New Nat'l Geo Field Guide coming out (2 Viewers)

[Jim M.]

Finally, what's the use of including long-extinct species like the Great Auk, the Passenger Pigeon, and the Carolina Parakeet in a FG?

So humans never forget about these birds and that human actions led to their demise. A powerful warning about what could happen to other species in the future.

Jim

 

[Richard Klim]

Perhaps of interest to fans of Svensson et al 1999/2009, Killian Mullarney has provided new artwork for a few of the plates (mostly for Eurasian species):

• Bean & Pink-footed Geese, Baikal Teal, Garganey, Common & Velvet Scoters, LRP, Lesser Sand Plover, Killdeer, Mountain Plover, Dotterel, Lapwing, Upland, Pec, Sharp-tailed & Buff-breasted Sands, Ruff, phalaropes.

 

[Scrufftyguy]

How does this new edition compare to Sibley "Birds of North America"? I'm torn between the two but living in the UK can't get a look at either book, i'd have to order one on the internet. The size really doesn't bother me, as it's likely to spend most of its time on my bookshelf! Thanks!

 

[jedigrant]

How does this new edition compare to Sibley "Birds of North America"? I'm torn between the two but living in the UK can't get a look at either book, i'd have to order one on the internet. The size really doesn't bother me, as it's likely to spend most of its time on my bookshelf! Thanks!

I've always preferred the Sibley, myself. But with this new edition, NatGeo has narrowed the gap considerably. Here are a few, somewhat scattered, thoughts:

• I prefer Sibley's art, and he still shows more variation (i.e. in-flight illustrations for every bird with a full account). However, this NatGeo has added more illustrations and redone some of the plates I had the most problems with before (especially the sparrows and aforementioned fulmar).
• I consider the "big" and regional Sibley guides to be complementary. The maps in the big one are quite dated now (they were improved in the smaller regional guides). There is also less text than in the regionals. But in your case, you would probably just want the "big" Sibley that includes the entire region. This would be a point in favor of NatGeo, as its maps are now probably the best of any NA guide, and it includes a good bit of text.
• NatGeo includes more species and the latest updates. However, most of the additional species are Siberian vagrants to Alaska which you probably already have a field guide for. So I wouldn't really make a choice based just on this.

I still haven't had a chance to really get into the NatGeo and see how it compares. But I would no longer immediately recommend Sibley in your case, and that signifies quite a step forward for the NatGeo.

I don't know if that helped any, but they are both worthy choices.

 

[Jim M.]

How does this new edition compare to Sibley "Birds of North America"? I'm torn between the two but living in the UK can't get a look at either book, i'd have to order one on the internet. The size really doesn't bother me, as it's likely to spend most of its time on my bookshelf! Thanks!

The big Sibley remains the best pure ID guide for intermediate to advanced North American birders. Among other things, it has many more depictions per species (flight depictions of all species for example) than any other guide.

However, if you have limited familiarity with North American birds, I can see an argument that the National Geographic Guide would also have advantages versus Sibley. It has more species per page, laid out more compactly, so if you are scanning for a match for what you have seen, you may be able to locate the correct bird more quickly. Also, the National Geographic Guide has more extensive text summarizing the bird and its identification. The big Sibley made an effort to avoid large, imposing blocks of text and teach more through diagrams, but sometimes this means useful info for those less familiar with the bird is omitted.

Best,
Jim

 

[Scrufftyguy]

Thanks for the detailed responses! From what I've seen I really like the illustrations in Sibley and this is perhaps the most important thing for me. I have an early edition of the Nat Geo which I picked up cheap about 10 years ago, and the quality of field guides has improved a lot in this time...so I'm looking to replace it. Hence the query. I contacted Helm/ A C Black who are the publishers in the UK to find if Sibley is likely to be reprinted anytime soon, but I have yet to hear back.

 

[Swissboy]

Thanks for the detailed responses! From what I've seen I really like the illustrations in Sibley and this is perhaps the most important thing for me. I have an early edition of the Nat Geo which I picked up cheap about 10 years ago, and the quality of field guides has improved a lot in this time...so I'm looking to replace it. Hence the query. I contacted Helm/ A C Black who are the publishers in the UK to find if Sibley is likely to be reprinted anytime soon, but I have yet to hear back.

NHBS lists the book as having been reprinted in 2007. And Amazon UK essentially seems to have run out of new ones. But US sources still offer the book. Thus, I assume a updated reprint must be in the works, but they may try to sell the remaining copies first. And I would not expect to get a firm answer from the publisher. If you get one at all. At least that's my experience with the German edition of the Svensson/Collins.

EDIT: I just noticed that NHBS actually lists the book with the remark "reprint under consideration". And that means, it's out of print, according to NHBS. With just remaining stock being sold then.

 

[Scrufftyguy]

I'd kind of thought the same, that another reprint can't be far off. Perhaps some news will come from the States sometime soon.

 

[Swissboy]

Perhaps of interest to fans of Svensson et al 1999/2009, Killian Mullarney has provided new artwork for a few of the plates (mostly for Eurasian species):

• Bean & Pink-footed Geese, Baikal Teal, Garganey, Common & Velvet Scoters, LRP, Lesser Sand Plover, Killdeer, Mountain Plover, Dotterel, Lapwing, Upland, Pec, Sharp-tailed & Buff-breasted Sands, Ruff, phalaropes.

Interesting, I had not realized this. And these are original illustrations, they did not simply buy them from the publishers of the Svensson book.

 

[Richard Klim]

Concerning the plates, my inexpert opinion...

To me there still seems to be a significant difference in the aesthetic quality of the plates in the latest NatGeo guide compared with the benchmark Svensson et al (Collins Bird Guide etc). I find it hard to put my finger on the reason - perhaps it's partly a result of different printing techniques?

Svensson et al mostly gives an impression of exquisite fine detail, with subtle, realistic colours - always easy on the eye. In comparison, although the new artwork is definitely an improvement, the NatGeo plates often seem very 'heavy' - bold and dark - as if the contrast is too high.

Sibley is closer to Svensson et al - with a similar lightness of touch and pleasing shades, but perhaps less forensic detail.

 

[Richard Klim]

AOU 52nd supplement

The AOU 52nd supplement (Jul 2011) has generally been taken into account, eg splits of Common Moorhen/Gallinule and Transvolcanic/Mexican Jay, and generic reassignments within Parulidae.

But one AOU taxonomic change that seems to have slipped through the net is the split of Charadrius nivosus Snowy Plover from C alexandrinus Kentish Plover.

 

[Swissboy]

Concerning the plates, my inexpert opinion...

To me there still seems to be a significant difference in the aesthetic quality of the plates in the latest NatGeo guide compared with the benchmark Svensson et al (Collins Bird Guide etc). I find it hard to put my finger on the reason - perhaps it's partly a result of different printing techniques?

Svensson et al mostly gives an impression of exquisite fine detail, with subtle, realistic colours - always easy on the eye. In comparison, although the new artwork is definitely an improvement, the NatGeo plates often seem very 'heavy' - bold and dark - as if the contrast is too high.

..........

I could not agree more with you here. Though I was astonished how well the old Greater White-fronted Goose illustrations blended in with the new Mularney ones of the Bean Geese on the same page. And the printing of the Bean Geese is not all that different in the NG and the Svensson books. Though comparing the White-fronted Geese in the two books, the NG version is again clearly darker and less subtly colored.

Looking at those illustrations this carefully just revealed an interesting but apparently intended difference. The upper wings of the North American birds are illustrated as having much more grey. Are these subspecific differences?

 

[njlarsen]

Concerning the plates, my inexpert opinion...

To me there still seems to be a significant difference in the aesthetic quality of the plates in the latest NatGeo guide compared with the benchmark Svensson et al (Collins Bird Guide etc). I find it hard to put my finger on the reason - perhaps it's partly a result of different printing techniques?

Svensson et al mostly gives an impression of exquisite fine detail, with subtle, realistic colours - always easy on the eye. In comparison, although the new artwork is definitely an improvement, the NatGeo plates often seem very 'heavy' - bold and dark - as if the contrast is too high.

Sibley is closer to Svensson et al - with a similar lightness of touch and pleasing shades, but perhaps less forensic detail.

This is a little funny to me: When I bought my Nat Geo Guide (3rd ed) for a trip in 1990, I was astounded by the quality of the plates for especially the warblers I met at the west coast. There was to the best of my knowledge nothing in Europe that could reach the knees of this FG. Today it may very well have been surpassed, but I still have a soft spot in my heart for the Nat Geo guides.

Niels

 

[Richard Klim]

This is a little funny to me: When I bought my Nat Geo Guide (3rd ed) for a trip in 1990, I was astounded by the quality of the plates for especially the warblers I met at the west coast. There was to the best of my knowledge nothing in Europe that could reach the knees of this FG. Today it may very well have been surpassed, but I still have a soft spot in my heart for the Nat Geo guides.

True enough, Niels. I'm certainly not suggesting that the NatGeo plates are poor. I should qualify that I was comparing high quality to even higher quality!

 

[stonechat1]

Cases in point are page 265 where Band-tailed and Rock Pigeon are not clearly separated in my opinion.

I got my FG yesterday and can´t agree with you. In my eyes it´s far more curios that the common Feral Pigeon (Columba livia forma domestica) is added to this group in a few colors and not mentioning that those are domesticated doves. So people who might see them are thinking they are seeing the rare Rock Dove!

This time, at least the shelducks and the Egyptian Goose on page 49 are too red.

There are no sighting of Egyptian Geese in my area so far but you are wrong about that.
http://ibc.lynxeds.com/photo/egyptian-goose-alopochen-aegyptiacus/adult
Ruddy Shellducks we have occasionaly, nearly each year a few birds, so I´m familiar with them and I don´t see to much of red on the drawing. Jm2c

What makes me wonder is that the drawing of the Least Bittern hasn´t been replaced. Compared to the cattail the bird looks like he has the size of a hummingbird :eek!:

Anyway, a lot of informations, for small money in that book. Greatly appreciated! :t:

 

[Swissboy]

......Feral Pigeon (Columba livia forma domestica) is added to this group in a few colors and not mentioning that those are domesticated doves. So people who might see them are thinking they are seeing the rare Rock Dove!

There are no sighting of Egyptian Geese in my area so far but you are wrong about that.
http://ibc.lynxeds.com/photo/egyptian-goose-alopochen-aegyptiacus/adult
......

I think the text makes it sufficiently clear regarding those Feral Pigeons. But note that they run as Rock Pigeon anyway, while it's Rock Dove here in Europe for the wild form.

As for color differences in the printed plates, there are likely some differences within a print run. And the published photos usually are a bit underexposed to make for more spectacular colors. Thus, the picture of the Egyptian Goose you linked to has legs that are way darker than the light pink I have observed on a family here in Switzerland.

Also, I have compared my new book with my copy of the second edition. (I'm one who hates to throw away books even when there are newer editions.) From my experience with various editions of the original Peterson FG for Europe, I thought the plates might tend to get darker and less subtle here too. But there is no such general pattern here in the NG editions. Rather there is wide variation in many illustrations. Sometimes, the new edition has the darker version, sometimes the old one. Same with color shades.

 

[Mysticete]

Got my copy today:

Nat Geo continues to improve. Most of the new artwork, inclusion of text information, expanding coverage of subspecies, and revised range maps are fantastic. The sparrows are particularly well done, as our the nightjars and storm-petrels. The authors really have strived to include the most up to date information available on identification, taxonomy, and distribution, and this update even close the illustration gap between Sibley and the series by quite a bit. For instance, take the discussion of possible id of Cape Verde vs Grant's type Band-rumped Storm-petrels.

Most of the issues I have are relatively minor. A lot of the sparrows still haven't been replaced, and IMHO the old sparrow plates are probably some of the worst illustrations in the guide. My guess is that they are planning to replace these slowly, so I expect the 8th edition will see even more new artwork.

The new artwork for the wrens seems off. The Sedge wren looks...weird, and the Winter Wren a bit too pale.

A few ranges maps need fixing (the introduced range of Muscovy duck in Florida isn't shown) Some vagrants get maps, and other (more regular ones) don't.

Some subspecies got lost in the shuffle; no floridana Burrowing owl, not much coverage of Wilson's or Orange-crowned Warblers, etc.

Some of the plates seem to be broken up oddly. For instance, European Golden Plover is on a separate page from the other Pluvialis. Northwestern crow is on a different page than American Crow, etc.

Other comments:

Between the format and the new illustrations, this book is getting closer to Collins in format.

Changing the font really makes the book look different

Is it just me, or are the pages more glossy than prior volumes?

Also, if you could combine Sibley's artwork with Nat Geo's format/comprehensive coverage, I think you would have the ultimate bird field guide to end all field guides for North American

 

[Swissboy]

.........I think you would have the ultimate bird field guide to end all field guides for North American

That would not be in the interest of the publishers, I'm sure. Gradual improvements or other alterations keep us buying.

 

[Cristina_H]

I think it's a really good field guide, but sometimes the artwork from different artists on the same page gets me slightly confused. From the sharply, slightly too heavily detailed Pratt to the smoother Burke and Quinn, all in one leap.

I agree with Mysticete. If we could combine Sibley's artwork with NatGeo's map it would be wonderful. Perhaps even throw in a nice share of Svensson/Mullarney/Zetterstrom there?

 

[Edward]

As someone who had seen, but never owned, the earlier editions of the National Geographic, this sixth edition is a very welcome addition to my library, and a must-have if you are interested in North American birds and don't have any of the previous editions. One advantage over Sibley is the inclusion of scientific names for subspecies, and in some cases I find the illustrations better than Sibley (notably those by David Quinn). But Sibley has always served me very well in North America and it remains to be seen which one I will use more in the field next time I go.

I appreciate the inclusion of Greenland (it is North America after all) in the range maps and I'd be intrigued to know where they get their data from for the distribution of American Pipit in Greenland - it seems rather optimistic to me.