Bird Photography
Basics
First things first...ANYBODY CAN DO THIS!!! YOU can do this. Taking photos of birds is NOT rocket science. YOU are fully capable of taking photos every bit as good as anything on this website. Bird photography is just as much about how to get close to birds than it is about the technical aspects of the photography. Neither aspect of bird photography is difficult...YOU can learn how to take photos every bit as good as any "pro" nature photographer. My biggest pet peeve in life...elitist folks and snobs. Goodness knows you meet those types of folks in any endeavor, and the world of nature photography has just as many of them as any hobby/profession. In reality...bird photography is NOT that difficult. Do you have patience? Do you have a love of nature? Do you get a thrill out of capturing nature's riches in an image? Then YOU are capable of producing world-class photos that can match any photo a "professional" nature photographer can produce. With that said...
The ideal solution to good bird photography? MARRY A RICH PERSON!!! In terms of equipment, my collection is sometimes inadequate for bird photography. I get my share of good photos, but I also miss some opportunities because my equipment simply isn't "long" enough or fast enough. A word of warning...bird photography can be a VERY expensive hobby, especially if you hope to someday compete with professional bird photographers.
Given up yet? Don't!!! I have too many hobbies, and can't afford to spend all my "fun" money for a super long, high-quality lens. However, I still have a great time birding, and still manage to get some nice photos. I would KILL to have a 600mm, 4.0 lens, but unless some kind soul reading this donates the necessary $10,000, I'll get by with what I have. Patience and persistence is free, and can (often) compensate for equipment that is a little lacking.
What follows is my personal take on equipment and technique. I'll try to give both the "Ideal" solution and the "Practical" solution for each section. Given today's option of digital vs. film, I'll also try to make appropriate comments when necessary. This is my first attempt at writing on the topic, so I'm sure I'm missing some important points. Go ahead and let me know if you think there's something that needs to be addressed! I hope this is helpful.
I use a Canon camera body and lenses, but this page isn't meant to endorse any particular product. Nikon also makes wonderful products. Right off the bat, here's what I currently shoot with, and my take on them:
BODIES:
Canon 50D (New -- December 2008) -- This is now my primary camera body. It has several advantages over the 20D, one being a 15.1 MP sensor instead of the 8 MP on the 20D. Megapixels aren't everything though, and all thing being equal, I probably wouldn't have purchased the 50D if that were the ONLY improvement. Auto-focus is improved over the 20D, noise levels are quite good, especially considering this is a 15.1 MP APS-C sensor, and it's got a tremendously improved back LCD than on previous Canon models in this line. All in all, I'd highly recommend this camera body for birding.
Canon 20D (New in March 2005) -- This is now my backup birding camera body. I won this body in a photo contest!! At this stage, most of the photos on my website were taken with this body. GREAT body, and still fully capable of providing great shots.
LENSES:
1) Canon 400mm 5.6L -- My primary bird lens. Price? Around $1100. Keep in mind to get the Canon 600mm most birders use, you'd need an extra $8,000 laying around. ESPECIALLY considering the cropping factor of 1.6x of multiple Canon digital SLR's, the 400mm lens will be able to get you many great shots, and it's an EXTREMELY high-quality and VERY sharp lens.
2) Canon 70-200mm 4.0L -- One of the best bargains of the professional "L" series of Canon lenses. VERY sharp throughout the entire range, even when shot wide open. I HIGHLY recommend this lens, especially at the "bargain" price of between $500 and $600. It's obviously not as useful for bird photography, but at the longer end, can sometimes do very well for flight shots of bigger birds like wading birds and raptors.
3) Canon 50mm 1.8 -- The El Cheapo of the Canon Line, coming in at $75!! It's also very cheaply made (don't drop it)!! However...it's EXTREMELY sharp, and makes a great wider-angle lens. For the price, you might as well get one...and you will enjoy it.
4) Canon 17-40L -- High-quality "L" series, and with that 1.6x multiplication factor on the camera body, you NEED a lens this wide to have any kind of wide-angle capability with the 300D. Very sharp.
5) Canon 1.4x Teleconverter -- Read about teleconverters below. They "multiply" the effective focal length of your lens. My 400mm thus becomes a 560mm effective lens when I use it with my teleconverter.
FLASH:
Canon 430EX with "Better Beamer" -- This flash unit rarely leaves my camera body when I'm out taking photos. There are more powerful Canon flash units right now, but I've been quite happy with the 430EX. For bird photography, you have to couple the flash with a "Better Beamer", an actually quite flimsy looking attachment that goes on the flashhead, and significantly extends the range of your flash, something obviously very useful when shooting birds at distance with very long lenses.
Camera Body -- Digital vs. Film - Not even any argument anymore...go digital. What follows in this section is old...I'll update when I get time. In short, go digital, and you'll probably do very well with just about any DSLR camera body available on the market right now.
DIGITAL BODY - I'm not talking
about the cheaper "point-and-shoot" digital cameras that are
extremely popular. One thing you'll immediately learn is that you can
NEVER have a long enough lens, and most point-and-shoot cameras simply don't
have the reach you're going to need when photographing birds.
Point-and-shoot digital cameras often try to inflate their zoom potential by
mentioning a "digital" or "software" zoom. Don't
fall for it. A "digital" zoom is basically digitally blowing
up a smaller image to a larger size. The results will never be as good
as the equivalent "optical" zoom. Anyway...you'll want a
digital SLR, the digital equivalent of standard film camera bodies
that allow for the use of a wide variety of detachable lenses.
Advantages:
The most obvious...no need for film!! Purchasing and
processing film can be an expensive proposition when shooting
birds. Keep in mind that birds aren't the most considerate of
subjects! You'll often find yourself a bit frustrated when
that shot-of-a-lifetime disappears because you just weren't quite
quick enough in getting the shot. Unless you're really good or
really lucky, a good portion of the shots you take will be less than
ideal. With a digital body, it's no problem...you simply
delete the "bad" images. With film, you will
inevitably end up throwing out many of your shots, something of a
downer when you're paying for film and developing. With a digital body, your images are recorded in a
digital format. Given the large number of digital applications
(including my very own web page), having a digital camera eliminates
the need for a film or flatbed scanner, saving you some $$$$.
You'll also save yourself the time involved in scanning film
products. Zoom...Zoom...Zoom. If you get a digital SLR
that's compatible with many lens lines, chances are that your
"Zooms" will get "Zoomier" (this from a college
grad...). There is generally a multiplier ranging from 1.2 to
1.6 for most digital SLR's. What does that mean? If
there's a 1.4 multiplier, it means your 300mm lens has suddenly
become a 420mm lens when attached to the digital body. Given
that you can NEVER have a long enough lens in bird photography, this
is a definite plus. Disadvantages:
Cost. The cheapest digital SLR body right now
is around $700. As of the date I'm writing
this, digital SLR bodies are still MUCH more expensive than their film
counterparts. and this is expected to continue for the
foreseeable future. Resolution? I initially listed this as a
disadvantage. I really don't think so any more. The
lowest-res new digital SLR is a 6 megapixels. A 6 megapixel
camera will give you beautiful 8x10 prints, and I routinely make
13x19 prints with my 6.3 megapixel Canon 300D. In the
strictest sense, a 6 megapixel digital SLR probably doesn't give as
high a native resolution as high-quality film (and a good drum scan
to make a digital product from it). HOWEVER...digital SLR's do
MUCH better with regard to grain/noise. Film products have a
grain which often detracts from the look of bigger prints.
Digital SLR's equivalent to "grain" is "noise", but for the most
part, the photos you get from a digital will have a much smoother,
"noiseless" look to them than a film product shot. ![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
FILM BODY
(Haven't deleted this section yet, but I'm darn
close to deleting it!! FILM IS NOT AN OPTION any more!!! GO WITH A
DIGITAL SLR!!!!!) Advantages
Cost. You can purchase a very high-quality,
many-featured film SLR body for between $500-800. Very good
quality entry-level SLR's are available for $250 or even less. Availability, familiarity, and documentation.
Just a quick glance online will show the vast amount of resources
regarding film photography. Techniques, tips, equipment
reviews, etc...all are out there in great abundance. You
definitely won't feel like you're out there breaking new
ground. If you have any problem or photographic challenge, you
can generally be assured you're not the first, and you'll be able to
find the information you need. Disadvantages
Cost. Yeah, I know, I listed cost as an
advantage as well. While the camera body itself is less of an
investment, film and film developing can be a little pricey if
you're a very active photographer. Non-digital format. If you ever want to get
your photographs into a digital format for a web page, to e-mail to
your friends, etc, you'll need a film scanner if you get a film
camera body. Note I didn't say a flatbed scanner, the cheap,
often under $100 scanners that scan print products. To get the
highest quality digital products from your film camera, you'll need
a film/slide scanner. This will generally run $350 or more (at
the date of writing this). Waste. Shooting birds often results in
"bad" shots. You'll end up throwing away many shots,
shots for which you've shelled out $$$$ for film and developing. ![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
THE VERDICT - Practically everybody now has gone exclusively digital, and I HIGHLY recommend going with a digital SLR. Save your money and make one, up-front larger investment in a digital SLR and lenses. Once you choose a product line, you'll be able to use those lenses for decades (if handled properly). If money is an issue, I highly recommend spending money on LENSES FIRST, body 2nd. You don't NEED the fanciest $5,000 digital camera body to take GREAT, world class photos. There is very little practical difference, for example, in picture quality between Canon's latest "Digital Rebel" DSLR, and their next line up, the 20D / 30D / 40D / 50D line. There are definitely some bells and whistles on the higher-priced models that can be nice at times, but you can get GREAT picture quality on the most basic of DSLR's nowadays. What you DO need are sharp lenses, which is covered in the next section. So, if money is an issue, I still recommend saving and getting a DSLR, but use most of your initial investment on good lenses, and get just a basic DSLR.
LENSES - I've already mentioned it several times...you can NEVER have a long enough lens when photographing birds. When people first get into bird photography, they tend to grossly underestimate the length they'll need (I sure did), generally because the long telephoto lenses are so much longer than lenses generally used for photographing people, landscapes, etc. Many birds are quite small, and to fill the photographic frame with the bird often requires a beast of a lens. And one thing you'll learn very quickly in digital photography...it is the LENS that is the most important investment you can make, NOT the camera body (as mentioned above). If you've got money to spend, invest in high quality lenses. In my case, since I shoot with the Canon line, that means the "L" series of lenses. Costlier than "consumer" lenses, yes, but they truly do blow away the cheaper lenses in terms of image quality. Some tips regarding lenses and bird photography:
FOCAL LENGTH - Focal length is
measured in millimeters. The larger the number, the greater the
magnification and the narrower the field of view. The focal length
you'll require is dependent upon the types of shots you hope to get.
If you're looking for "habitat" shots that show the bird in its
natural surroundings, or if you're primarily photographing large birds, then
you could possibly get by with a 200 mm lens. However, if you're
looking for the "fill-the-frame" shots of small species of birds,
even a 600 mm lens could be "short" quite a bit of the time.
A word of warning...the longer telephoto lenses can cost as much as a good
used car. A 600 mm prime lens is likely going to cost in the
neighborhood of $8,000. Weight is another consideration, as that 600
mm lens may weigh as much as 20 pounds!!! Not exactly the type of lens
you'll be carrying around while you hike!!
Advice (Ideal) - Ideally, money wouldn't
be an issue. If this just does happen to be the case with you,
then I'd definitely shell out the $$$$ to get a 500mm or 600 mm prime lens, along
with a good 300 mm prime lens, and 1.4X and 2.0X teleconverters (read
about teleconverters below). With this combination, you'll
have the reach for most situations, but still be flexible enough to
capture the close and/or larger birds. Advice (Practical) - Hmmm...the
"ideal" lens set above (2 lenses, 2 teleconverters) will
likely cost in the neighborhood of $12,000. Ouch. If you're
like me and money IS definitely an issue, you can get by with a more
practical set of lenses. My longest lens is 400mm. Do I need
more length? No doubt I could use it at times. I miss some shots by only having a
400mm, and some of the shots I DO get end up having the bird filling
only 10% of the frame. Can I still have fun, and get some good
shots? Definitely!! As I said above, patience and persistence is free, and can (often)
compensate for equipment that is a little lacking (read
about techniques below). So what will a 400mm set you
back? A good, reasonably fast 300mm - 400mm prime lens will probably set
you back $600 to $1300. A zoom lens with a maximum reach of 300mm
- 400mm can be had at a considerably cheaper cost (as low as $200), but with
some significant sacrifice in sharpness, and likely in speed. ![]()
![]()
SPEED/APERTURE - The aperture
controls the amount of light that reaches the film (or digital sensor), and
is controlled by the size of the opening through which the light
passes. Aperture also controls the depth of field, the amount of
depth that is "in focus". Typical lens aperatures are f/2.8,
f/4, f/5.6, f/8.0, etc. The smaller the number, the wider the
aperture. The wider the aperture, the "faster" your lens is,
as it doesn't have to be open as long to collect the same amount of light as
a more narrow aperture. When photographing birds, a fast lens is
definitely an advantage. A faster lens allows the shutter speed to be
much quicker, which reduces the chances that you'll get "motion
blurring" of an active bird. It also gives you a better chance at
getting a decent shot in low-light conditions. Buy the fastest lens
that you can afford (smaller f/X numbers). Keep in mind that you
definitely will pay to get a faster lens. A Canon 300mm f/4.0 lens
will cost around $1100, while the 300mm f/2.8 lens will be closer to
$4,000!!! Also keep in mind the weight factor. Just as longer
focal lengths result in heavier lenses, faster speeds also generally come at
the cost of higher weight.
Advice (Ideal) - Ideally, you'd have the 600mm
f/4.0 lens, along with a very fast 300mm f/2.8. Both would be
quite heavy (especially the 600mm), but you'd definitely have the length
and speed to get most shots. Advice (Practical) - OK, let's say 300mm is the
most you can afford to start. If that is the case, does it make
sense to spend an extra $3000 to get the f/2.8 instead of the f/4.0?
Unless you're independently wealthy, spending $3000 for one extra f-stop
doesn't make a lot of sense in my book. Just make sure you don't
get anything slower than a f/5.6, or you will suffer from a lack of
speed (and lack of auto-focus on most camera bodies). And on a related note...faster speeds are great
for photographing birds, because they allow you to have fast shutter
speeds, reducing blurring on moving targets like birds. Canon also
has an "Image Stabilization" (IS) feature on many of their
higher quality lenses. The IS compensates for camera motion and
shaking when taking a shot, reducing the amount of blur you may see in
your photos. IS enables you to hand-hold a shot more often instead
of using a tripod, and is great for photographing birds. (See notes
on tripods below). ![]()
![]()
![]()
"PRIME" vs. ZOOM LENSES - "Prime"
lenses refer to those which have one, unadjustable focal length.
"Zoom" lenses typically have a continuous range of usable focal
length between two end marks. Zoom lenses have the advantage of
offering much greater flexibility. One zoom lens can be used for a
wide variety of situations. Prime lenses generally offer the advantage
of greater sharpness and less distortion. Using a 75mm-300mm zoom at
the 300mm length generally won't get you as sharp an image as a good 300mm
prime lens, and unfortunately for those doing bird photography, zoom lenses
tend to be the "softest" at the longer focal lengths.
Primes also generally allow the use of teleconverters
to extend effective focal length, something that often isn't possible with
zoom lenses.
Advice (Ideal) - Go with primes. You simply
can't beat the sharpness, and if you're after that great, publishable
photo, primes are the way to go. You'll need multiple lenses to
give yourself flexibility for different situations. If money were
no problem...once again, a 600mm f/4.0, a 300mm f/2.8, and 1.4X and 2.0X
teleconverters should cover most bird photography situations. Advice (Practical) - If you're like most people,
the $12,000 set above is too much. If possible, though, I'd still
recommend a good prime lens for bird photography. A 300mm f/4.0,
with 1.4X and 2.0X teleconverters, will probably cost around $1700 (at
least for the Canon line). You'll have great sharpness, and decent
reach. If this is still too much (as it was for me when I first
got my equipment), then go ahead and get a good zoom lens. I
initially bought
a cheap Canon 75mm-300mm zoom. 300mm is awfully short for a lot of situations,
but a 75mm-300mm zoom can cost you as little as $200. For a bit
more, you can get 100mm-400mm zooms, or even some zooms that go up to
500mm. Just keep in mind your photos might not be as
"tack-sharp" as you'd like. ![]()
![]()
TELECONVERTERS - Teleconverters
are basically little extenders which fit between your lens and the camera
body. The result is an increase in your effective focal length.
Teleconverters generally come in 2 magnification factors, 1.4X and
2.0X. Using a 1.4X with a 300mm lens will give you an effective focal
length of 420mm, while a 2.0X will give you can effective focal length of
600mm. Teleconverters sound like a GREAT idea for bird photographers,
as you're always wanting more length. Given a good, prime lens and a
good, compatible teleconverter, you WILL have an excellent combination for
bird photography. Keep in mind 2 things, however. Adding a
teleconverter will have an affect on sharpness and distortion. The
higher quality converters minimize this somewhat, but you will still suffer
a bit of loss in your sharpness. Teleconverters also make your lens
slower, with a 1 f-stop decrease with a 1.4X teleconverter and a 2-stop
decrease with a 2.0X teleconverter. If you use a 2.0X teleconverter
with a f/5.6 lens, you will end up with a VERY slow f/11 lens that will be
quite unusable for most birding situations. Teleconverters will be the
most effective if you have a fast lens to begin with, and if you're using
the teleconverter made by the manufacturer of your lens. A Canon lens,
for example, will probably work best with the Canon teleconverters.
Advice (Ideal) - Ideally, you'll have that 300mm
f/2.8, and the 600mm f/4.0. With the appropriate 1.4X and 2.0X
teleconverters, you'll have a wide range of options from a 300mm f/2.8
up to a monster 1200mm f/8, combinations which should fit the bill in
nearly any bird photography situation. Advice (Practical) - OK, you couldn't afford the
fast primes above. If you couldn't afford anything faster than an
f/5.6, then teleconverters probably aren't going to work well for
you. You'll end up with a lens that is just too slow. If you
did buy the lower priced 300mm f/4.0, then you probably will get a lot
of use out of 1.4X and 2.0X teleconverters. The 300mm f4.0 with a
2.0X teleconverter will give you a 600mm f/8, something that is
definitely not as desirable as the 600mm f4.0, but is definitely quite
usable for bird photography. ![]()
![]()
MIRROR LENSES - If you're
anything like me, you'll probably wonder about the "Mirror" (also
refered to as "Reflex") lenses that are offered. A quick
search for 600mm lenses on E-Bay, for example, might give you several of the
$10,000 prime lenses, but you may also run across an amazingly cheap $200
600mm mirror lens. These lenses use reflective mirrors to effectively
increase focal length. They're incredibly small and light for the
effective focal length, and INCREDIBLY cheap compared to the standard lenses
of the same focal length. The BIG, BIG, BIG tradeoff? The image
quality is often very, very poor. Mirror lenses also often result in
these little ring-shaped image artifacts that really detract from the photos
you shoot.
Advice (Ideal) - Ideally, you'd have already
bought the $10,000 600mm lens. You wouldn't be tempted for the
incredibly cheap mirror lens at 600mm. Advice (Practical) - Practically, if you can't
afford the lens above, it's awfully tempting to try this incredibly
cheap alternative. As somebody who has tried this, I can
wholeheartedly recommend...DON'T DO IT!!! Will you get a
very long effective focal length? Yes. Will you also get a
cheap piece-of-crud (pardon my English) that won't give you any photos
you'd even let another human being look at? Yes. ![]()
![]()
![]()
TRIPODS/SUPPORT - Camera shake caused by your own twitchiness, the wind, internal vibration, etc. can make your once-in-a-lifetime shot blurry and slightly out-of-focus. Hand-holding a camera is the most convenient method of taking a shot, but can have consequences with regards to image sharpness. This is ESPECIALLY true in bird photography, where you are generally using very long focal lengths. Hand-holding becomes less and less desirable as focal length increases, as the effects of camera shake are much more noticeable at higher lengths. A simple rule of thumb is this: Only hand-hold a shot if the shutter speed is faster than your lens' focal length. For example...with a 300mm lens, hand-holding will generally work if your shutter speed is 500th of a second, but you're likely to get some blurring if you attempt to hand-hold it with a shutter speed of 100th of a second. So what are your options?
Camera Stocks - Camera stocks are somewhat similar to gun stocks, and provide additional stability while still "hand-holding" your camera. I must admit I've never tried them, so can't give a lot of insight.
Monopod - A monopod is simply a one-legged version of a tripod. While it isn't able to fully support your camera, using a monopod will provide additional stability. They are lighter weight than tripods, and can be a good option when hiking, or for capturing shots that don't allow for a complete tripod setup.
Tripod - A good sturdy tripod is truly wonderful in stabilizing your camera and giving you sharp, clear photos. When using extremely long focal lengths (such as the 600mm), use of a tripod is pretty much mandatory. A wide variety of tripods are available, with a wide variety of locking mechanisms. The cheaper, lighter models often don't have enough mass to prevent camera shake caused by the wind or other sources. Consistent use of a good, heavy tripod is one of the best ways to improve your image quality.
Other Support methods - There are many other things you can do to improve your camera's stability when taking a shot. When birding, you may often find yourself taking shots out of a car window. Specialized window braces are available which will help you stabilize your camera in these situations. Something as simple as a bean bag placed on the window frame can help immensely when shooting from a car.
"Image Stabilization" - I believe it was Canon that first introduced the concept of Image Stabilization (IS) to its lens line. Image stabilization uses software in the lens itself to compensate for camera shake. The result is that you can effectively hand-hold shots with an IS lens that you would have to use a tripod for with other lenses. Most claims I've seen is that it allows you to hand-hold at one or two stops higher than you normally would. Because the subject in bird photography tends to move around a lot, hand-holding is often the only way you can quickly get the shot. Use of an IS lens in such situations is very helpful.
FLASH/LIGHTING - This is pretty obvious, but when doing bird photography, you're going to be doing your shooting out-of-doors. All nature photographers have a strong bias for using natural, or ambient, light. Most bird photographs also use ambient light. There are definitely man, many situations, however, where the use of a flash will greatly improve your bird photos. Low-light situations, such as in taking a shot of an Brown Thrasher in heavy forest understory, photographing nocturnal species, or taking a shot when the subject is between the camera and the primary light source...all are wonderful situations in which to use a flash. You will generally use flash in two ways..."total" flash or "fill" flash.
Total Flash - Total flash is used when both the subject and the background need to be illuminated in order to get the shot. This is typically the case in any low-light situation, either because of time of day, or because of location (as with the forest understory example above). Most 35mm SLR's offer electronic through-the-lens (TTL) flash systems, which have internal flash meters in your camera that determines the appropriate flash based on your current aperture and shutter speed settings.
Fill Flash - Fill flash is used to augment ambient light by filling in the shadows or for lighting a back-lit subject. For example, let's say you're shooting a gull sitting on a post. The gull is backlit by the sun. Shooting without a flash will result in a photo showing the bird as a dark shadow, revealing only it's outline. By providing light to a backlit subject, you "fill-in" the details of the subject itself. Fill-flash is also useful when taking photos of birds in vegetation canopies, as the fill-flash will fill in the shadows.
RECOMMENDATION: Get a flash unit and learn to use it. My
flash rarely leaves my camera body. I'll use a flash unit in bright
sunlight just as much as I will in a shadowed environment. It's amazing
the differences in many of my photos once I learned to use a touch of fill-flash
in certain situations.
As I photographer, I'm still learning (as are all photographers). However, when I said at the beginning, photographing birds is NOT rocket science. The biggest problem you typically have isn't with your equipment, it's getting close enough to a bird to actually take a photo. Most of my "tips" below deal with putting yourself into a position to get a good photograph. Here are a few tidbits, and hopefully you can learn a few tricks for getting good bird photos.
Birding first, photography second - First and foremost, keep in mind that you should always be a birder first, and a photographer second. What does this mean? The best way to be a good bird photographer is to be knowledgeable about birds and birding. The creation of this website, for example, has made me a better bird photographer. Why? Because by creating the individual species pages, I've been forced to learn about the different species of birds. In so doing, it's helped me to understand bird behavior, which has in turn made me a better photographer. I would almost suggest going out several times without a camera before trying to photograph birds. Take the time to learn the species in your area, their favorite haunts, what time of year to expect them, etc. Take the time to read through your birding field guides and other books...they're actually interesting reading and will help you to understand the species. Most importantly, get your butt out into the field!!! Nothing is a better teacher than personal experience.
Keep a Low Profile - This goes along with the previous theme in being a birder first and a photographer second. There will be many times where you have the opportunity to put yourself in a position to get a great bird photo, but only at the expense of trampling habitat and scaring off every living thing within a quarter mile. Any action which helps to degrade habitat, endanger birds an other animals, or go against established laws is an action you shouldn't be taking. Taking photographs of nesting birds is the type of activity that is most likely to get you into trouble. The last thing a nesting bird needs is some dude with a camera sticking his nose around the nest site. Here are some general things to avoid when photographing birds:
Don't upset the birds. Avoid nest photography unless you can be absolutely sure you're not causing harm to the parents or their chicks. Sure, it's tempting to try and get that great shot of a mother feeding her chicks or incubating eggs. However, that's generally very difficult to do without upsetting the birds themselves. Don't approach a nest site unless you can do it in a way that won't upset the birds, and NEVER alter habitat (clearing brush from around a nest, etc.) in order to get a clearer picture. Remember...Birds First, Photography Second.
Don't approach endangered or threatened species for the purposes of photographing them. Unless you have a good telephoto lens and can photograph them from a good distance, you shouldn't attempt to photograph endangered species. Just a few people disturbing an endangered species can have a severe impact on that species' chances for survival.
Some people use tapes of bird calls to coax certain species closer to the photographer. These can either be courtship calls for certain species in attempt to attract that species, or tapes of predators, which can arouse a defense instinct in many birds. Using taped calls not only temporarily disturbs the birds, but repeated use of a predators call could cause a species to vacate the area.
Getting Close - Even with a long telephoto lens, it is often still necessary to get very close to the subject, especially if that subject is a 4 1/2" wren or other small bird. How does one do this? I'll say it once again...Patience and persistence is free, and can (often) compensate for equipment that is a little lacking. Even if you DO have very good equipment, you still won't get many great bird photos without patience and persistence. There are three methods I can think of for getting close enough to get that great shot:
Stalking - Many species of birds
simply do not tolerate the presence of human beings very well. It's a
very rare situation where you can walk right up to wild bird and take a
photo from a fairly close distance. So...can you approach (stalk) a
wild bird for the purpose of taking it's photo? Yes, you can.
Patience and a calm demeanor will go a long way when stalking a bird.
More often than not, the bird you're stalking will take off before you get
the shot. Some things to keep in mind or try when stalking:
Different species show wildly different
tolerances for human presence. For example.it's MUCH easier to
approach a wren, for example, than it is a Brown Thrasher. Some
species are simply "tamer" than others, and are easier to
approach and photograph. One thing I've learned, however, is that
individual birds within a species can act vastly different. My
ability to photograph a Merlin is a good example. I've
occasionally seen them around, but they've always been SO shy that I
can't get anything close to a good shot. Well, one cold morning, I
came across this Merlin,
sitting on a fencepost eating a Lapland Longspur. I pulled up with
my car to within 20 feet and started clicking away, while he just sat
there and ate his breakfast. You NEVER know when a bird may decide
to cooperate! Stay readily visible when stalking.
Alright, I know this seems counter-intuitive. You would expect the
last thing you'd want to do is make yourself seen to the species you're
trying to stalk. I beg to differ. Let's face it...our
ability to stalk and hide a wild creature is pretty limited, and you can
generally be pretty sure that unless you're 100% concealed, a wild bird
is going to be aware of your presence. Approaching a wild bird
while trying to stay concealed is very similar to predatory behavior,
and birds will generally react accordingly. Staying out in the
open, remaining readily visible and letting the bird keep track of your
movements, is generally a better way to approach a bird. Move slowly and erratically. Don't
approach the bird in a steady, straight-on gait. You'll have more
luck if you make very slow, zig-zag movements instead of making a direct
approach. This worked very well in stalking a bald
eagle sitting in a cottonwood tree below Gavin's Point Dam near
Yankton. The eagle was facing the river as I approached from
behind. I took a few small, slow steps at a time, during which the
eagle would always turn its head to check out what I was doing.
I'd pause, take another step or two, pause, take another step, until
after 20 minutes or so I was quite close. I was able to get a
pretty good shot of a bird I never thought I'd be able to approach.![]()
![]()
![]()
Hiding (using blinds) - The "best
of the best" of your photographs are generally going to come when
you're using some form of concealment. To get photos of a naturally
acting bird, nothing beats taking its photo from a blind, where it is
totally unaware of your presence. Not only will you be able to capture
natural behavior, but the use of a blind generally allows you to get much
closer than you ever could by stalking.
Permanent blinds - With the
increasing popularity of birding, the availability of permanent blinds
in key locations is gradually increasing. Many parks and other
government-owned areas have permanent blinds build in locations that
allow wonderful photography of certain species. Did you ever have
the urge to capture the Sandhill Crane migration along the Platte River
in Nebraska? An entire cottage industry has been creating that
caters to birders and bird photographers. Even private land owners
in the key areas along the Platte often now rent the use of carefully
placed blinds. Places like Farm Island near Pierre and other park
areas have blinds that can be used by bird photographers. If you
are fortunate to own a piece of land with some good birding locations,
you yourself can build simple, permanent blinds. Although you lack
some flexibility due to their fixed locations, permanent blinds are a
wonderful tool for a bird photographer to use. "Body" blinds - Want to
have the advantages of a blind, but also have mobility and the ability
to place the blind wherever you choose? You might want to think
about a personal "body" blind. These generally take the
form of a rather shapeless, camouflaged bag of cloth that you place over
yourself while you sit and wait for birds to approach. You do run
the risk of looking like a complete fool, sitting under a bag of cloth
in a public park while children come up to you and laugh, and dogs use
you as their own personal fire hydrant!!! Well, if your personal
pride can take looking a little weird, body blinds offer a wonderful,
transportable method for getting close to your subject. Your Car - Probably the most
overlooked birding tool is your car. Many species of birds are
immediately threatened by a visible human presence, but will readily
tolerate the close proximity of a car. As with the use of any
blind, using your car as a blind will require patience. Driving
right up to the edge of a wetland, for example, is likely to scare off
any bird that's close. Don't give up, however. Open
your window, get your camera ready, and wait. You'd be surprised
at how short a wait it sometimes is. Many birds will easily accept
the presence of a parked car in their area, and will start to behave
normally again within several minutes of the car first arriving.
Don't believe me? Check out this
Gyrfalcon. This
is shot from a car window. He landed on the fence post, and didn't
seem to care at all about the presence of a car. If I had opened
the car door, I'd bet my life he would have flown away. Cars make
GREAT blinds.![]()
![]()
![]()
Remote Triggering - Can't get yourself close to the birds? Well, keep in mind that it's not YOU that has to be close to the bird, it's the camera itself. Remote triggering of your camera often allows you to photograph natural behavior that you'd never be able to photograph if you were actually present. Remotely triggering your camera could mean using a corded shutter release, an infrared cordless shutter release, or a remote triggering mechanism that automatically fires when motion is detected in a camera's viewing frame. I've often used my corded shutter release and a 40-foot extension cord to capture birds at feeders. My shorter lens, a 28-105mm zoom, is truly a great lens and provides very sharp photos, but is generally much too short to use for bird photography. It works great, however, when using this remote triggering method. I simply set my tripod and camera up right next to a feeder or other location, attached the corded release, back off a ways, and wait for the birds to arrive. They become used to the presence of the camera very quickly, and even the sound of the shutter firing doesn't affect them very much.
BE PREPARED!!! - Always being prepared will help to ensure that you don't miss that shot-of-a-lifetime. You can generally be assured, for example, that your only chance to get a great photo of a species will be when you're not paying attention, you don't have the right equipment for the situation, or you simply don't have your equipment with you. Even the simple drive to work in the morning can give you opportunities to get some great shots. I work at the EROS Data Center, which is 10 miles or so outside of town, so my drive to work is probably different than most people's. However, I have learned to bring my camera to work each day, because I just never know when I might see the Wild Turkeys along the Big Sioux River doing their mating dance, a huge flock of Snow Geese in a corn field during their migration north, or a Bald Eagle sitting on a dead tree along the river, waiting to pounce on some unsuspecting prey. You never know when that great shot might turn up.
SOUTH DAKOTA BIRDS AND BIRDING - VISITOR LOCATIONS
Please mail any comments/suggestions/additional links for this page to: Terry L. Sohl
This page was last edited on 01/28/10