How technolgy is changing Bird Photography

[manelson]

I have been having some great success with my current setup.  I wrote a brief blog entry that explains it in detail and why.  Have a peek if your interested at the Blog below.

Cheers,
Michael

[JMCDA]

Thank you Michael, that was very informative. I have been looking at the 500mm Nikon for a while but haven't had the courage to jump and spend the money, as I want to upgrade my camera as well from my current D40.  The longest lens I have now is 300mm which with the Nikon DX technology gives me 450mm.

...I guess by publishing this you think that the 3rd party lenses (sigma, tamron etc.) are as good quality as a Nikon would be, is one better than the other with a particular brand of camera and/or which would you choose to go with a Nikon D300, and also your suggestion of best place to buy?

Thanks so much!
Joann

[manelson]

Hi Joann, glad you like the blog.  For most people, photography is like religion so you will get very strong views about alot of things.  To answer your question I think Canon and Nikon lenses are superior to Tamron and Sigma.  Having said that - for the money -  you can get very fine quality out of either Tamron or Sigma.  As far as the D300 goes, I was about to buy it myself but ended up changing for the D90.  For the features that were important to me the D90 was equal and sometimes superior to the D300.  However they are both excellent cameras.  Having said that any Nikon or Canon middle to high end DSLR that came out in the last couple of years will have very good noise handling compared to the past.  You can that match it with a quality lightweight 200-500 or 50-500 or maybe 400mm zoom and you will not be disappointed.  I picked at Tamron 200-500 myself and am happy with the results.  You can see many of my photos on my blog - all shot with the Tamron although some were with the older D70 before I got the D90.

As far as where you would buy it, it really depends on what type of consumer you are.  If you want to just get the cheapest price then searching on ebay or the net would get that.  If you want any type of service then going to one of your local camera shops and pay maybe 50-75 dollars more then net prices would get you that service.  Go with a list of questions to compare the D90 and D300 and you can then judge them based on how they handle you.  Myself, I really treated it as a commodity and bought the D90 from whoever had the cheapest price at the time (boxing day)

[JTF]

Interesting article indeed. My current setup is a Nikon D50 w/80-400vr Nikon lense. My next body will be a D90, you made a good choice as the noise is alot less in the 90 for sure. After having my first published image this month in Birders World Magazine I have the urge to get a bigger lense for some reason I will take a look at the 200-500mm Tamron you mentioned, I still like the 80-400vr nikon but the little extra 100mm can make a difference on some shots. Nice of you to post such an informative piece, thanks for the helpful info.

[ichiro17]

Its great that you are trying to inform people, but I do take some of it with a grain of salt.  I will point out where I find points that should be revised:

"a quality 500mm lens (the best for bird photography)" - no, the 500mm is a popular one, but the 600mm, and 800mm (gaining popularity among avid pros) are just as good.  I notice the reference to a lot of zooms.  From my opinion, zooms are not worth it for quality photographs.  You will always be at the higher end of the zoom range, which will always suffer from lack of sharpness.  I have a Canon EF 500mm F/4 prime and its the best lens for me and my system because of many considerations.  One being that its lighter than the 600mm, and it was more affordable, handholding possibilities are there for a small amount of time, and its optically fantastic.  Way better than my 100-400 at 400mm in terms of sharpness and its image quality is great.  I cannot speak for Nikon users, but I'm sure that the lenses are just as good, but also unjustifiably more expensive than Canon's.  And yes, its big, heavy and awkward, but birding isn't about chasing birds, its about them coming to you so you can photograph them naturally.

In addition, you will almost always need a 1.4x teleconverter, because the birds are never close enough.  You will lose autofocus on any of the zooms (except the 200-400mm VR from Nikon I believe) and that is useless in bird photography.  The autofocus is a key component to capturing great shots.  I wouldn't recommend going from a D50 to a D90.  Its hardly worth it for what you get.  If you can grab a D200 or D300, you will be better off in that the autofocus is WAY better, and you will have a much better body to withstand the weather conditions.  

Another thing no one talks about is a blind.  This year I'm making it my mission to photograph the belted kingfisher and to do so I will need a blind.  There isn't any lens that will get me close enough that the bird will not fly away, so the use of the blind is imperative.  And its the best way to catch the birds doing what they do best in a natural environment without feeling threatened.  

Just a few points you may want to consider

[JMCDA]

Interesting article indeed. My current setup is a Nikon D50 w/80-400vr Nikon lense. My next body will be a D90, you made a good choice as the noise is alot less in the 90 for sure. After having my first published image this month in Birders World Magazine I have the urge to get a bigger lense for some reason I will take a look at the 200-500mm Tamron you mentioned, I still like the 80-400vr nikon but the little extra 100mm can make a difference on some shots. Nice of you to post such an informative piece, thanks for the helpful info.

That was a beautiful picture Paul, can't believe you used a D50...I bought one for my son the year before I got my D40, he hardly uses it, so I may have to give it a tryout. :-)

Joann

[Kin Lau]

Its great that you are trying to inform people, but I do take some of it with a grain of salt.  I will point out where I find points that should be revised:

I think you missed the point of the article. It's geared towards _birders_ who want some good photos as oppose to _photographers_ who are willing to sit all day for one bird.

[JMCDA]

Myself, I really treated it as a commodity and bought the D90 from whoever had the cheapest price at the time (boxing day)

I think I would rather light my hair on fire than go to a electronics store on boxing day! LOL

I've been going back and forth on the D90 vs D300 for a while now, can't even remember what "review" swayed me to stick with the D300, I really need to get to Henrys and try them both out again.  Lens...I know I want more but I also want a macro for flowers and bugs (((sigh)))

...we are booked for the first part of May at Rondeau, and then finish the month at the Huron Fringe Birding Festival...I will wait and see how I do with what I have as to what lens will make me happy - I use my pics for artistic reference, so I really don't need the pro quality you guys work with, but I would like to have it anyway! :-)

Joann

[Vicsr]

Your article was very interesting & informative. I like that you are talking about using Tamron & Sigma lenses because they do provide good value for their cost. In my opinion though your article is geared to the more advanced photographer rather than the average birder who wants some decent pictures of the birds they see. The main reason I say that is money!  Lenses alone like the ones you mention cost more than my complete outfit! (Nikon D80; Nikon 70-300 VR lens) I guess it is what your budget will allow. Would I like to have a 500mm lens? Definitely but what I have will still get me close enough & provide me with excellent pictures. Also the advances in editing software (availability & ease of use) mean I can correct most of the flaws caused by a lower level of equipment!

Thanks for writing the article. I enjoyed reading it & seeing your photographic work.

Vic

[manelson]

Wow, I think this topic created a bit of controversy.  Well in the end it is all about choices and tradeoffs I think.  I think we just need to try and be honest with ourselves as to what we are trading off.  

Nikon and Canon Stabilization Technology
I didn't even mention this in my blog but essentially this allows you to shoot at lower shutter speeds then with out it.  This allows you to handhold in many more situations ( providing of course the weight is not too high).  I would NOT trade a Nikon 400mm zoom VR for my Tamron 200-500.  Stick with what you have - the difference of 100mm you trade off with less flexibility with the Tamron.  I am assuming weight is similar.

On the D90 vs D300
Again, all about choices and tradeoffs.  First, the D300 is a better camera.  Having said that look at what features you would ACTUALLY use and then compare.  For most of us those features are identical.  I was all set to purchase the D300 and went with the D90. Keep in mind the price is quite different so if your needs can be met by both I would buy the D90 and invest the savings on the lens front.   I like the primitive HD Video mode in the D90.  This broke the tie for me.  I use the Video mode mostly for iding birds.   It comes in very handy.  Iding a bird using video is so much easier then using a few pictures.  As I travel alot there are so many birds I don't know!!!

Again, I want to say that I do not dispute that a 500mm ( or higher as pointed out) will shoot a higher quality picture.  No doubt it will.  I just want people to realize that there are tradoffs to every choice.  The trade off with a large prime is you will miss bird shots.  The weight and setup time will cause you to miss shots.  You won't be spending 5 hours walking up the Pipeline Rd through the rainforest in Panama carrying a 500mm prime, tripod, binoculars, fieldguide etc.  I can just barely do it with my setup.  The point of the Blog is that, FOR A BIRDER, technology has advanced enough to get very good shots with the techniques I suggest.  Photographs you could proudly frame in your home.

Cheers,
Michael

[Vicsr]

One of the advantages of having a Henry's or similar photography store near you is the ability to rent equipment. If you are about to make a significant investment in equipment (buying that top of the line Nikon or Canon; getting that special telephoto lens) & have read all the reviews but are still undecided, renting to try the equipment out may be a good option. Do you want the 200-500mm Tamron/Sigma or the Nikon 400VR? Should it be the Nikon D90 or D300? Well if you had your hands on one for a weekend of birding would that help your decision? Check out the cost of renting - it may be the thing that saves you from getting a piece of equipment that you are not happy with. I do racing photography in the summer & rented a 500mm lens to try because I saw the pros using them. I found out that I can do everything I want with what I have, that the difference wasn't worth the price so didn't blow the family budget to buy the lens "I just had to have"!
Michael, there will always be the controversy about which is better, Canon or Nikon; Sigma/Tamron or Nikon/Canon & even within the manufacturer's models - D90 or D300. My racing photography friends mostly use Nikons & we say anyone with a Canon has gone over to the "Dark Side"!   :roll:  Let's be honest - If you get a great shot, it was obviously the photographer's ability that produced it; if the shot is bad, it MUST have been the equipment!

[manelson]

Vicsr, Well said!!!  Great idea re renting the equipment!

Cheers,

[Kin Lau]

Check out the cost of renting - it may be the thing that saves you from getting a piece of equipment that you are not happy with. I do racing photography in the summer & rented a 500mm lens to try because I saw the pros using them.

Seriously... who rents out 500mm lenses in Toronto? Not Vistek or Henry's or Headshots, I've checked. The longest I've found is 400mm.

[accwai]

[...] The trade off with a large prime is you will miss bird shots.  The weight and setup time will cause you to miss shots.  You won't be spending 5 hours walking up the Pipeline Rd through the rainforest in Panama carrying a 500mm prime, tripod, binoculars, fieldguide etc.  I can just barely do it with my setup.

Your example seems pretty extreme.  Sure, walking with a supertele for 5 hours would be brutal, but I'd say 2+ hours is perfectly doable.  And for those truly dedicated, I don't think 5 hours is completely out of the question--it's all in the planning...  Also, most people who are into the heavy stuff have lighter equipment as well.  So it isn't a clear cut either or question as you presented.

Also, a big supertele focuses much faster and with much greater exactness at long distance than a small supertele, let alone a telezoom.   And 1.4x TC has very little effect on them.  Under marginal conditions, you miss less shots, not more.  If you can get them there in the first place, that is.

Andy

[manelson]

Hi, Yes I agree with all of your points of the advantages of the prime.  If only they could make one for 1/3 price and 1/3 the weight. :-)  Of course I wouldn't be able to write a blog about it if they didn't.  Seriously its all about tradeoffs and I don't see a perfect solution.  I just wanted to give another solution for birders to think about that can achieve great results.  


Cheers
Michael