[wisb] Re: Birding Camera
- From: Doug Herr <wildlightphoto@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: harrierhawk1@xxxxxxxxx, alschirmacher@xxxxxxxx, wisbirdn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 08:25:21 -0800 (GMT-08:00)
Andrea Szymczak wrote:
>If replies are made on this topic PLEASE reply to the entire list ~ I'm
>thinking about doing the same thing that Al is considering. In particular,
>I'd like a model that fits easily into a coat pocket.
Andrea Szymczak wrote:
>>>
If replies are made on this topic PLEASE reply to the entire list ~ I'm
thinking about doing the same thing that Al is considering. In particular,
I'd like a model that fits easily into a coat pocket.
<<<
You might want to browse the whatbird.com forums. There's a section for
birding photography. Advice can (and often, will be) biased toward the user's
particular interests and objectives but if you get a broad range of opinions
you may be able to narrow your choices down.
My approach is fine art, which requires very different equipment and field work
than documentation does.
One of the simplest approaches is called digiscoping, where you use a spotting
scope and a relatively inexpensive (coat pocket) digital camera held up to the
scope's eyepiece. This can be very inexpensive if you already have a spotting
scope. See http://www.digiscoped.com/Digiscopingindex.html for example.
For a dedicated camera (more $$$) typical birders find that a lens that's at
least equivalent to a 400mm on a 35mm camera is a bare minimum focal length.
For cameras with a sensor smaller than 35mm film, the focal length you'd need
for an equivalent angle of view would be calculated by multiplying the focal
length by the camera's crop factor. For example a 4/3-system camera has a crop
factor of 2.0 so a 200mm lens on a 4/3-system camera would give you an angle of
view equivalent to a 400mm lens on a 35mm camera. There's a lot of confusion
and misinformation surrounding the crop factors and equivalent focal lengths.
Some camera makers specify the actual focal length, some specify the focal
length * crop factor because 35mm-equivalent is familiar to many people. The
thing you're looking for is the angle of view: a 400mm lens on a 35mm camera
yields a 6 degree angle of view. You want 6 degrees or narrower. A longer
lens (narrower angle of view) is harder to hold steady.
You also need to consider how to keep the camera steady enough to get a clear
photo. The traditional approach is a sturdy (i.e., big & heavy) tripod, but
there are electronic stabilizing technologies that help reduce the need for a
tripod. Canon calls theirs Image Stabilization (IS), Nikon calls theirs
Vibration Reduction (VR), Sony calls theirs Super Steady Shot (SSS).
For every camera feature there are tradeoffs. More $$$$ typically results in a
more responsive setup, one that can be used in dimmer lighting conditions, and
will produce better quality big prints. The tradeoffs besides $$$$ include the
bulk and weight, battery consumption, and worrying about the equipment in the
field. There's a lot to consider.
Doug Herr
Orangevale, Sacramento County
http://www.wildlightphoto.com
####################
You received this email because you are subscribed to the Wisconsin Birding
Network (Wisbirdn).
To UNSUBSCRIBE or SUBSCRIBE, use the Wisbirdn web interface at:
//www.freelists.org/list/wisbirdn
To set DIGEST or VACATION modes, use the Wisbirdn web interface at:
//www.freelists.org/list/wisbirdn
Visit Wisbirdn ARCHIVES at: //www.freelists.org/archives/wisbirdn
Other related posts:
