• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Passerines, Birmingham UK (1 Viewer)

stevethehydra

Well-known member
All these were photographed on 22nd Feb 2021 at Deer's Leap Wood local nature reserve, Birmingham. Bad photos I know, but I think some might be IDable...

1-4 Fringilla sp, part of a small flock that was very skittish/human-avoidant. I think the first 2 pics are the same bird. Are any of them Bramblings?

5-8 Marsh or Willow Tit?

9-10 (different bird but seen immediately after in the same tree) Coal Tit

11 could have been either of the previous 2 or a third individual!

(edit: not sure why the finch photos have appeared twice!)

finch2.jpgfinch3.jpgfinch4.jpgfinch1.jpgtit1.jpgtit2.jpgtit3.jpgtit4.jpgtit5.jpgtit6.jpgtit7.jpg
finch2.jpgfinch3.jpgfinch4.jpgfinch1.jpg
 
I dont think so: 7 and 8, the real tough ones, are better for Marsh/Willow Tit with what appears to be whitish outer tail feathers and a better belly colour for this than for Coal Tit, that have normally whitish or greyish or yellow (-buff) belly. 11 seems another Marsh/Willow Tit imo.
 
5-11. All coal tits?
Agreed - except - I am getting confused with the numbering.

5-6, 9-11 = Coal Tits

Alex you are not referring to those ones are you?

I was assuming we were only looking at 3 birds with the images showing the underparts belonging to the third individual (in #7 and #8 of the images) which is the difficult one.
 
Last edited:
got some time to realize what marlow tit means :LOL: - nice name. but i agree with butty that in fact the presumed marlows are also coal tits (note wing bar in pic 6).
Its alright, I deleted my post, see my subsequent one I thought Alex was referring to “5-8 Marsh or Willow Tit?” so was trying to see why - I did note the white wing bars after I posted and was reposting an agreement when you posted.

I have been writing transcripts for training videos in the past couple of days and this is one of the terms I started using in email communications - I guess it stuck!

It’s better than Mippit and Trippit isn’t it? 😁
 
Hello, oh thanks from me too! Havent seen the wingbar. And as some Willow Tits have quite a distinct pale(whitish outer tail feather), I cant remember noticing this in a Coal Tit, but wait, its a picture from below: some passerines can have whitish outer tail feathers, that are just visible from below. And this might be enhanced due to light shining through the feather.
I was concentrating and still thinking about another thread here
 
I am not absolutely sure (tiny birds, high in a tall tree, moving around a lot), but I think images 5-8 are one bird, 9-10 a second, and 11 could be a third. I was pretty sure 9-10 was a Coal Tit, but included those mainly for contrast with the rest of the tit pics! The bird in pics 5-8 definitely seemed more like a Marsh/Willow - I didn't see any wingbar on it, which I clearly saw on the second bird. Can a Coal Tit really look as much like a Marsh/Willow as image 5?

Slightly disappointed that the finches (or at least those I managed to photograph) were all Chaffinches - it was the flocking behaviour, staying high up in the trees and seemingly more wary of humans than I'd expect Chaffinches to be, that made me thing Bramblings were a possibility. And then I managed to convince myself that in the photos they looked vaguely orangey...
 
Steve: is it really so difficult for you to adjust your photos before posting so as to maximise the possibility of an ID? For example, the following (your photo 1 which is black on my screen.

Screen Shot 2021-03-12 at 12 Mar  12.46.38 PM.jpg

The photos that come out of your digital camera are not 'the real thing'. They have been created by the software of the company that made your camera plus any adjustments to the settings that you have made. But adjusting with your editing software doesn't make the photos less 'true'. Sometimes you see a claim that Camera RAW photos are real and everything else is the result of 'adjustments'. But this is completely wrong - without 'adjustments' you can't see the photo at all - and the camera company's choice included in their software may not be the best, or even near it, for the type of photo you have taken.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 3 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top