Taking bird pictures

[mugge]

There is a colony of Ibis near our home and I decided to take some shots. I wanted birds in flight and also landing and taking off. I used my Olympus m1 mk2 with an Oly 40-150mm 2.8.

I took a total of 647 images, all taken at high speed. On uploading the images on my computer I got one solitary picture that was somewhat passable.

I was aware that I was not anticipating correctly a few times in my shot selections but even then to get only one picture out of 647 is quite disappointing.

I did spend time observing the birds before I started taking pictures and I thought I got the right spot, the right time and the right lens.

What, I wonder, was I doing wrong?

[royent]

What was wrong with the shots that you discarded?

Not enough practice

[William W]

As some general comments:

> it is a difficult task nailing BIF
> would go to analysis and probably your learning if you posted some errors with EXIF
> arguably Mirrorless is not the most suitable tool - none the less, IMO you definitely can improve on that score of 1/647
> 647 shots in ??? (guess less than 30 minutes???) is too many shots, you're probably not concentrating enough on anticipation and good technique

There was a conversation at CiC earlier, perhaps two three months ago, in that thread were sereval points as to why Mirorrless Systems are not the favoured choice of BIF Photographers: similarly Sports Photographers. I think it also had some Mirrorless specific comments which could assist technique. If I find the thread before someone does, I'll post a link here.

WW

[mugge]

As some general comments:

> it is a difficult task nailing BIF
> would go to analysis and probably your learning if you posted some errors with EXIF
> arguably Mirrorless is not the most suitable tool - none the less, IMO you definitely can improve on that score of 1/647
> 647 shots in ??? (guess less than 30 minutes???) is too many shots, you're probably not concentrating enough on anticipation and good technique

There was a conversation at CiC earlier, perhaps two three months ago, in that thread were sereval points as to why Mirorrless Systems are not the favoured choice of BIF Photographers: similarly Sports Photographers. I think it also had some Mirrorless specific comments which could assist technique. If I find the thread before someone does, I'll post a link here.

WW

My mistakes are much worse I am afraid to say. I first went to the site the day before. I had my Fuji X100F with me. I observed the bird for an hour or more, with the intention of going back the following day with my Oly.

I must have taken the images over two hours at least, not 30min. My errors are getting bigger and bigger

[bhurley]

So what exactly where the problems with the rejects? Out of focus, out of frame, improperly exposed, too much movement-related blur?

If you don't mind cropping (and you shoudn't), you could zoom out a bit to increase your chances of catching the birds in flight and then crop in by a reasonable amount (recognizing that you will lose resolution in doing so).

There are thousands of excellent photos of birds in flight taken on mirrorless cameras ranging from full-frame to APS-C and MFT sensors. It can be done.

I'd also recommend that you consider including more of the environment, especially for birds taking off and landing. In my view there are far too many close-up portraits of birds showing all the beauty and details in every feather but they might as well have been shot in a studio; the most interesting images to me are photos that show the birds in the context of their environment; the bird may not even be the primary subject in the picture. Take a look at the paintings of Bruno Liljefors, one of the most important wildlife artists of all time, and you'll see lots of very compelling environmental portraits and very few close-ups.

[Manfred M]

I agree with the others, we do need to see some examples of the types of things that went wrong.

The first time I tried bird photography, the biggest issue I ran into was focus problems with the focus mode being the primary issue. The camera always picked the wrong place to focus and with a long lens, the focusing errors were quite apparent.

I don't shoot birds very often, but when I do, generally try to pre-focus and have set my camera with back-button-focus (BBF) so that I do not lose this setting. That seems to work, even for birds in flight. I also use a single point focus when shooting birds in trees, otherwise the matrix focus gets to complicated and seeks out the branches, not the bird.

Other than than, motion blur from insufficient shutter speed has been my biggest issue.

[Stagecoach]

There is a colony of Ibis near our home and I decided to take some shots. I wanted birds in flight and also landing and taking off. I used my Olympus m1 mk2 with an Oly 40-150mm 2.8.

I took a total of 647 images, all taken at high speed. On uploading the images on my computer I got one solitary picture that was somewhat passable.

I was aware that I was not anticipating correctly a few times in my shot selections but even then to get only one picture out of 647 is quite disappointing.

I did spend time observing the birds before I started taking pictures and I thought I got the right spot, the right time and the right lens.

What, I wonder, was I doing wrong?

As others have mentioned you have not told us what was wrong with your attempts.

Doing a quick search I found this article which should be of help and I believe is your camera and lens combo.

https://learnandsupport.getolympus.c...rd-photography

[mugge]

I am grateful for all the good advice given to me. I will try this:

single point focus instead of five points focus

zoom out and be more ready to crop

use 121 points when bird is set against sky instead of five points

If the colony of Ibis is still there I'll will have a good tryout.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Ole,

I identified so well with the feelings expressed in your original post - I used to shoot birds a few years back and just when I thought I had it sorted in my head, like you describe, I sometimes came back with a whole session's worth of duds, which I immediately deleted.

That's possibly the first mistake, hang on to them at least long enough to be able to show the problems here, or if too shy (I was), analyse them a week later when the emotion has left you and you can determine the causes of the problems - it is likely there will be many different ones - the odd shot that is perfectly exposed will be out of focus, the odd shot that is sharp on subject's head/eye will be badly exposed - and so on.

Cameras (on auto anything) are dumb, but photographers can be dumber (if they believe the advertising hyperbole)

I don't shoot mirror-less, far less do I know Olympus, so I cannot help with specifics, but here are some general thoughts based on what I eventually learnt:

(numbers are for reference, they do not denote 'importance', equally the order may not be relevant to your situation)

1) I usually only use AF to preset the focus distance (in my case via 'back-button' method)
2) I also preset the exposure whenever possible (by shooting on manual and having set that by trial and error on the day viewing RGB histograms)
3) The combination of 1) and 2), preset focus and exposure, yields the highest burst rate - it also simplifies your job, concentrate on tracking and framing a flying bird
4) I only use multipoint, tracking AF if the background will be purely clear sky (no clouds, other birds or ground based clutter)
5) If the shot will have clouds, water, trees, other birds, river banks, grass, etc. in background (bg) - DO NOT rely on AF - pre-focus at the distance the subject will be when you have the desired framing
6) I have some lenses that are only good (sharp + good contrast) beyond f/8 or f/11
7) The result of using high ISO (noise) is often easier to deal with in post processing than too much wing blur because the shutter speed was too low
8) Burst shooting is your friend for 'bif', but be aware of any buffer limitations (esp. in RAW) and temper your enthusiasm to prevent running out (and slowing down) just when it gets closest and largest in frame

Keep at it, it was only when I made a concerted effort by shooting often, making small variations to my technique, thoroughly analysing the results and refining the technique, that I started to see consistent improvement.

I recall shooting some sessions where I tried a specific focus mode for half an hour, then changed ONE aspect and continued. Only upon reviewing the of hundreds of shots could I determine which method gave the highest average ratio of sharp pictures to missed focus - given the variability of random bird flight over me.

If available to you in Oz, I found a good place to practice birds of prey in flight was a conservancy place that did demo flying sessions 2 or 3 times a day, I would go for the day and attend all those sessions. This has the advantage of close proximity for your lens, plus repeatable/predictable flight paths (from perches to handler). Sadly, this option may not be possible at the moment due to pandemic restrictions

Another option I had was a garden with a few trees and feeders to 'attract the locals'.

Do have a look at my birds albums on PBase, these shot over a period 2009-2012, some better than others, for shooting and post processing. I believe I have shot some birds since, but must have tired of uploading.
The Canada Goose, Cormorant, Grey Heron, Gulls and Mute Swan albums are possibly the best albums to check.

There are quite a few birds in my CiC Project 52 for 2012 album too.

If you see some shots there that are similar to your shooting situation, tell me which - and I will try to recall some useful, more specific, tips. Life, work and a granddaughter took me away from shooting the birds in the end.

And finally, don't be discouraged, on a good day, the average amateur, shooting alone, is likely to achieve 1 in 100 barely acceptable shots and one in a thousand might be worth entering in a competition here. The naff ones might be worth showing here for comments and guidance to improve.

Good luck,
Dave

[rpcrowe]

IMO - there are two different categories which cause failure in BIF photography, First: incorrect camera usage such as settings causing problems like OOF and bad exposure and poor camera handling causing you to miss the birds and, Second: poor stalking/positioning techniques..

Unless we could view the images which are problematic, or at least learn what you consider the errors to be, it would be quite difficult to give any advice...

I will make one comment... There is a vast difference between the capabilities of various brands and models of cameras in their auto focus and auto exposure capabilities...

There is a plethora of YouTube videos regarding BIF photography - some of which are general and pertain more to the techniques of BIF photography and some of which are brand/camera specific. Here are several videos regarding BIF photography with Olympus cameras.
https://www.google.com/search?q=olym...hrome&ie=UTF-8

You might, in the interest of keeping your morale high, shoot some images of non flying birds so that you might bring home some images that are decent while you are honing your BIF skills. That way an entire outing is not blown...



However even when shooting with a old Canon DSLR camera (EOS 40D in 2015) and the EOS 300mm f/4L IS lens (480mm equivalent), I had no problems with these sandhill cranes at the Bosque del Apache Wildlife Refuge, New Mexico, using autofocus.

1/1,000 second at f/8


Even with quite a busy background - the AF had no problem with subject separation
1/800 second f/8


This was the first time I shot BIF... Newer Sony and Canon cameras have better AF than the old 40D... But, the 300mm f/4L IS was a great action photography glass...

[odds]

...If the colony of Ibis is still there I'll will have a good tryout.

You may perhaps like to try Xavi Bou's approach:
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/m...tion-starling/

--
Odd S.

[Dave Humphries]

You may perhaps like to try Xavi Bou's approach:
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/m...tion-starling/

That is a concept I had pre-visualised myself, but have never seen done, nor figured a method I felt I could try.

Thanks for the link Odd,
Dave

[mugge]

This image was the best of a very bad lot of my ill fated Ibis expedition

Ibis by Ole Hansen, on Flickr

[Stagecoach]

This image was the best of a very bad lot of my ill fated Ibis expedition

Well it's a good start Ole.

It's framed well, focused in the right place and the exposure is good. What you need to look at now is your speed, aperture and ISO balance to see how you can improve it.

Unfortunately the shooting data is not with the image so it's difficult to advise.

[mugge]

Well it's a good start Ole.

It's framed well, focused in the right place and the exposure is good. What you need to look at now is your speed, aperture and ISO balance to see how you can improve it.

Unfortunately the shooting data is not with the image so it's difficult to advise.

Grahame, it was a severe crop, taken at 1/400 f3.2 at 150mm (300 in 35mm parlance) and the ISO was 200

[Stagecoach]

Grahame, it was a severe crop, taken at 1/400 f3.2 at 150mm (300 in 35mm parlance) and the ISO was 200

Thanks for posting the data Ole.

For this shot the light was not your friend, at the settings used it suggests a scene LV (light value) of 11. Your best option would have been to double the ISO to 400 allowing a faster speed.

On a decent sunny day you have around LV14 allowing a shutter speed of 1/3200 at the f/3.2, ISO200 you used. This gives more scope to increase the DoF if wanted, but possibly not necessary with your sensor.

[odds]

This image was the best of a very bad lot of my ill fated Ibis expedition

What would you like to be different in the image as shot? (The unsharp wings signal motion/flapping to me, frozen wings would not improve much, I think)

[Manfred M]

Grahame, it was a severe crop, taken at 1/400 f3.2 at 150mm (300 in 35mm parlance) and the ISO was 200

Your shutter speed is far too low (you should be looking at 1/1000th second or faster) and your ISO needs to be higher in order to compensate. Your focal length is quite short as well. Most birders I know shoot with a minimum of 400mm full-frame equivalent and a number of them are shooting at 600mm. Most birders generally look for no motion blur in the wings.

Serious birders are much like sports photographers; they own the high end camera bodies with the fastest lenses.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Ole,

I concur with the views on shutter speed.

The discussion on ISO reminds me that now my 'default' ISO for sunny day bird shooting is 500 - and for an overcast day, 1000 or more likely 2000, higher still if at the beginning or end of the day.

Those are the settings I find 'work' for me with my Nikon D7100, which reviews, plus my own experience, give best noise vs exposure results at these multiples (rather than 400/800/1600).

Unfortunately, with a 4/3 sensor, it is my opinion that you may be about a stop worse-off for noise than I am (APS-C), but noise is still easier to fix in post than blurred wings and tips. I used 'Neat Image' for NR, but other products seem just as effective if you need something beyond your normal PP software.

Given the conditions apparent in that shot (and your camera), I would have used 800 ISO and a shutter speed of 1/1600s, or perhaps a more nuanced approach, leaving some 'artistic' wing blur might have been 1/1000s at ISO 640.

You seemed to have nailed the panning speed with head/feet, which definitely earns you a 'well done', that's another thing that is easy to get wrong without practice.

Cheers,
Dave

[rpcrowe]

It would be helpful if any photographer would test out his or her camera/lens and determine the highest ISO values which will provide the minimum image quality, after any post processing noise reduction, that your combination is capable of producing. The image quality needed is determined by the uses to which he/she will put the images and any personal desire for quality.

Lately, I have been working with manual f/stop and shutter speed selection combined with Auto-ISO when shooting moving subjects. I can select a maximum ISO depending on my uses for the images...

Generally, however, I would prefer a sharp image with some additional noise over a noise free image that is blurred due to a shutter speed that is too slow...

BTW: there have been some camera lens combinations that I have used that are easier to hand hold than others...

Additionally, some camera/lens combinations can produce better IQ when shot wide open than can other combinations. I often shoot wide open with some tele zooms (such as the Sony 70-350mm) because of the relatively small (f/6.3) maximum aperture at the longest telephoto settings.