That’s quite lovely! The pose and glare (according to my anthropomorphization) really bring life to the image.
3 Likes
Thank you!
That birdie was so nice to wait until I could take a number of images, before it flew away.
2 Likes
Behold, the spectacular proof:
Even though they are some of the worst photos ever taken by a human, I can sometimes get a picture just good enough for me to identify the bird.
But maybe my new project is to get a phone photo of a bird that I would be happy to hang on my wall. Obviously I can’t cheat and go to a zoo or farm. This will be a wild bird. I wonder how long-term this project will be…
6 Likes
In the meantime, you can make a “Where is Waldo” style book of birds from your “rejects”. 
Hmm…Now I kind of want to do this project lol
3 Likes
Since this seems to be a bird photography thread now…
I see these Hooded Merganser (i think) every winter in a water retention pond for a local subway station. I dont have enough lens and they never get close enough to “shore” for me to get a really nice close-up.
315mm FF equiv
8 Likes
I just went for morning golden hour to a favourite local location - this was at 600mm on APS-C, i.e. 900mm FF equiv:
14 Likes
That’s awesome @Thomas_Do, a fine-art print.
6 Likes
I’m guessing about as long as that long lens you’re gonna talk yourself into…
How did you guess!
I’ve actually ramped up my research lately into my next long lens. However, it’s proving difficult to beat my Fuji 70-300mm for size and value for money. At 450mm FF equivalent, it’s got really nice reach although it’s still not enough for birding. But getting more into the 600-800mm reach is a challenge and a decision not to be made lightly…
All the ones I want are thousands of dollars.
I got started with birding with a Nikon DX (i.e. APS-C) Kit-level 55-300 zoom, which maxes out at 450mm FF equiv. One capture at least with that one I shared here: this one.
Looking over my collection of images rated 3 stars with that lens, I note 2 things:
- Quite a few are of larger birds - pelicans, great egrets, swamp hens, swans
- But not a few are of small or even tiny birds; yes, you do struggle to fill the frame with those, and cropping down does impact the quality.
I could lust after long glass with price tags approaching $10,000 (AUD), but they were never realistically an option for me. I ended up waiting for a sale at a time I was expecting my tax refund and got a Sigma 150-600mm (FF, so 225-900mm on APS-C) in their (C)ontemporary series - which is the cheapest - and spent a little under AUD $1400 in 2019. More expensive are the (S)port and still dearer are the (A)rt. But the quality does not necessarily increase as the price does, according to some reviews, and the contemporary is already quite heavy enough, thank you.
Is this Sigma Contemporary as good as perfect for me? No: it has its best sharpness in the mid-range, and the fastest aperture decreases out to f/6.3 at the long end. It is, however, the best I have by a large margin. And at 300mm it leaves the Nikon DX kit-level for dead.
You can currently find this lens for Nikon-F mount for just over USD 1000 online
3 Likes
That depends on how and where you want to do your birding. With a simple hide in your garden where you feed birds (*), you can get some of them to approach to a metre or so… Parcs also can be a good spot (the birds are used to the presence of humans).
Also, in the “film era”, lots of work was done with 300 mm or less (and that’s of course 300 mm FF eq.). And at 800 ISO or less. Cropping was possible, but “a bit” more complicated.
600 mm does give a lot more options, of course. BUT: those lenses are unwieldy (too heavy and clumsy for hand-held work, for me at least), so you’ll need decent support as well. And DoF is tiny…
(*: can be as simple as a curtain or cardboard in an open window. The others in the house might not appreciate, though, especially in winter. Don’t ask how I leaned that )
1 Like
Gee, well that didn’t take long at all…
By way of comparison, from a distance of 5m 16ft, same bird, same twig, same lens (Sigma 150-600 C),
Canon full frame @600mm______________Canon crop @600mm
Still gotta be pretty close
Mind you, not the kit to carry in a back pocket
4 Likes
I’m not much of a birder at the moment and maybe never will be, but I’ve always had more than a passing interest in photographing birds, and I’ve found 450mm equivalent to be frustratingly short at times. But because it’s not the main focus of my hobby and I don’t really know what I’m doing yet (for serious birding), I’m loath to spend big on the nice glass. On the other hand, I realize I need to spend more to remove the frustration I currently have with my kit. Yes, I can get some successful shots with my current equipment but it would be more confined to the situation you describe rather than when I’m out on a hike or trying to find the rarer species, which is more of what I’d be interested in. My current successes have all been around the house.
Something like the OM System 70-300mm is a very affordable way to get to 600mm equivalent with an extremely compact set-up. But it’s rather slow and I think I’d be at high ISOs a lot of the time. And I’m not convinced it would offer much more than my current XF70-300 which has less reach but is paired with my 40MP X-T5 so has more cropping room.
Haha, well there is no imminent purchase and I’m fine with what I have for the time being. I will continue with my daft phone project for a while yet, if for no other reason than the amusement it gives me. And I still have the 450mm equivalent lens on my Fuji, which can sometimes be all I need if the bird is cooperative, like this merlin sitting on a powerline near my house:
6 Likes
Trying to derail this nice birding thread with something different.
The first photo I’m calling: “Ooh, must touch!”
Shot at 100 mm (200mm FF) and f/7.1. Using “manual mode with auto ISO” as suggested in another thread.
The second one is “Blue Moon.”
The dog’s name is “Blue.” Shot at 50 mm (100 FF), f/7.1.
I’m still getting used to longer focal lengths; the moon is not quite in focus. I had assumed f/7.1 would be enough but didn’t take the time to check.
11 Likes
Some Austrian tradition:
ISO 12800 
- 156mm (252mm FFequiv) - 𝑓/6.3 - 1/40s
ISO 12800 - 200mm (323mm FFequiv) - 𝑓/7.1 - 1/40s
edit: Do you also see the Moiré in the second picture? I never had that with any camera before, but this is the second image with the R7 where I see it…
5 Likes
Sigma Canada has their 100-400 Contemporary for X mount on sale at a significant discount at the moment: Sigma 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG DN OS | Contemporary — Sigma Canada
150-600 FF equivalent. I have one of these, and have gotten some decent results with it, but I still find myself wanting more reach. It never ends.
1 Like
haha, yeah, I know that feeling. I was thinking that 600mm would be just that bit extra I needed beyond my 450mm (equivalent), but it’s not really that huge a difference, especially with birding. So 800mm was my new target…
I think it’s one of the reasons I still feel I want those high-resolution sensors. Because the extra cropping ability can replace the need for bigger glass.
I can’t remember your camera body, but do you have the 40MP sensor? If so, have you tried using the digital teleconverter to simulate a longer focal length? I use it with my 70-300mm sometimes, although it’s only the JPEG affected, so it makes no difference if you only shoot/edit RAW. But it can still be useful for framing.
Also, with my OM-5, it upscales the digitally teleconverted shot, so your JPEG is actually a higher res image, which is a nice feature.
Hi @reox
Nice photos!
I can see some faint ripples in the background of the second image. I don’t see enough to label it as “Moiré,” but something more akin to a bit of a screen door effect. Perhaps it is more evident in your raw developer. In any case, I happen to like the effect here.
1 Like