedication level is less photography enthusiast and more bird enthusiast with a camera to capture some great pictures now and then near me. I'm sure I'll get myself to a higher level with better gear at a later point. I've been confused about lenses. I'm unfortunately someone who knows very little about camera lenses, how difficult they are to set right and interchange, and how to know whether not they are compatible with my camera, etc. $1500 as a budget stretch is possible for the right stuff. This information of "buy used" is also interesting! Is there a great place to peruse used cameras and lenses? That would be an optimal way to go, I think, while I get the hang of using a camera in general.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 13:57
|
|
|
fawning deference posted:These are great responses. If you're coming at it from that angle, then I agree with previous posters - an interchangeable lens camera might not be the right option for you. That option makes more sense if you're more interested in photography than in birding, but you sound like you're more the other way around. Interchangeable lens cameras have better optics and better image quality, but they're more expensive, require more knowledge from the photographer for the best results, and they're usually bulkier too (if you include the lens - for reference my camera body+100-400mm lens combo weighs about 4 lbs and I consider that to be pretty lightweight). Don't spend a grand on gear if you don't even know if you like the photography hobby yet. I'd recommend a used compact superzoom (a few options were mentioned above), or for an even more "birding over photography" option, consider maybe getting a spotting scope plus an adapter for mounting your phone on it? The latter requires you to lug some kind of tripod or monopod around though. I don't know much about the used market in the US but someone else will probably chime in. TheFluff fucked around with this message at 16:10 on Jun 21, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 16:04
|
|
|
Have a look at mpb.com for used gear.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 16:13
|
|
|
my cat is norris posted:That last shot! It had the potential to be a lot sharper at this distance. But when something like this starts happening and my heart starts pounding, I didn't have the presence of mind to speed it up a few clicks from my general normal flight 1/1600, which won't work for fast flicky action. Much less the osprey not being panned with. So I'm bummed I missed the chance for a very rare amazing photo. Here's the next best one from the series. Less talon show, but you can see both of their faces. Also farther apart.  Barn swallows  
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 17:14
|
|
|
 I can't stop laughing at how weird juvenile Red Wing Blackbirds are
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 18:39
|
|
|
TheFluff posted:f/8 ISO 1600 crew Oh hi. Sometimes it's ISO 3200 too.  Short-Eared Owl by charliebravo77, on Flickr   Canon 80D and Tamron G2 150-600mm Biggest complaints are low light performance and frame rate but I can't stomach what it'd cost to get set up with the R5 right now so here we are.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 21:25
|
|
|
jarlywarly posted:The entry level f/4 camo gear and a tripod crew, gear probably cost between 6k - high quality images but with no ergonomics, really heavy older FF cameras with older generation f/4 lenses and extenders and a big heavy tripod limited by weight but the quality is good, pick a spot and stay there for a while, or drive around twitching, helps if you are retired/single.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 22:31
|
|
|
ISO 1600 crew checking in. These look like some of those incredible fishing shots, but it's actually one of the chicks that fell out of the nest and is stranded on the ground and struggling. I was shooting it just stretching its wings at 1/200 when it suddenly tried to fly and hopped along the water's surface toward me, with no time to change shutter, before flopping into the water. I was lucky to get these 2 sharp faces in the string, and the rest turned out great with the action.   Here it is beforehand. Handsome.  And a later, slightly more successful flying attempt. I counted 6 wing flaps in the series, completely unsupported. Still deciding whether to count it as a "yes" for witnessing an eagle's first flight, which is a pretty powerful concept that I've been after. This time not so lucky with getting something sharp. After this I decided I'm not shooting with a slow shutter any more.  Edited to reduce saturation after looking on 2 other devices. I need a better monitor, but my next purchase toward this hobby is definitely a lens. vessbot fucked around with this message at 22:04 on Jun 25, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2021 05:33
|
|
|
Dang vessbot you are killing it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2021 05:54
|
|
|
It fledged guys, it fledged! It's in full flight! 
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2021 15:56
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:Have a look at mpb.com for used gear. I'd trust keh.com over mpb any day since they actually use signature tracking, but maybe i just have bad luck. i ordered a Panasonic 100-300mm lens from mpb back in March and never received it. they told me to gently caress off, refused to make a FedEx insurance claim (FedEx 100% delivered it to the wrong address) and just kept my $400, which is a fuckload of money to spend on photography for someone like me. I've never even spent half that on a lens before This is why I'm still relegated to shooting with cheap rear end Minolta lenses from the 70s/80s. The 100mm f/2.5 I picked up for $65 to console myself has been fun, at least. both from last weekend: Catbird  Brown-headed cowbird couple 
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2021 17:16
|
|
|
Stevie Lee posted:I'd trust keh.com over mpb any day since they actually use signature tracking, but maybe i just have bad luck. i ordered a Panasonic 100-300mm lens from mpb back in March and never received it. they told me to gently caress off, refused to make a FedEx insurance claim (FedEx 100% delivered it to the wrong address) and just kept my $400, which is a fuckload of money to spend on photography for someone like me. I've never even spent half that on a lens before
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2021 17:57
|
|
|
they do seem reputable, i just had an awful experience the one and only time i ordered something from them, so I'm now required to poo poo on them wherever they're mentioned. I did try complaining at mpb's social media, but got nowhere. I actually made the mistake of ordering through their eBay store because it was slightly cheaper there, so i think i probably screwed myself out of any sort of resolution that doesn't involve me paying for it. PayPal was no help, and I already spent too much time fighting with them. I'm just gonna buy cheaper lenses and torture myself with manual focus instead I did just today receive a minolta MD 200mm f/4 that was a fraction of the price, so it should be a good birding weekend.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2021 18:44
|
|
|
Last afternoon I left with the eaglet having walked (and hopped, and doggie paddled, and probably one or two other modes of locomotion) a few hundred feet and climbed up the trunk of a small tilted tree. Well this morning I showed up and there was a small crowd, including some of the regulars, under a tree on the other side (well, our side) of the channel, where it was up in the canopy! Piecing together their stories, it had flown at least twice. Once up to its (unclimbable) nest tree, and once across the channel to where it was now. So then I witnessed what was likely its third flight! Normally I try to avoid spamming and try to select down to my absolute few favorites of a series, but for an event like this.... sorry not sorry: You beautiful young boy! Or girl, nobody really knows, but we all used our most affectionate pronouns.  Couldn't pick my favorite. Above, we have a little more slender profile, with light hitting some of the bright patches on one wing, which annoys me because of the inconsistency vs. the rest of the bird (it does this majorly on ospreys). OTOH, it makes it pop and give overall more dimension to the picture. Below, we have nice and even (if not boring) lighting, and showoff of more wing, but... more chonky profile.  Mean looking approach to landing  Oof!  Oh poo poo!  Shitshitshitshitshit  Phew! 
vessbot fucked around with this message at 05:04 on Jun 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 04:48
|
|
|
Stevie Lee posted:I did just today receive a minolta MD 200mm f/4 that was a fraction of the price, so it should be a good birding weekend. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 13:30
|
|
|
 Cedar Waxwing by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr Cedar Waxwing by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr Yellow Warbler by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr Yellow Warbler by Tyler Huestis, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2021 21:59
|
|
|
Any advise for the f8 crew on shooting in a dark, dense forest?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2021 12:43
|
|
|
Sorbus posted:Any advise for the f8 crew on shooting in a dark, dense forest? Auto iso with f8, 1/1000 I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2021 12:49
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:Auto iso with f8, 1/1000 I guess. 1/1000 at f/8 in a forest will give you ISOs well over 12800 unusable on some/most sensors. My only advice is to try and shoot at as a low a shutter speed as your dare especially if you have IS on the lens, you can get away with some low shutter speeds. Obviously only works for perched birds. If you are in the f/8 club you should own Topaz Denoise AI as well, it basically saves shots and makes your crops look much smoother/better in the bokeh even when you have good light. This shot was shot on a very dull overcast evening, at f/8 I dropped to 1/250 at 560mm (892mm FF equivalent) with IS on on my 80D it was still at ISO 1600 and Topaz really had to help out with it, 1/1000 would have been a much, much less usable ISO  Busy parent Blue Tit by Aves Lux, on Flickr This shot was at 1/800 on an Canon R5 in slightly sunnier patch in a dark forest, ISO 10000 was recoverable a bit with the FF sensor and Topaz, but if you pixel peep you can see the high frequency feather detail is just destroyed.  Fledgling Robin by Aves Lux, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2021 16:15
|
|
|
jarlywarly posted:1/1000 at f/8 in a forest will give you ISOs well over 12800 unusable on some/most sensors. Do you have before/after examples with topaz? I'd be curious. I guess I meant 1/1000 assuming OP was going to be taking photos of birds in flight with the tamron/sigma 150-600 at 600mm, hence needing f/8. I can't imagine shooting fast subjects at anything less than 1/1000 with that lens at f/8 600mm.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2021 17:42
|
|
|
osprey family great blue heron  baltimore oriole  juvenile cardinal 
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2021 18:56
|
|
|
Downloaded DeNoise and ended up buying it. Here are a couple of great spotted woodpeckers working on a spruce cone. With Denoise:  Without:  350mm (counts as 525mm) F8 SS 500 ISO 3200
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2021 09:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 22:32 |
|
|
 Rockhopper Penguin by CmdrKittens, on Flickr East African Crowned Crane by CmdrKittens, on Flickr Hadada Ibis by CmdrKittens, on Flickr Hadada Ibis by CmdrKittens, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2021 04:44
|
|
