Birding without a camera, forever? (2 Viewers)

[Hermann]

Interesting topic.

I'm first and foremost a birder, not a photographer. I didn't take a camera on birding trips for much of my life. Carrying binoculars and a scope+tripod AND a camera was a bit much, especially as I do quite a bit of hiking when I'm birding, and I also felt I'd sort of "lose out" on the observations of the birds I saw. So I was quite happy just to focus on watching the birds, and whenever I found a rarity or semi-rarity on my own, I took full field notes and wrote up a full description at home. That was enough to get the birds accepted by the relevant committee even if no other birders got to see the bird.

However, birding has become much more popular over here, and many birders and newbie birders (and people who think they're birders) started carrying cameras, especially during the pandemic. The result was there were lots of claims of rarities and semi-rarities that could be discounted because the photographs people took proved beyond doubt that they had made a mistake. The end result is that nowadays you have to have either witnesses (which isn't always possible) or, even better, photographs or sound recordings of a bird. So I personally feel almost compelled to carry a camera, not for "proper" bird photography as such, but to be able to prove I saw what I saw. For "record photography". I also almost always carry a scope as well. Of course.

Now, that has advantages and disadvantages. It's easier to sort out misidentifications, and there are now lots of photographs of "interesting" birds such as, for instance, (possible) hybrids and birds in "interesting" plumages. OTOH some observers who don't carry cameras stopped reporting birds they saw without witnesses simply because they feel nobody will believe them. Others started carrying a camera "just in case" but no scopes anymore because the weight does get a bit much. And, let's face it, digiscoping or phonescoping isn't an alternative.

Hermann

 

[Maljunulo]

Hermann;

It‘s called “progress”. (ever increasing regulation and complexity)

Richard

 

[Scott98]

FWIW I've declined to add photography to my birding and astronomy hobbies, even though it's technology that can help you see and identify more stuff. I prefer the visceral thrill of seeing things in real-time with my own eyes, and I prefer minimalism in my leisure activity. I hate carrying the camera around with me on hikes and bird tours.

The best-case scenario is I'm birding with someone else that has a camera! Then I get the pictures afterwards without carrying anything or charging batteries

 

[SGBirder]

Bird watchers with optics only are a minority in where I live. I'm not into cameras and photography but the the bird photographers I did chat with are certainly passionate with their hobby. If the bird or creature is stationary, I do capture short videos of them and sometimes you get to record interesting behaviors and even bird calls/songs (if the phone manages it). A pair of binoculars is a very useful and handy instrument. When paired with a scope (a 24-48x 60mm for me), the scope becomes my primary instrument and I spend at least 10x more time using it than my binos. No batteries needed for them but it is a chore to lug a scope and a tripod though. I'm kind of tempted to try a monocular and scope combination.

Observe whatever you want, even the night sky, with your trusty monocular, binoculars and scope:

View attachment 1508593

Marina East Drive?

 

[01101001]

I found that birding with only a camera meant that I was looking only at those birds that I felt were in range of my camera (and within my ability!) to take photos of. This often meant I was missing out watching other birds that were maybe too far away or too difficult to photograph. Of course the ideal situation is to take both camera and bins but lately I've been leaving the camera at home and taking only bins and a smartphone with Merlin on during my birding outings (or while walking the dog).

I have around -4 dioptres in both my eyes plus some astigmatism. After a recent check at the ophthalmologist's and receiving dilating drops, I've noticed that--with my glasses off--I'm not distracted by detail and can see the world from a new and more satisfying perspective. Everything around me becomes soft and fuzzy, the borders become smooth and rounded, and I focus more on the interplay of light and shadow and how patches of colour complement one another. Very interesting and gratifying.

 

[LucaPCP]

I mostly take binoculars only. When I take a camera, it's purely to facilitate difficult IDs; I take a photo only if I cannot ID the bird (and I have time). The camera typically comes out only once or twice in a long outing.
I go with a camera probably 10% of the time; I tend to take it when I go to places I am less familiar with.

It's exactly as the original poster said. With a camera, you need a good pose to be happy; with binoculars, even a short glimpse half-covered by a branch (or a song!) is good enough for an ID. Much more enjoyable.

 

[MiddleRiver]

I'm still struggling to get past something here, a feeling that listening is only a clue, if I can't see the bird I still don't know it and it doesn't really count for me, so I wouldn't put it on my own personal list. (I do see how it still matters for public or scientific purposes like eBird, though I wish everyone would add a note "heard only" as only a few seem to.) Any advice?

I'm with you on this one. For my life list I have to see the bird. Full-stop, period, end-of-discussion.

 

[MiddleRiver]

I'd like to think I'm not a competitive birder but will admit that if I see an unusual bird, I want to be able to prove it. In this age of eBird, 'rare' sightings are often rejected unless there is visual proof or multiple experienced viewers. Of course in the grand scheme of things it doesn't really matter if a reviewer believes me, but I'll confess to being glad I had photos when I did see something offbeat

 

[opisska]

How many field ID's are missed when the bird pops in to full view while we're attaching tha camera to the tripod?

I think this is the root of the misunderstanding here, because the idea that "bino birders" have about "camera birders" is quite distorted. I have never in my life seen a person attach a camera to the tripod while a bird appeared, it's simply not something that ever happens. Either people are really here for photography and those people have their cameras on their tripods the entire time, are hidden in a tent, hide, or under a masking net and patiently wait for the bird to come into their view, or people are "birders with a camera" and those just point the camera at the bird in the same manner as other would do with binoculars.

I am a "birder with a camera". I do not carry binoculars, because my camera is my telescope. I look at birds through the camera - I have an enlargement lens installed in the viewfinder, so my view is comparable to 8x binos roughly. I see the bird as much as you do, only my "binos" also take pictures and I have an objective record of what I have seen.

I personally find viewing birds - and animals in general - without the ability to objectively record them extremely frustrating. I sometimes take out my spotter scope and that, combined with the human eye, shows more detail on distant bird than any photography I am capable of - and this bothers me to no end, because I always have doubts about what I am really seeing. When I started snorkeling, I had no underwater camera - well at first, there was the wow effect of the underwater life, but very quickly, I grew frustrated that I can't record all the fishes and analyze them later - so I have an underwater camera now and am much happier.

 

[MiddleRiver]

I think this is the root of the misunderstanding here, because the idea that "bino birders" have about "camera birders" is quite distorted. I have never in my life seen a person attach a camera to the tripod while a bird appeared, it's simply not something that ever happens. Either people are really here for photography and those people have their cameras on their tripods the entire time, are hidden in a tent, hide, or under a masking net and patiently wait for the bird to come into their view, or people are "birders with a camera" and those just point the camera at the bird in the same manner as other would do with binoculars.

I am a "birder with a camera". I do not carry binoculars, because my camera is my telescope. I look at birds through the camera - I have an enlargement lens installed in the viewfinder, so my view is comparable to 8x binos roughly. I see the bird as much as you do, only my "binos" also take pictures and I have an objective record of what I have seen.

I personally find viewing birds - and animals in general - without the ability to objectively record them extremely frustrating. I sometimes take out my spotter scope and that, combined with the human eye, shows more detail on distant bird than any photography I am capable of - and this bothers me to no end, because I always have doubts about what I am really seeing. When I started snorkeling, I had no underwater camera - well at first, there was the wow effect of the underwater life, but very quickly, I grew frustrated that I can't record all the fishes and analyze them later - so I have an underwater camera now and am much happier.

Not suprisingly this is how I started down the photo rabbit hole. I got tired of getting back home with several birds I was unsure of. That's not to say I get a photo record of every bird, but it sure helps to have a photo record of at least some of them.
Case in point: This past week we were birding near wetland/shore on the Chesapeake Bay. As I stepped out of a wooded trail, a couple of Terns flew overhead, quickly enough that my first impression was 'red beak' and I assumed Royal Tern as they are expected at that location now. I managed to get a few rushed pics, which upon inspection at home, showed beak and wingtip coloration etc. identifying them as Caspian. I suppose a better birder would have caught the field marks with binos, but I did not.

 

[Maljunulo]

For me it is “Birding without a camera, always.”

 

[Elkhornsun]

There are two types of critter pictures, ID pictures for guide books and Web applications, and environmental pictures that show critter behavior and or them in their habitat. The only time I take an ID photo is when I need to post the image for others to help with identification.

When I take my camera and lens(s) I carry my 10x25 binos that are small enough to fit in a water bottle pocket, or with the weight of only 12 ounces, hanging off my neck.

 

[Oregon John]

I currently have a very portable bridge camera. Sometimes I carry both binoculars and the camera, but for times I'm birding locally and I'm unlikely to see a new, life list bird, I carry just binoculars. I concentrate on observing, especially observing behavior. Other times, in a new environment, with lots of "new" birds, I carry only the camera. I like having a visual record of the first time I see a new species, but I admit maybe that's just a personal quirk. Also, sometimes only looking closely back home at a photo of a new bird allows me to ID the species correctly.

I understand the arguments against cameras and I think they're one reason I've not yet splurged for a high-end $4,000 full-frame/telephoto combo, which seems to me so much impedimenta, big and cumbersome. The small bridge camera, though, I feel doesn't really get in the way.

 

[RickStillBirding]

This is such a helpful conversation!

So, after returning to birding recently, and focusing mostly on recording bird sounds, I find that I think about and experience the birds around me very differently than 40 years ago.

When I first gave birds attention in my 20s, I quickly found myself running around ticking off each new species and not doing much more than noting their field markings. My eyes were keen and I could identify birds.

Adding to my list was the challenge, a game I played against myself. The birds were beautiful and I still remember my first sightings of many species - painted buntings, scarlet tanagers, roseate spoonbills, and others.

Now, I ease out into the darkness with a mic and recorder. I stand beneath the stars waiting for their individual waking noises and their calls that swell into the melodies of the morning chorus.

I notice their group behaviors, like when a wood thrush wakes to find a barred owl on a nearby limb and panic calls out to the mob that wakes and joins a peer group of carolina wrens, tufted titmouses, mockingbirds, carolina chickadees, brown thrashers, and finally, the raucous blue jays, to urge the barred owl from one tree, to the next, and finally to flight into the woods alone. In my first round with birds, that morning would have been check, check, check, check, etc. and check.

With the recording, I’ve re-enjoyed that morning several times.

Earlier this week, I spent two hours standing on a levee between two farm ponds with the mic and recorder capturing 23 Canada geese beginning from before their pre-daylight first grunt, through their morning routine, into daylight as they left the water, gathered on the bank and dispersed for a bit of grass-nibbling, before returning together to the pond before they all lifted off, flew directly overhead, and headed into their day.

I’ve enjoyed playing the recordings in my office and watching visitors smile when the recognize particular birds, or just from the joy of their songs.

I love to see the photos of birds that others are so generous to share, but I lack the talent to do birds justice. I use my binoculars in the yard, but for me, I have found that recordings - more than a camera or binoculars - are making my return to birding a real and surprising pleasure.
--
Rick

 

[MiddleRiver]

This is such a helpful conversation!

So, after returning to birding recently, and focusing mostly on recording bird sounds, I find that I think about and experience the birds around me very differently than 40 years ago.

When I first gave birds attention in my 20s, I quickly found myself running around ticking off each new species and not doing much more than noting their field markings. My eyes were keen and I could identify birds.

Adding to my list was the challenge, a game I played against myself. The birds were beautiful and I still remember my first sightings of many species - painted buntings, scarlet tanagers, roseate spoonbills, and others.

Now, I ease out into the darkness with a mic and recorder. I stand beneath the stars waiting for their individual waking noises and their calls that swell into the melodies of the morning chorus.

I notice their group behaviors, like when a wood thrush wakes to find a barred owl on a nearby limb and panic calls out to the mob that wakes and joins a peer group of carolina wrens, tufted titmouses, mockingbirds, carolina chickadees, brown thrashers, and finally, the raucous blue jays, to urge the barred owl from one tree, to the next, and finally to flight into the woods alone. In my first round with birds, that morning would have been check, check, check, check, etc. and check.

With the recording, I’ve re-enjoyed that morning several times.

Earlier this week, I spent two hours standing on a levee between two farm ponds with the mic and recorder capturing 23 Canada geese beginning from before their pre-daylight first grunt, through their morning routine, into daylight as they left the water, gathered on the bank and dispersed for a bit of grass-nibbling, before returning together to the pond before they all lifted off, flew directly overhead, and headed into their day.

I’ve enjoyed playing the recordings in my office and watching visitors smile when the recognize particular birds, or just from the joy of their songs.

I love to see the photos of birds that others are so generous to share, but I lack the talent to do birds justice. I use my binoculars in the yard, but for me, I have found that recordings - more than a camera or binoculars - are making my return to birding a real and surprising pleasure.
--
Rick

INteresting... maybe you're becoming a slow birder ;-)

I usually carry camera for subsequent confirmation and ID. Yesterday we birded a familiar section of road (warblers are migrating through), and due to a lingering cold I only took my bins. It was such a pleasure to relax and enjoy watching the birds w/out distraction of having to panic, grab camera, try and locate, focus, etc. I still kept an ebird checklist, but it was a totally different experience. Of course I had a couple of questionable ID's for which I wish I had gotten a pic,... but does it really matter? It's not about keeping score, but about watching nature...

 

[RickStillBirding]

Yes, I like that! "Slow birder" is correct!

 

[pbjosh]

Late to this conversation but I almost never carry a camera (except on pelagics without a lot of other photogs). I rarely carry a scope when it isn’t explicitly necessary due to distance to shorebirds or the like. I generally carry the lightest bins and kit that I can get away with. Yes I miss a few birds and IDs but I see far more and walk further and enjoy more. Most birds are ID’d by sound first anyways. Then via bins, then via walking closer. Not bragging but I record a lot more species in areas / habitats / bird communities I know than most people just by being out and listening and watching attentively and covering long distances a lot of the time. And I don’t have scads of photos that require disliked (by me) chilping / processing at the end. Personally I feel that the time spent behind the screen could be used studying vocalizations or birding more which will make anyone a far better birder than any camera will.

I will happily admit though that being on a pelagic or birding trip with a good photog is a luxury. They carry the camera and when you have something interesting or tricky they can frequently get a record shot or ID shot. it’s just not worth it to me, most of the time. It hampers my enjoyment of time in the field far more than the occasional squeaked out ID pleases me.

I have found rarities and some remarkable birds in out of the way parts of the world and sometimes gotten only audio documentation and frequently nothing but I am not too bothered, I just don’t worry / care about the “photo or it didn’t happen” people. I bird for me and I share as much info as I can and people can do with it what they will.

 

[pbjosh]

I'm still struggling to get past something here, a feeling that listening is only a clue, if I can't see the bird I still don't know it and it doesn't really count for me, so I wouldn't put it on my own personal list. (I do see how it still matters for public or scientific purposes like eBird, though I wish everyone would add a note "heard only" as only a few seem to.) Any advice?

Birding in S America I frequently log 100-200 species with I would guess typically less than half seen. If I know I have not mis-ID’d a bird and it is a species I have seen sufficiently well / enough times in the past I rarely try to even see it unless it happens to be right there. I am not interested in adding perhaps up to 60-100 “heard only” comments at the end of the day

 

[temmie]

Whatever floats your boat.

some remarks:
1. some species are hardly ID-able without a good picture.
2. you 'see' more with a good camera / long lens combo (digitally zooming in on the picture) than with binoculars.
3. having photographs really helps with backlogging subspecies and noting interesting features long after the sightings (sex, age, moult, ...), and looking at old pictures really brings back old (and often very good) memories.

For those that truly enjoy absorbing the natural experience, I can fully recommend going into sound recording.

disclaimer: I have almost 3000 species photographed, so I am firmly in the camp of bird photography, but most pictures are nothing more than record shots.

 

[Gzoladz74]

I keep having this desire to ditch my camera at home, and only bring binoculars. There seems to be a constant pull and trend toward photographing birds but I can't help but shake these feelings. Has anyone else had this "purist" mindset that is more romantic of how birding started out? Some recurring thoughts:
- Simplicity: Binoculars are ALL you'd need to carry. Leave the camera at home. No need to share. Be IN the moment
- ULTIMATELY life is too short to spend countless hours on photography, camera maintenance, photo editing, photo sharing, etc. My life is busy enough as it is!
- I STILL get to add the birds to my life list just the same, my own rules and letting go of if I'm 100% sure or relying on others to confirm it for me, which is again more work and less birding
- You get to use BOTH eyes while viewing the bird and in 3D
- Bird-watchers look AT birds; birders look FOR them. I can still look for them but might as well look at them more too.
- Cameras are WORK. They require constant PRACTICE. This effort goes against the idea of being ONE with nature.
- I should come back from birding being REFRESHED not more burnt out. I should want to do my ACTUAL JOB without having gone so far into
the technical weeds of photography that it's hard to juggle both
- What keeps it interesting is LEARNING about birds, you can still share facts about birds, which is what people are mostly interested in
- You can't use bins and a camera at the same time, so why would you want to set the bins down?
- With binocular viewing, you experience the FULL thing, including the sounds it's making not framing a shot!
- Binoculars alone is still just as much a "hunt" if you want it to be
- I'll still always have an iPhone camera on me, to document the trip in general, just not the birds.
- Even the best photographers MISS many many shots. They could have just enjoyed the birds with bins instead!
- I'm not a professional, no one is paying me for my shots. I could focus on low quality / superzoom/point and shoot shots but why not just HQ binoculars/Field guide?
- I don't like the way I view birds through photos. I treat them as if one SPECIES is all each individual bird is. When in reality birds
of the same species are like humans, they have different personalities, behavior, etc, which is often missed if we're photographing
- Without a camera, i'm free to go out in the low light dusk and dawn or bright noon and not worry it's "not good lighting for photos"
- With binoculars if there's no birds currently around I can still enjoy the view of whatever else (flowers, animals, mountains, etc)
- Birds rarely sit still but with binoculars you can follow their movement and actually view them much better
So what if you don't get the shot? It will be rare that you'll see a rare bird and you can still SAY you did, who cares about proof?
- You're still just as much a birder, if not more so. Photos feel more from the ego "wanting to prove what you saw or how good your photo is"
- You can focus on RELAXING in nature rather than hurrying around trying to get closer, get the shot, lugging bulky equipment, etc
- You don't have to WORRY about not seeing new birds, getting a good shot, camera settings,
- You don't have to worry about how you're going to find the time to sort through, edit and share all your photos
- You save money not needing a Adobe Lightroom subscription, new camera gear, etc
- You can still share what birds you saw, by sending online existing photos to give people an idea if they're interested
- You don't have to worry about someone possibly wanting to mug you for your expensive camera gear
- Imagine feeling bad because "not many people on instagram LIKED my AMAZING photo!" How could they, there's too much content!

Note: I'm certainly not knocking anyone for taking photos. I've done it since I got into this hobby 17 years ago but it feels more like a chore than a passion ATM. My ONLY concern is will I regret it later if I didn't get the photos. I've thought of "digiscoping" or "super zoom lenses" but that still just ends up back into photography mindset.

The goal of this post is just to see if anyone else feels the same way, not to drum up arguments about how my points aren't necessarily true. I'm very aware that there's a way to still look at cameras and photos as a bonus, not a subtraction. Thanks.

I relate to this sentiment 100%...I love going out just with binos for the reasons you mentioned, and I don't consider myself a photographer. But I do like keeping a record of what I see if it is interesting. Often I will carry my camera and not get it out of the bag, unless something special shows up.

Having said that when I do take pictures I do some minor editing on my tablet (PS Express or Lightroom or Snapseed), all of which have free versions.

Do what you feel like doing on the day. As you said, it is a hobby, not a job, so it is all about enjoyment.