Bird Photography (1 Viewer)

Hi all,just joined this forum from Kingston, Ontario Canada. I have been birding now aobut 15 years and have finally decided to start photographing birds. As I am about to embark on buying my first camera, I don't believe there is any point in spending a ton of money until I give it a whirl and understand exposure etc. Would a digital or manual slr be the way to start, also any specific models etc would be great. Thanks and happy birding.

Hi and welcome to the Forum! Nice to see another Canadian on here.
My 'beginner' camera for birds was a (digital) Fuji FinePix 6800Z and a few other people on here have various types of that same camera. It was wonderful to learn with because it was very user friendly. I find nothing beats digital when it comes to bird photography because you usually end up deleting many more than you actually keep! No wasted film this way.
Hope this helps. Enjoy your time here. I'm sure you'll get more helpful replies shortly.

Welcome to BF, JTF and good luck with the photography - I'm sure you'll get lots of help here.

Hello there JTF and on behalf of the Moderators and Admin here at Bird Forum, a very warm welcome.

To answer your question regarding which camera, all I can tell you is that you couldn't pay me to go back to using a film slr. I think I have paid for my cameras ten times over with no film developing costs.

The Bird Forum has an extensive Forum on different cameras so it might be a good idea for you to peruse that before you invest any money. Again, welcome.

Say hi to Bryan Adams

Hi JTF

Welcome to the forum.

I can only echo the sentiments of KC regarding the use of digital over SLR. Sure you probably get better shots from an SLR, but only in the hands of an expert (IMHO).

I have a 2nd hand Nikon Coolpix 990 and it was the best camera purchase I have ever had. Using adapters it links well with the use of your scope and brings the world of birds right up to you.

Being new to photography you will probably waste more shots than taking good ones so the film you need with an SLR will become expensive. No such expense with a digital as you can download the images to your computer then reformat your disk to take more pictures and so on.

There will be plenty of advice still to come on types of camera to buy but in my opinion the Coolpix ranges of 990 / 995 & 4500 are hard to beat.

I thought Bryan Adams was from Vancouver, BC....

Hi JFT,

Welcome aboard Bird Forum :t:

I can understand your confusion as to which camera to plump for. Personally I'd definitely plum for going digital as it is so much more versatile. Whilst 35mm to my mind gives better results still, you'd have to be prepared to settle for maybe one or two decent shots off a 36 exposure film. You get a similar wastage rate with digital, but once you have bought the equipment you can just delete the useless images and reuse the memory card.

I'd agree that if you are interested in what is known as 'digiscoping' then the Nikon Coolpix 990/4500 are much the preferred camera, but only if you have a decent spotting scope to use it with.

If you have no scope or one without ED/Fluorite etc glass then you'll be looking at a decent optical zoom camera. If you're considering digital then that narrows it down to a Digital SLR which cost big bucks as the lens can cost more than the body or a compact camera with around a 10x optical zoom.

Personally I do both digiscoping and have a compact with a 10x optical zoom, the Olympus C2100UZ which unfortunately is no longer manufactured. There are several other cameras out there which are popular amongst our members. For example the Olympus C700 range of which the C750 is I believe the current model, but has no built in Image Stabilizer which can be important at longer zoom lengths in dull conditions. A new one on the market is the Minolta Dimage Z1 a tidy looking camera which looks very easy to use, though lacks some of the manual options of other cameras, which is not necessarily a problem. Panasonic have released the Lumix DMC-FZ10 which is available in the USA for a reasonable price with a 12x optical zoom, Image Stabilizer and takes additional teleconverters for even more reach.

There are other models available. You can checkout our camera forums for details of the most popular ones.

Happy hunting

Thanks for all the great tips, I will go digital for sure and take some time reading up on all the models suggested. Yes Bryan Adams is from Vancouver B.C. haven't talked to him lately.

Anyone making the step to photographing birds faces quite a few dilemmas, camera choice being the big one, but the digiscope or DSLR option needs serious thought in respect of what you want out of your photography.

Although I use DSLR’s I think that for anyone making the first step, the digiscoping option is the way to go until you feel that you are sufficiently interested to make the move on to a DSLR and long lenses. The reason being that most of the compact digital cameras that will fit to a scope are capable of 5 megapixels, only 1 megapixel short of the most commonly available digital SLR’s which are about 60% more expensive before you buy a lens!

As an example, a Coolpix will cost £450-500 and an adaptor will be £100 plus cable release £30-35 at the most, your total outlay will be £600 approx if you already own a suitable scope, a 6 megapixel DSLR will be anything between about £800-1500, with a 400 or 500mm lens anywhere between £800-1300 you will spend in the region of £2000 you will also need a serious tripod, possibly as much as £300, getting into serious kit the sky is the limit, with a Canon EOS1Ds and 600mm IS setting you back around £12000. A lot of money to spend if you find that bird photography not for you, and a pretty big loss if you then resell the kit! It is also very heavy to carry around!

Digiscoping will yield much higher magnifications thus you are more likely to get pleasing results within a short time. You will also learn all the basics of exposure and which modes to use etc. Given that digital cameras are getting more advanced at a very rapid rate, the chances are that the resolution will be higher and the cameras cheaper when and if you want to upgrade.

Using a DSLR and 600mm lens combination will give you about 12x mag with a full frame sensor and 17.2x with the smaller sensors that are in the 300D, 10D and D100 and similar, so using this set-up is to some extent a lot more fieldcraft/patience dependent.

The dilemma really is whether you want to carry on birding and get images of what you see, if this is so, then digiscoping is the way, as its more portable and gives higher magnification. Whereas the DSLR option will require more work to get close to the birds and has the weight penalty.

Hi nigel, thats for the great post. I have done some reading on digiscoping after reading your post and yes digiscoping would be the best route for me. My scope a KOWA angled TSN 824 would probably take an adapter quite easly for most digital cameras. Thanks again, and happy birding.

JTF said:

My scope a KOWA angled TSN 824 would probably take an adapter quite easly for most digital cameras.

Click to expand...

Kowa makes an adapter specifically for its scopes which is unduly expensive but works quite well. It is discussed in a couple of threads in the adapters section of the forums. Good luck with digiscoping. Glen

Hi JTF

I have the Kowa 823 and my adapter came from Eagle Eye Optics in the uk and works fine (albeit a fairly expensive purchase). http://www.eagleeyeuk.com

You should get excellent results with that scope.

Hi JTF

I have a Kowa 822 (straight) an adapter from London Camera exchange and a Nikon CP990 (from ebay).

I am getting some pretty reasonable results although I wouldn't use the photographs as an end product. I only take the pics for reference for my paintings.

I learned photography on a heavy old Zenith 35mm fully manual camera, that experience taught me a lot about photography there was no auto anything on that old beast!

I switched to a minolta 404si and a 300mm lens and doubler and I still use it. I must say though the amount of times I have waited with baited breath for films to come back from the developers only to find a series of smudges instead of the fabulous shots I thought I would have are too numerous to count.

I would have to agree with Nigel and say that for pleasing, if not technically great, shots of birds digiscoping is a great start.

BTW My father in law lives in Kingston and I'm planning a trip out there in 2005 so I look forward to seeng your shots to give me an idea of what to expect!

Woody

Thanks Glen; Reader & Woody for taking the time to post, this site is a great scource of info indeed. Just a side note we have a Rufous HummingBird visiting a feeder here in Kingston. It was last sighted this am even with the temp being at -7 C, the bird appears active and healthy. The owner of the feeder has put a heat lamp next to it to keep it from freezing.

JTF

Like all the above members have stated go digital with an adaptor for the scope, and preferably something like a coolpix 4500. As they also have said, you can readily delete the ensuing rubbish which you cannot do with expensive film until it is too late because only when you get the prints/slides back from processing will you finally realise that your last great filmed bird shot wasn't! In the future when you think you've cracked it and are getting good digiscoping results fairly consistently then consider buying a digital SLR + very long lenses + big mortgage on the house to pay for it all!!
Nigel laid out the costs pretty well in his posting above.

Thanks Geoff, I will take a look at the Coolpix 4500.