Off topic, what SLR for birders?

[Trevor Carpenter]

Not for me; I have no intention of deserting my FZ50 but acquaintances are often asking about the best SLR solution for bird photography and it strikes me that in general they don't look very far outside the box. For example I don't think the Pentaxs are ever considered yet they get very good reports here. I could ask on the general forums but I think I will get a more unbiased version here.

So the question is, you are a birder who wants an SLR and a couple of lenses what would you buy? Although you may use the camera for other things you won't consider these when making the decision, birds are everything. Price probably is an issue but not to the point of sticking second rate lenses on.
--



FZ50, Oly TCON17, Raynox DCR150 (need a lot of practice with the latter)
My Galleries are at
http://picasaweb.google.com/trevorfcarpenter
My website is
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/birdsofhants/index.html

 

[Kevin Coppalotti]

When it comes to sports/action/birding one camera reigns supreme: Canon in just about any flavour, probably the pick of the current bunch is the Canon 30D with 1.6 crop, then the new 1DMKIII if money is no object.

Its not the body selection that kills the budget however, - its the glass, thats where the great divide between rich and poor becomes clear and budgets have to be specified. Just the tripod alone for a decent big lens kit is probably Worth 2 X FZ50's, so we are talking serious money.

On a modest budget just about any half decent DSLR will get results, it just depends on how good you want those results to be and how much money you want to spend.

Not for me; I have no intention of deserting my FZ50 but
acquaintances are often asking about the best SLR solution for bird
photography and it strikes me that in general they don't look very
far outside the box. For example I don't think the Pentaxs are
ever considered yet they get very good reports here. I could ask
on the general forums but I think I will get a more unbiased
version here.

So the question is, you are a birder who wants an SLR and a couple
of lenses what would you buy? Although you may use the camera for
other things you won't consider these when making the decision,
birds are everything. Price probably is an issue but not to the
point of sticking second rate lenses on.
--



FZ50, Oly TCON17, Raynox DCR150 (need a lot of practice with the
latter)
My Galleries are at
http://picasaweb.google.com/trevorfcarpenter
My website is
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/birdsofhants/index.html

--
Kevin Coppalotti
http://razorsharp.smugmug.com
http://maxhr.zenfolio.com/

 

[KenTel]

Well I couldn't afford to think about it. But I do accompany a Pro. Bird Photog on some lucky events, and this is his llist of equipment.

Canon 5D x 3
Canon 20D
Canon 400D
Canon 1.4 & 2.0 converters
Canon 100-400mm IS lens
Canon 600mm prime IS lens
Sigma 8mm RE DG fish-eye lens
Canon 24-105 IS lens
Manfrotto tripod & King Cobra head
Canon 550 flash
and all manner of other lenses & bits & pieces

I did ask him about the Fish-Eye, so was then shown pics taken of him hand feeding various wild birds, yes he is that good!

--
Cheers.
Ken.

 

[Rossuziers]

I'd check on the weatherproof Pentax, which eventually should be getting weatherproof lenses & hopefully at least one real long fast one.... But bottomless pockets aside which might favor the best Canons with the biggest 'IS' lenses... I'd definately prefer something with stabilization built into the body so long lenses won't need to be stabilized & gobble up the big bucks.... So basically I'd research the longest current Pentax compatable lenses available along with a 2x converter to go on the weatherproof Pentax body....

But then again, I'm a DSLR-a-Phobe with very limited DSLR interest or knowledge...
--

The Amateur Formerly Known as 'UZ'pShoot'ERS' 'Happy Shootin' Comments, Critique, Ridicule, Limmericks, Jokes, Hi-jackings, EnthUZIastically, Encouraged... I Insist!



* [email protected] * http://www.pbase.com/rrawzz * EffZeeThreeZero / CeeEightZeroEightZeroDoubleUZee / CeeTwoOneZeroZeroUZee / EOneHuderedAreEss

 

[aftab]

Agree with Kevin, Canon has the best set up at the moment. I would say for body 20D, 30D, 1Ds MKIII or even 5D. And for a two lens et up
Canon 100-400 plus depending on budget one of the faster tele prime.
I have used 5D and 30D with 100-400 and 400/5.6 for birding.
The experience is simply breathtaking.
aftab
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aftab/

 

[PhilD73]

I'd go for a non full frame Canon personally... so I'd not choose the 5D which I have (great for studio, less good for long range). If they're looking at taking pictures of non-static birds (ie flying) I'd also look at focus speeds and accuracy of any lens and camera combination.

I'd consider a 1DmkIIn maybe, and then possibly the popular 100-400 L IS, although 400mm isn't actually that long really when you're taking bird shots...

--
http://www.phildrinkwater.co.uk

 

[Ching-Kuang Shene]

So the question is, you are a birder who wants an SLR and a couple
of lenses what would you buy? Although you may use the camera for
other things you won't consider these when making the decision,
birds are everything. Price probably is an issue but not to the
point of sticking second rate lenses on.

If $$$ is not a big issue, I'd say the 4/3 system, currently Olympus, is the best for birders. Here is why. The 4/3-system has a crop factor of 2, and its small sensor permits very large aperture telephoto lenses with a comparable size with the traditional SLR lenses. For example, Olympus has a 300mm f/2. When you mount this lens on a 4/3-system body, it is equivalent to 135 film's 600mm f2. I am not sure if Oly has good 1.4X or 2X converters. If they do, adding a 1.4X (resp., 2X) converter, the 300 f/2 is equivalent to 840 f/2.8 (resp., 1200 f/4). This is a bird shooters' dream! Noise? Yes, noise, this is currently a big concern. Not sure how good the the anticipated E-3 would be.

CK
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam

Nikon Coolpix 950/990/995/2500/4500/5700, Panasonic FZ-10/FZ-30, and Canon A95 User Guides

 

[Rossuziers]

So the question is, you are a birder who wants an SLR and a couple
of lenses what would you buy? Although you may use the camera for
other things you won't consider these when making the decision,
birds are everything. Price probably is an issue but not to the
point of sticking second rate lenses on.

If $$$ is not a big issue, I'd say the 4/3 system, currently
Olympus, is the best for birders. Here is why. The 4/3-system has
a crop factor of 2, and its small sensor permits very large
aperture telephoto lenses with a comparable size with the
traditional SLR lenses. For example, Olympus has a 300mm f/2. When
you mount this lens on a 4/3-system body, it is equivalent to 135
film's 600mm f2. I am not sure if Oly has good 1.4X or 2X
converters. If they do, adding a 1.4X (resp., 2X) converter, the
300 f/2 is equivalent to 840 f/2.8 (resp., 1200 f/4). This is a
bird shooters' dream! Noise? Yes, noise, this is currently a big
concern. Not sure how good the the anticipated E-3 would be.

Hell, even on the weatherproof & quiet E1 body that might be a decent setup, if 5mp is enough.... Unfortunately none of it would be stabilized though... But with the new E510 with stabilized body comming out soon... That might be food for future thought....
--

The Amateur Formerly Known as 'UZ'pShoot'ERS' 'Happy Shootin' Comments, Critique, Ridicule, Limmericks, Jokes, Hi-jackings, EnthUZIastically, Encouraged... I Insist!



* [email protected] * http://www.pbase.com/rrawzz * EffZeeThreeZero / CeeEightZeroEightZeroDoubleUZee / CeeTwoOneZeroZeroUZee / EOneHuderedAreEss

 

[MusicDoctorDJ]

Just the tripod alone for a
decent big lens kit is probably Worth 2 X FZ50's, so we are talking
serious money.

What planet do you live on . . . ?

I can think of several Bogen tripod and head combinations for under $350 that would be perfect for big lens shooting!

FZ50 prices . . . Retail: $600 . . . Online: around $500!

--
J. M. Daniels
Denver, Colorado
Panasonic FZ10, FZ50 & Fuji S602Z owner & operator



Remember . . . always keep the box and everything that came in it!

 

[PhilD73]

I'm pretty sure depth of field is affected by sensor size. So, while you will get f2 in terms of light, you might get something more like f4 in terms of depth of field.

Just in case this is useful info

--
http://www.phildrinkwater.co.uk

 

[Kevin Coppalotti]

Have you checked the price of of tripod and heads, - the real good stuff, not the toys, the stuff that can take the weight of 500L and the Sigmonster for example??

I know from my discussions in the Canon lens forum many of the guys use tripod and head combos worth over $US1000. My own entry level tripod and head is woth 1.2X an FZ50.

Just the tripod alone for a
decent big lens kit is probably Worth 2 X FZ50's, so we are talking
serious money.

What planet do you live on . . . ?

I can think of several Bogen tripod and head combinations for under
$350 that would be perfect for big lens shooting!

FZ50 prices . . . Retail: $600 . . . Online: around $500!

--
J. M. Daniels
Denver, Colorado
Panasonic FZ10, FZ50 & Fuji S602Z owner & operator



Remember . . . always keep the box and everything that came in it!

--
Kevin Coppalotti
http://razorsharp.smugmug.com
http://maxhr.zenfolio.com/

 

[aftab]

5D is not bad for birding actually, compared to 20D/30D... as a matter of fact I prefer it over my 30D for extra resolution and finer detail.. and its fast and accurate enough almost all birding situation.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aftab/

 

[PhilD73]

Fair play. Mine tends to be pointed at ladies most of the time and they're much more liable to do what I want than birds

--
http://www.phildrinkwater.co.uk

 

[leighton w]

Nikon has not been mentioned yet so I'll say Nikon. I know I'm biased because I have one. :> )
--
=======================================================
Tom
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tomwom/

 

[MusicDoctorDJ]

Have you checked the price of of tripod and heads, - the real good
stuff, not the toys, the stuff that can take the weight of 500L and
the Sigmonster for example??
I know from my discussions in the Canon lens forum many of the guys
use tripod and head combos worth over $US1000. My own entry level
tripod and head is woth 1.2X an FZ50.

Yess . . . I sell this stuff every day, so I do know what this stuff sells for!

Just because many choose to spend over $1000 for a tripod setup doesn't mean that you can't get as good (if not better) of a setup for much less!

On the otherhand, many of those here on the chats will claim to have all of this high end expensive stuff . . . yet really don't have it!

Or, they just have more money than they know what to do with, so they buy the most expensive carbon fiber setup money can buy, then claim it is the only thing that will do the job!

Or . . . they are like my neighbor . . . who's stuff always costs twice as much as mine, twice as heavy duty, always newer than mine . . . you get the picture.

I know . . . 'cause I see these same people every day in my store!

--
J. M. Daniels
Denver, Colorado
Panasonic FZ10, FZ50 & Fuji S602Z owner & operator



Remember . . . always keep the box and everything that came in it!

 

[Steve82]

The 4/3-system has
a crop factor of 2, and its small sensor permits very large
aperture telephoto lenses with a comparable size with the
traditional SLR lenses.

Do you think that the Oly's have a "fast enough" focus speed for birds in flight? From what I've read, generally Canon and Nikon are usually considered the two best options if focus speed is one of your top criteria.

 

[TomJ]

While on vacation recently in Florida I rubbed elbows with a good number of photographers who specialize in bird and wildlife photography. Most were freelance pro shooters who purchased their own equipment and some were serious amateurs with a keen interest in birds and birding. Overwhelmingly, the camera make of choice was Canon. Models varied with most amateurs shooting Rebels and the occasional 10D, 20D, 30D. All of the pros (many of whom I exchanged business cards with) were shooting 1D Mark IIN's and 1D Mark II S bodies. One individual had recently been given the opportunity to shoot with the new forthcoming Canon 1D Mark III body for a week and had already pre-ordered two of them he was so impressed.

In my own experience, and before obtaining the Panny FZ-50, I carried either a Canon 1D Mark II body, a 1 Ds Mark II body or a 5D along with a 100-400 IS lens. Speaking of lenses, the 100-400 was probably one of the more popular Canon lenses in the field, though I did see a a good number of 70-200 lenses often with 1.4X converters attached. The seasond pros were all shooting 500 and 600 mm lenses often with a teleconverter as well. These rigs sat upon large Bogen and Gitzo tripods usually outfitted with gimbal heads.

If I were going to get serious about bird photography professionally and leave the world of corporate and advertising photography (which actually can pay the bills, ha, ha) I would probably opt for the new 1D Mark III bodies myself and add a 500 mm f/4 and 1.4x teleconverter to my lens kit.

Yes, there were a few Nikon shooters in the mix, but fewer and further between than I have ever seen and all that I did see were amateurs. Several pro photographers I spoke with were former Nikon shooters. Not because Canon is so much better, but in the professional world even a little bit better is an advantage and when you are relying on this to make a living, you want every advantage you can have no matter how small. And right now Canon has that over Nikon in most pro's minds.

All the best,

TomJ

 

[luisflorit]

Fair play. Mine tends to be pointed at ladies most of the time and
they're much more liable to do what I want than birds

Lucky you... This is one of the main reasons I am becoming a birder!

L.

--



FZee50 + Oly EfEl50 + TeeCon17 + Raynx150 (250 comming!)
Nikn CeePee4500; Cann EsDee500

 

[MusicDoctorDJ]

I'm pretty sure depth of field is affected by sensor size. So,
while you will get f2 in terms of light, you might get something
more like f4 in terms of depth of field.

Actually, this is a pretty interesting concept!

Most of the time, I see many here on the forums complaining about this exact same thing!

In otherwords, many don't like the smaller sensors because they have a tendency to increase depth of field, because there are those who don't want any depth of field.

However, there are those of us who like that extra stop or two of depth of field, because now we don't have to stop the lens down as far (thus resulting in slower shutter speeds) to get the same range of focus we once had to close the lens down to f:11 or f:16.

--
J. M. Daniels
Denver, Colorado
Panasonic FZ10, FZ50 & Fuji S602Z owner & operator
Remember . . . always keep the box and everything that came in it!

 

[ejmartin]

I have no first hand experience with anything but Canon gear.
Two years ago I went that direction because the deciding factor
for me was the lens system. There was a good chance that
eventually I would want to get a long supertelephoto (500 or 600mm)
and then there really is little choice. One of the main reasons high-end
amateurs and pros use Canon over Nikon is the image stabilization
of their supertelephoto lenses. Another factor is the 45-point AF
system of their pro bodies, and best-in-class high ISO capability.

But this is at the very high end. At less rarified price points,
there is less to choose from in bodies, but I think Canon still has
the advantage in lenses in the 400mm range. The Nikon 80-400 VR
and Sigma 50-500 are comparable to the Canon 100-400 IS
(and the Sigma will be image stabilized when used on
an antishake body such as Pentax or Sony), though I believe
the Canon still has the edge in AF speed. And there is no rival
to the Canon 400/5.6 for speed of AF, though it is not IS and
so you need a tripod for low shutter speed (for high shutter speed
and BIF it's a dream).

Up to ISO 400 the bodies of all the major players
are pretty comparable in terms of noise performance and overall
image quality. I'm thinking of the Canon 30D/400D, Nikon D200/D80,
Sony A100, Pentax K100/K10. The Oly system suffers from the small
sensor, and overall speed (the AF system is poorer as well).
Here I'm judging from images and reviews with rigorous testing
like dpreview and imaging-resource. I don't know for instance
what the relative merits of servo tracking AF are among these
(for following moving esp. flying birds);
I do know Canon's is decent.

At ISO800-1600 the advantage goes to Canon,
but I only go there if forced by lighting conditions; I think there is
a definite and visible drop in image quality, you start to lose fine
feather details on the bird (if you've filled the frame and are not
printing really big, it's not so bad though).

So to me it still comes down to the lens system -- what are your
choices within a given mount, and is there an upgrade path
should you decide to get further, erm, invested in bird/wildlife
photography. For the entry level, there is not so much difference.
Towards the high end, it's Canon all the way (for now). That could
of course change if Nikon ever puts VR into their supertelephoto
lenses, or if Sony or Pentax start making long fast lenses widely
available at a competitive price point.

I have several birding friends who've gotten interested in
photography, and have gone the Canon 30D/400D route
with 400/5.6 or 100-400 lens, and are very happy with the
results they get.
--
emil
--



http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/