-
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.
recommendations for a US field guide (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter ryckfour
- Start date
+1 on Eastern Sibley. It would be tempting to get a full US guide, but the Eastern guide really makes reference easier.
My second fave option would be the National Geographic guide but it is not constructed as well for field use (basic paperback).
Third would be Kaufman, but now, the more I use it, the more I prefer the multiple profiles and in flight and stationary images that Sibley provides.
One caveat is that if you get an Eastern edition, it's reasonably likely you'll encounter a "western" species not in the guide.
Finally, I'd check the local Audubon groups and ebird.com for bird lists for the area.
Matt
My second fave option would be the National Geographic guide but it is not constructed as well for field use (basic paperback).
Third would be Kaufman, but now, the more I use it, the more I prefer the multiple profiles and in flight and stationary images that Sibley provides.
One caveat is that if you get an Eastern edition, it's reasonably likely you'll encounter a "western" species not in the guide.
Finally, I'd check the local Audubon groups and ebird.com for bird lists for the area.
Matt
Nick French
Well-known member
I travel to the eastern US a lot and the Eastern Sibley guide has proved perfect. I did use the National Geographic guide for many years, but switched to Sibley and never looked back.
Happy birding.
Happy birding.
BrightonBirder
Well-known member
The Peterson Guide is still a great guide, and compact.
apbarr
Well-known member
I own both NG and Sibley national guides as well as Eastern and Western versions of both. Overkill I know but the NG guides were bought from Amazon at brilliant prices that I couldn't resist. What I did was buy the Eastern Sibley from Ebay USA and had it sent to my hotel where it was waiting for me on arrival.
They all have pluses and minuses but overall Eastern Sibley would be my recommendation
They all have pluses and minuses but overall Eastern Sibley would be my recommendation
Pinewood
New York correspondent
jmepler
It's just a flesh wound.
Of all the guides that I have (you can't have too many) I find that the first ones that I reach for are the Sibleys, I have both the Eastern and the complete North American.
I wouldn't worry too much about seeing birds that are not in the Eastern version, it covers birds that are seen in the Eastern two-thirds of the US. I wouldn't expect to see a Western Scrub-Jay or a Cactus Wren, but they are covered.
There is a new version of Peterson out now that has the range maps along side the illustrations and descriptions like Sibley does. It covers all of North America the same as the big Sibley, and it is almost as big. I grew up using Peterson, but I don't have the new version (yet).
So, another vote for Sibley, Eastern version.
Mike
I wouldn't worry too much about seeing birds that are not in the Eastern version, it covers birds that are seen in the Eastern two-thirds of the US. I wouldn't expect to see a Western Scrub-Jay or a Cactus Wren, but they are covered.
There is a new version of Peterson out now that has the range maps along side the illustrations and descriptions like Sibley does. It covers all of North America the same as the big Sibley, and it is almost as big. I grew up using Peterson, but I don't have the new version (yet).
So, another vote for Sibley, Eastern version.
Mike
stonechat1
New member
I use in the field NG and as standby Eastern Sibley.
That is my basic approach as well. Exchanging Western Sibley for visits further west, of course. But my main book is definitely NG, has been since the first edition. And I think I bought every one of them just to be informed about "splits and lumps" as it's not so easy to keep track from abroad.
i use nat geo primarily as the birds seem to look closer to what i see in the field. the sibley birds seem a little "washed out" looking to me. i have the sibley, but generally carry the NG in the field.
the text of the new princeton pictorial guides i really like, but some of the photos (see the blue jay photo, for example) are really unrepresentative to me. but that is a characteristic of all photo guides it seems.
have a great trip!
the text of the new princeton pictorial guides i really like, but some of the photos (see the blue jay photo, for example) are really unrepresentative to me. but that is a characteristic of all photo guides it seems.
have a great trip!
Sibley for me--little one in the field and big one at home. All the birds in the same pose for easy comparison, and every surface of every bird is shown. Try to find out what the underside of the wing of a tricolored heron looks like (which is actually an important field mark) from looking at Nat Geo--it's not depicted or described, but is easily found in Sibley.
Best,
Jim
Best,
Jim
Last edited:
Not sure why you prefer the old ones. Do you think the printing was better on those? That did happen on some European "Peterson" editions. But the newest NG edition is certainly larger and thus less convenient to use in the field. Plus, they changed to the so called new system as discussed in another thread some time ago. Also not particularly field friendly during the transition period.
Microtus
Maryland USA (he/him)
I use the Eastern Sibley in the field with the National Geographic guide as a backup. The fifth edition of the latter has several newer and more accurate illustrations than any of the preceding editions. Overall I think that the Sibley guide is the most accurate and useful in the field, as illustrated by J. Moore's comment about Tricolored Heron.
Grousemore
Senior Member
I agree completely.
I have every field-guide available, but to ID birds, which as a visitor you'll presumably want to do, Sibley is paramount.
A small point in favor of the Sibleys not mentioned so far is the fact that AFAIK they are the only modern FGs that give weights as well as linear measurements, weight IMO often being as useful a criterion of relative size as wing span or overall length. If nothing else weight data can be a source of entertaining trivia questions (. . . which is heavier, a Snowy Egret or a Mew Gull?).
Also, in contrast to e.g. Nat Geo and Peterson, Sibley shows the full range of a bird's occurrence on its range maps--including both migration range and the area where a bird occurs but is rare. The other guides leave you to guess where a bird occurs in migration.
Best,
Jim
Best,
Jim
Peter C.
...just zis guy, you know?
Not sure why you prefer the old ones. Do you think the printing was better on those? That did happen on some European "Peterson" editions. But the newest NG edition is certainly larger and thus less convenient to use in the field. Plus, they changed to the so called new system as discussed in another thread some time ago. Also not particularly field friendly during the transition period.
I haven't seen this bigger Nat. Geo., so I don't know - what I think was better about the second edition vs. the 4th and 5th, is the quality of the paintings - very three-dimensional, as opposed to the very flat, featureless paintings in the newer guides (and, for that matter, in Sibley). Check out the Towhee pages, as a good example.
This is largely an academic discussion, of course (since OP won't find it anyway), but the only serious drawback I can see to the 2nd Edition NG is that the taxonomy has moved on quite a bit since it was published; there are quite a few splits that don't appear ... I think the "tabbed" pages (by family) is another positive change, but a minor one.
