I got into photography at the same time I was heavily into birding and for a while thought about combining the two interests. My photography gear was the old Pentax screw-mount system, and I was even able to get the 500/4.5 Takumar lens, and I had a decent tripod. And of course I was shooting Fuji Velvia, because that's what the folks in Nature Photographer magazine used. But I don't know that I ever got a bird photograph I was happy with. I suppose now with autofocus and continuous shooting and near infinite storage I might have better luck, but I'm not about to shell out for a long lens for my DSLR.
My conclusion was that birds are always very small and far away. And also, that doing birding and doing bird photography are just very different activities and one should decide which you're trying to do on a given outing, and especially don't try to do one with a group of people doing the other.
Curious about this desire for eyes-on image. Maybe that descends from a naturalist’s want of fullest description. But I cherish this first image because I am sharing a perspective with this “beast”--possibly experiencing something of the same. Over the shoulder seems a so powerful way of engaging another as it constructs or sustains the illusion that we are sharing our respective expertise. Thanks Tim.
Thinking back on Ed Yong's book An Immense World, on animal sensory systems, he does point out that human beings have a kind of assumption about reading eyes-as-attention that doesn't apply the same way to birds--a lot of bird visual fields extend to the side and then up and down above and below the bird, not straight on in front of the bird. (He points out that this is why some species of raptors will fly into wind turbines--they literally can't look right in front of them as they're flying.) But it does seem to me that with bird photography, people have taken note that if a bird is looking at you, it's doing so from one side or the other--we've all seen birds turn their bodies or heads to keep track of a moving human. (Owls are one of several bird exceptions in this respect, and it's probably one reasons human beings find owls so fascinating--their facial/visual orientation appears closer to ours.)
I got into photography at the same time I was heavily into birding and for a while thought about combining the two interests. My photography gear was the old Pentax screw-mount system, and I was even able to get the 500/4.5 Takumar lens, and I had a decent tripod. And of course I was shooting Fuji Velvia, because that's what the folks in Nature Photographer magazine used. But I don't know that I ever got a bird photograph I was happy with. I suppose now with autofocus and continuous shooting and near infinite storage I might have better luck, but I'm not about to shell out for a long lens for my DSLR.
My conclusion was that birds are always very small and far away. And also, that doing birding and doing bird photography are just very different activities and one should decide which you're trying to do on a given outing, and especially don't try to do one with a group of people doing the other.
Curious about this desire for eyes-on image. Maybe that descends from a naturalist’s want of fullest description. But I cherish this first image because I am sharing a perspective with this “beast”--possibly experiencing something of the same. Over the shoulder seems a so powerful way of engaging another as it constructs or sustains the illusion that we are sharing our respective expertise. Thanks Tim.
Here's a brief guide to the conventional wisdom on birds: https://petapixel.com/2017/12/14/5-rules-better-bird-photos-eyes/
Thinking back on Ed Yong's book An Immense World, on animal sensory systems, he does point out that human beings have a kind of assumption about reading eyes-as-attention that doesn't apply the same way to birds--a lot of bird visual fields extend to the side and then up and down above and below the bird, not straight on in front of the bird. (He points out that this is why some species of raptors will fly into wind turbines--they literally can't look right in front of them as they're flying.) But it does seem to me that with bird photography, people have taken note that if a bird is looking at you, it's doing so from one side or the other--we've all seen birds turn their bodies or heads to keep track of a moving human. (Owls are one of several bird exceptions in this respect, and it's probably one reasons human beings find owls so fascinating--their facial/visual orientation appears closer to ours.)
Thanks for this link, and for these thoughts.
Yeah, serious bird photographers more or less have to have a big-ticket telephoto.