22 replies to this topic

[guy_incognito]

Was just wondering what camera settings people use while doing bird photography?  This may be somewhat camera specific, but I think generalized info may still be useful.

When I go out, I am usually on the move, so conditions are always changing.  I am not going to be doing much manual settings.  My camera is a Canon T1i (my first SLR, bought before getting into birding, but started my interest).

Sport mode is nice since it can capture fast moving birds, and minimize camera movement.  However, I'm not always happy with how much priority my camera puts into shutter speed.  On multiple occasions it will max out shutter speed at 1/4000 sec, but at the cost of bumping up to ISO 1600.  Many times I'd be much happier with 1/500 sec, and a lower ISO, so I don't get as much noise. 

I had read early on from a birder who recommended using an aperture priority mode, set at around F7-8.  This often works out for me.  Recently it has resulted in the opposite effect as sport mode, though.  It will shoot at ISO 200, but with 1/10 sec exposure...

I've set my autofocus and exposure to a small central spot, to try to eliminate the cameras tendency to focus on the surrounding brush and adjust to the background light (yielding a bird silhouette).

[thekiwi]

I use either my Nikon D60 or Nikon D80 and these are the settings I use most

I set the ISO to 400 I set the EV to under expose by 2/3 to a full stop, I always use aperture setting in order to keep the backgrounds nice and soft and out of focus and of couse I alway shot in raw inorder to retain the full range of the image tones and lighting.

[noahcomet]

Guy,

 

You're not going to want to hear this, perhaps, but if you want stellar pictures (of birds or anything else), nothing is going to work better than M mode (manual).  Please don't kill the messenger! :)

 

When I first started out with DSLR, I relied heavily on my camera's automodes and shift/priority-modes (the ones where only one variable shifts--whether shutter speed or aperture).  I got plenty of very good "keeper" pics this way, but since "going manual" (as they say), my keeper rate has increased a lot.  It's a matter of you taking control of your camera rather than the other way around, and once you start practicing it, it VERY QUICKLY becomes just as second-nature and just as easy as using an auto-mode---I swear!  At first I had to be convinced of this by the folks at Photography on the Net; now I'm a true believer.

 When I first arrive at the spot where I'm birding---before I even look for my first bird---here's my setup routine (takes about 15 seconds).

The first thing I do is gauge the light conditions and set my ISO.  If it's morning or late-afternoon (usually the best times for photography and birding), I'll probably select ISO 400, but if it's overcast, perhaps 640 or 800.  Higher ISOs (--my camera goes up to 6400--) are good for dawn/dusk or foresty settings, but of course you begin to sacrifice image quality to graininess. In bright conditions I'll occasionally go to ISO 100 or 200.  As I wander around an area, I'll constantly reevaluate the light conditions and adjust the ISO as needed.  When in doubt, 400 is a good choice, but it's not an all-purpose ISO.

The principal variable has to be shutter speed.  I find a good rule of thumb is that your minimum shutter speed should be 1/twice the focal length of your lens.  (Other people will give you different advice, but this is what works for me.)  Since my go-to lens is 400mm and since you have to magnify that number by the crop-factor of your camera (mine is 1.3x, yours is 1.6x), I shoot at a minimum of 1/1000, usually closer to 1/1600 if possible.  This pretty much eliminates blurriness due to camera-shake and is fast enough to capture not only still subjects but also birds in flight.  If you're using a zoom-lens rather than a prime, you can adjust shutter speed as your focal length changes, or just err on the side of keeping your speed suitable for your maximum zoom length, since that's likely to be where you do most of your shooting.  If you're using a lens with image stabilization, you can go a tad slower, but for birds-in-flight photography, it's probably best to disable IS (though here too, some will disagree).  If you're on a sturdy tripod, of course, you can go way slower (and again you'll need to disable IS), but most people i know don't schlep a tripod on birding hikes.

Once you've got your shutter speed selected to your minimum,  find a large frame-filling object that's about the same brightness as a bird---a tree-trunk is usually a good bet.  Point your camera at that object so that it fills the entire frame and check your exposure reading in the viewfinder.  Then adjust the aperture until you're where you want to be for a proper exposure. 

(INTERLUDE: In the auto and shift-modes, your camera will make some assumptions about how bright the picture should be, usually based on an averaged reading across the entire image; if you've got a small dark bird against a large bright sky, the camera is going to err on the side of toning down the sky, leading to a badly underexposed bird---this is the big reason for why you want to take control of your camera!  Even with a center-point metering system, the camera's never going to be smarter than YOU.)  

If you find that even with your maximum aperture, you still can't get a bright enough exposure, then bump up the ISO until you can---don't reduce the shutter speed!  You'd rather have a slightly grainy (high ISO) but sharp picture than one that's blurry because the shutter was too slow.  If you've got plenty of aperture-range to spare, then you can make some choices---do you want a wide-open aperture that will blur the background a little and isolate your birds from their surroundings?  In that case, keep the aperture wide (the smallest number) and increase the shutter speed.  Do you want lots of depth of field so that the bird and the foreground and the background are all in sharp focus?  Then keep your shutter speed at the minimum and close down the aperture (larger numbers) until you've got a proper exposure level.

 

Now you've got it.  You can pretty much keep the shutter speed and aperture settings where they are, and adjust ISO as lighting conditions change.  When you're actually snapping a picture, don't worry if the camera's meter indicates that you're over-exposing a shot, especially if the shot is of a bird against a bright background.  Remember, the camera's looking at the whole picture and trying to average things out, but you want to expose for the bird!  (The camera can't know that.)  Experiment a little with alternate settings, but I pretty much guarantee that if you follow these guidelines, you'll be satisfied with a lot of your pics.  There are other factors, naturally---a bright white egret is going to photography differently than a dark raven, but these settings will serve you well for almost all situations.  Another good tip I've learned to follow is that it's always better to err on the side of overexposing a shot (they call it "exposing to the right") rather than underexposing it.  You can always darken a bright shot in post without losing much detail in the process, but lightening a dark shot has a tendency to introduce noise and other ugly anomalies.

 

The other big question is about autofocus.  I too use a small center-point---that's the best for birding, I think.  I usually keep my focus set to AI Servo, since that can work for both still and moving subjects (and with birds, of course, still subjects can quickly and unpredictably become moving subjects!).  If I sense that I've got a reliably still subject (a perched bird protecting a nest or a fishing heron, perhaps), I will often switch to One-Shot mode since I feel it gives me a little more control over framing a shot.  (You can focus on the bird, and then---keeping the shutter button halfway pressed---re-compose the shot as you wish; the focus will remain on the bird.)  When using One-Shot mode, many pros will advise a two-press focus acquisition.  In other words, press the shutter-button halfway to achieve autofocus on your subject.  Then, keeping the camera pointed at the bird, let go of the shutter button and press it halfway again to let it autofocus a second time---supposedly this second focus makes for greater accuracy.  I don't know if I've ever been able to tell the difference, but I do it anyway if the situation permits---I mean, why not?

 Hope this helps!

 

 

 

 

[guy_incognito]

Noahcomet, thanks for the very thorough reply.

I've known this day was coming, but had always talked myself out of it.  My biggest concern has been the rapid switch from shooting a bird in a bright setting, then catching a little guy down in the bushes who only affords a few seconds.  Since my camera isn't pro-level, I don't have as many external controls, making it a bit more time-consuming to switch settings.  I'll spend some time today at home with manual, to get comfortable.  

The whole topic of IS and tripods always confuses me a bit.  Why shouldn't IS be used on a tripod?  Obviously it is unnecessary.  The only other reason I've heard is that it uses more battery power.  Haven't heard anything about it actually decreasing image quality.

My lens, the Canon 100-400mm IS, has two stabilizer modes, one for vertical and horizontal, and the other meant for lateral panning only.  I've never quite had the presence of mind to switch it when I see a bird flying overhead.  What is the negative effect of leaving IS on with flying birds?

 

[noahcomet]

Hi again!

I know it seems almost illogical, but IS on a tripod can actually make vibration worse!  The reason is that the stabilization can cause a "feedback loop" of sorts between the sensor and the motor.

Just touching the camera while on the tripod can cause enough vibration to set off the IS; or the motion of camera's shutter can do it.  Once the IS is triggered, it will try to compensate for this movement by doing what IS does---creating equal and opposite movements.  Then this IS motor movement causes more vibration, which sets the sensor off, which makes the motor vibrate even more, and so on and so forth.  Not sure about the 100-400, but I knows some of the newer IS systems have a sensor that can tell when your camera's tripod mounted, and they automatically disable IS.

This kind of feedback loop isn't a problem when you're handholding the lens because your body absorbs the shock of the IS motor (which is working, anyway, to counteract your own movements, so the ultimate effect is neutral motion or no motion at all).  Hope this makes sense!

 The newer IS systems in horizontal panning mode can be used on a tripod or handheld; some people say it helps a lot, but I've never found it useful.  For birds in flight, the trick is just a fast shutter speed (1/1600 or faster) and a good-tracking autofocus system, which your camera has. 

 There's a lot of rather academic disagreement about this, but in my view, regular IS is going to work against you for a bird-in-flight.  When you're trying to track a bird in flight, you're using your own motion to neutralize the bird's motion---you're panning at the same speed that the bird is flying and the effect is that (for all intents and purposes) the bird is motionless while the background moves.  The IS system is designed to counteract any motion at all (especially at lower shutter speeds), and in such a situation, it's going to be working overtime to freeze the motion you're trying to maintain and at the split-second when you snap the picture, it might even cause the image to blur a little bit.  It's not going to make a huge difference, but it could be the difference between a picture that's tack-sharp at 100% viewing and one that only looks sharp when viewed at a smaller size.

 In more general terms, with a fast enough shutter speed---like 1/1600 on a 400mm lens---the kind of speed you'd need for a good bird-in-flight shot---IS is pretty much redundant.  It's designed for slower shutter speeds.  I really only use it as a fallback, like when lighting conditions simply won't allow a proper shutter speed.  My advice (to those who ask) is to try not to become reliant on it!

 

 

[kitsabbe]

Noahcomet - Thank you for taking the time to be so thorough! Any chance you offer DSLR 101 for Birders classes? :)

[noahcomet]

Ha!---I think I just did!  Seriously, it's a neverending learning process.  Over the years I've met a few people who do nature photography for a living and even they say they throw away far more pictures than they keep, which is somehow both terrifying and encouraging.  I'm nowhere close to pro-level, but I've learned a lot through practice, so I'm glad to help when I can.  The Photography on the Net forums have been an invaluable resource; you'll learn a lot more from the folks on that site than from me.

[ruthcatrin]

I took a look at the instruction manual for the Canon T1i and it looks like your controls aren't to dissimiler to what I have on my Pentax. 

I highly recommend the Manual mode, for all the reasons stated.  Take the time (when you aren't specifically looking for birds so you don't feel any pressure) to go out in the yard, or the park or where-ever and snap photos of things.  The sky, the tops of trees against the sky, the bottoms of bushes in the shade, the grass, etc.  It takes practice to learn to change the settings quickly, but it IS very possible.  

What I try to do when I'm heading out (or even looking out my window) with the intention of possibly taking photos is snap off some quick shots of up in the air, down near the ground, in shadow, and figure out the base settings to work with.  Things change, the sun goes behind a cloud, whatever, so those base settings aren't perfect, but they give me a setting to quickly move to when I have a need to shoot quick.  Yes the little screen on the back of the camera isn't perfect, but it's enough to give you an idea of if you're to dark or or bright.  Once you start doing that alot, you get a better feel for what settings you're going to need in different situations and you can snap off that quick pic with out to much fuss because you've practiced setting the settings on your camera and you already have an idea what settings you'll need even if you've not had a chance for some first off shots.

Basically it boils down to practice.  If you can, take the camera with you everywhere and just snap off shots here and there, they don't have to be great, they're just to get you practice on changing your settings and figuring out what settings are required when!

 

I took several photography classes in college, they were taught by a professional photographer.  My camera was my dad's SLR that at the time was closing on 30yrs old (gosh I love that camera).  You CAN do motion photography with very basic manual settings, it just takes practice.  And yes professional photographers will tell you they go through a TON of film (or memory in the case of today's dSLRs) to get the photo's they want.  I recently read a blog post by one who stated that if he was still using film he'd have used over 10,000 rolls of film this past year (2010), and he was happy to have about a 1/4 of that be use-able photos.  He was very glad he was no longer paying for either film or developer chemicals!

[lyceel]

Unless I need absolute control of the shutter speed, I always shoot in aperture priority mode and matrix metering.  I use aperture priority so I can control the depth of field of the shot, and I let the camera's meter pick the shutter speed.  Camera makers have been working on meters for decades now, and believe it or not, they're actually pretty good these days.  There are hundreds of thousands of shots in the camera's matrix database that it uses to determine correct exposure, and it's pretty much right most of the time.

The meter is usually wrong only when you give it an especially challenging lighting situation.  Such as, when you shoot a bird against the bright sky, or you shoot a Great Egret (pure white) against the dark water of a marsh on a clear, sunny day.  The meter does its best to get everything exposed properly, but it's not actually possible in those cases.  There's too much lighting variability in the scene, and the camera physically can't capture it all.  In these situations, you have to pick what you want exposed correctly and what is going to be under- or overexposed.  To do this, you can either switch to a different metering mode, or (what I do) use exposure compensation (or you can use manual mode, as others have suggested).

In the case of the Great Egret shot, you can set the aperture to get the depth of field you want and dial in -1.0 to -2.0 exposure compensation (depending on how bright the day is), and you'll get a properly exposed egret.  It takes time to get used to seeing the lighting situation and anticipating what the meter is going to do, but once you get it, not only will you be able to nail the exposure every time, but you'll also gain an appreciation for how light interacts with the subject, and you'll be able to recognize when the photo just isn't worth taking because of the lighting conditions (no matter what settings you use, a blackbird up in a tree with an overcast sky behind him just isn't going to come out well).

Others have mentioned using manual mode all the time.  You certainly can get great results this way, and a lot of people do.  However, you're giving up a powerful photography tool that you paid a lot of money for.  As I mentioned, camera makers have put a lot of time and effort into today's metering systems.  If you can learn how to use it effectively, you'll have an advantage over pure manual shooting.

[ruthcatrin]

I'll admit to using the other settings on occasion, all the way to choosing auto when Im in a hurry, but I find I'm generally happier with the outcome when I've taken the time to use the manual setting.

[lyceel]

ruthcatrin:

I'll admit to using the other settings on occasion, all the way to choosing auto when Im in a hurry, but I find I'm generally happier with the outcome when I've taken the time to use the manual setting.

Just to be clear, Ruthcatrin, I didn't mean to make it sound as if I was responding to you specifically.  I was just contributing to the thread in general.  Everyone has their own technique and reason for using it.  I'm pretty happy with the one I use.  I picked mine up from reading Moose Peterson's books on wildlife photography.  He explains it way better than I did  :-)

[ruthcatrin]

No problem.  I suspect a huge part of my preference has to do with how I learned to use an SLR in the first place.  I do have to admit that I've not spent alot of time on some of the settings availible to me on my camera, and it would undoubtedly make a difference in some situations, but I've learned how to manage the manual settings quickly enough to get almost all shots I want, so I've not had much incentive either!

[lonestranger]

I have been following this thread since it's inception and it's caused me to re-evaluate my method, again. Following the advice of many nature/wildlife photographers, I started using aperture priority almost exclusively. It didn't take me long to realize that the camera didn't always select the right ISO and shutter speed combination for my shooting conditions. As an example, if I set the aperture at F8 the camera would often shoot with a slow shutter speed and lower ISO instead of increasing the ISO for the quicker shutter speed needed for bird photography. So to solve this problem I would take the ISO off auto and dial in my own ISO setting, usually ISO 400 as a starting point. That would usually give the desired shutter speed and from there I would use exposure compensation and/or change the metering mode to achieve the desired results depending on the conditions.

After reading through this thread and thinking about my method, I have to ask myself what is different from my method of using Aperture Priority and going completely Manual? I set my ISO and lower it if it's really bright out and increase it if it's dull outside. I set my aperture for the sweet spot but I will often need to re-adjust it, not just to control depth of field, but to also help achieve the desired shutter speed. I am constantly adjusting my settings to get all three settings working together. If my shutter speed is too fast because I am shooting in a sunny snowy setting, I adjust my ISO and Aperture to compensate. If I want more or less depth of view, I adjust my Aperture and then re-adjust my ISO to get the desired shutter speed. The fact of the matter is, I am constantly adjusting two of the three settings to achieve the desired third setting. I always refer to my histogram after each shot and make exposure compensation adjustments trying to shoot to the right.

So, if I am adjusting my ISO manually, adjusting my Aperture manually, and adjusting my Shutter speed manually by way of exposure compensation,  why am I not shooting in Manual mode? Like I said, this thread has caused me to re-evaluate my method and put some serious consideration into going manual and seeing what happens.

[noahcomet]

Can only speak for myself, but I've found going manual to be one of those "can't believe I didn't do this sooner" moments---there's no going back once you get the hang of it, which happens pretty quickly.

The way I think of it is that there are two basic things that need to happen in order to produce a good picture: proper focus and proper exposure.  There are many many ways for your camera to get acceptable results and probably infinite ways to get unacceptable results.  Assuming you've got some experience and understand the basics (the effects of different aperture sizes, for example), why not take maximum control and eliminate as many possible unacceptable shots and ensure that you get the kind of depth-of-field (for example) that you want in each picture?  It does keep you a little more on-your-toes than other shooting methods, and it's also true that you're ignoring some of the expensive and high-tech wizardry that your camera came with, but you're also going to be much more intimately involved in creating your images.

[maxrazor]

For casual birding I use Aperture Priority. Serious stuff = Manual.

Smallest aperture number and adjust the ISO so that I get at the very least a 1/250 shutter.

[Platypus]

Noah, after reading your posts, you've convinced me to try manual.  I think it's going to be a little bit overwhelming for me to start, but I'm sure that eventually the results will make the painful transition period worth it.

I have a couple of questions though, and my inexperience will show by asking them!

1) I thought I understood before, but after seeing this post of yours, I'm now confused at the concept of metering (http://www.whatbird....ead.aspx#214452).  I thought that even in manual mode, you still had to choose the metering system you wanted to use.  I understand the difference between spot, centre-weighted and matrix metering, but I'm unclear as to what is ideal for birding and whether it still makes a difference when shooting in manual mode.

2) I've never utilised the exposure reading in the viewfinder.  I've always just eyeballed the photo itself in the viewfinder, but now I'd like to learn how to understand the reading the camera gives you.  Could you either explain or point me to a good resource for this?  

Thanks so much, your posts have been so helpful to me!

[noahcomet]

Hi!  No problem---and actually, your two questions are essentially the same question.

The exposure reading in your viewfinder is based on your camera's metering---it's giving you an indicator of whether, based on its meter, your current combo of aperture, shutter and ISO are going to give you a properly exposed image or one that's over- or under-exposed.

The problem, as you know, is that the camera can't always tell what your subject is---the light sky or the dark bird, for example.  If you're in center-weighted or matrix, especially, it's going to average out the whole or large parts of the frame resulting (assuming you follow it's exposure suggestion) in a properly exposed sky and poorly exposed bird when you want the opposite.  Always expose for your subject---you can rein the sky in later in photoshop if needed.

I, for one, always go with center-point metering, and that's the autofocus-point I use too.  Keeps things simple---and if I want to get creative with composition later, I can always crop the image.

In non-manual modes, you can outsmart the camera's meter by using exposure compensation, which basically tells the camera to err on the side of over- or under-exposing as needed.  (So for birds against sky, you'd set it to over-expose a few stops, so that the birds are properly exposed.)  In manual, you're manually setting the exposure by adjusting all of the variables (shutter, aperture, ISO) yourself.  So the meter-reading is merely an indication for you to heed or ignore as you wish.  You still set the kind of metering you prefer, and that's how the camera will determine whether it thinks you're too light or too dark, but the camera will defer to you, not to its own metering.

I usually heed the meter when I'm first entering a new zone, just to get my settings within range of where they need to be.  Then I snap a test shot shot or two, see how I like the result in the camera's screen and make a few more fine-tuning adjustments.  After that, it's all intuition.  Actually, I'm at the point now, where I don't even do the test-shots much anymore---I can pretty much translate lighting conditions to camera settings in the moment---lots of practice!  (It helps that most of my shooting is in roughly the same kind of daytime light---I'm ISO 400, f/5.6, 1/1600 about 75% of the time!  Those have become my good-light default settings.)

 When in doubt, err on the side of overexposing and bringing it back down in photoshop.  But nothing beats getting a proper exposure right out of the camera.

 Hope this helps!

 

[paulkienitz]

noahcomet:

You're not going to want to hear this, perhaps, but if you want stellar pictures (of birds or anything else), nothing is going to work better than M mode (manual).  Please don't kill the messenger! :)

I don't think that's necessary.  If I set a high ISO and use a program line that defaults to the sharpest aperture, which is not far from wide open on most lenses, I find that it's a very workable combination that I can do little to improve on, except in cases where I want max background blurring, and that's only a short wheel-turn away.  Going manual means more fiddling with the camera, and for me that means more missed shots.

[noahcomet]

I'm content to disagree here---high ISO is about the last thing I'd want, as it has a tendency to introduce noise.  I set ISO based on ambient light and adjust only if needed.  (This is what the pros recommend.)  But your opinion's just as valid as mine---to each his own!  I find the images I've been able to get in M to be incomparably better (meaning closer to what I want them to look like) than in any of the auto modes.  And with practice, the "fiddling" has become second-nature fine tuning.

[paulkienitz]

For me the most aggravating camera setting is single-point vs multipoint autofocus.  Ninety percent of critter shooting wants single-point, but if something flies overhead, often the only realistic chance to get the shot is if the camera happens to be set to multi-point before I aim.  So now I end up trying to leave it on multi and constantly switch back to single to take shots that aren't in flight.

This is actually kind of a new strategy -- I'm in the middle of trying to retrain myself.