Art and Photography

New hobby : bird photography : recommend me a camera and lens

  • Last Updated:
  • Oct 18th, 2022 9:02 pm
Deal Expert
Jan 27, 2006
21844 posts
15620 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
EEE2 wrote: So many options given to me. I feel overwhelmed. I need to research further learn more etc
No need to feel overwhelmed... you just need to decide on 4 things really:

1. What does your budget look like? (Check... you stated $1000)
2. Are you willing to buy used equipment?
3. How heavy and bulky are you willing to go?
4. How much quality you are looking for?
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Nov 14, 2003
6675 posts
5466 upvotes
LaLaLand
Here's a good vintage lens that can be had for pretty cheap. I had this back in the day and I sold it for $300 about 10 years ago.



It can be had for about $100 today.

https://www.ebay.ca/itm/203945582858?ha ... SwQ7BieYlx

I think the only issue is no VR so steady hands are needed if shooting hand-held.
Deal Expert
Oct 27, 2003
18444 posts
9757 upvotes
Greater Toronto Area
batcave wrote: Here's a good vintage lens that can be had for pretty cheap. I had this back in the day and I sold it for $300 about 10 years ago.



It can be had for about $100 today.

https://www.ebay.ca/itm/203945582858?ha ... SwQ7BieYlx

I think the only issue is no VR so steady hands are needed if shooting hand-held.
I'm sure it's a good deal but that's not nearly enough reach for bird photography, and you really need VR on telephoto lenses.
Deal Fanatic
Jul 13, 2009
5244 posts
3535 upvotes
300mm is minimum for birding, 600-800mm is where it gets easier.

It's not impossible to get great results between 200-300mm, just less likely and really difficult (frustrating) to not get so close you spook them away. Also when you have great reach, it gives you a lot more composition freedom.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Nov 14, 2003
6675 posts
5466 upvotes
LaLaLand
Kurtz7834 wrote: I'm sure it's a good deal but that's not nearly enough reach for bird photography, and you really need VR on telephoto lenses.
It all depends on the photographer's circumstances and where they are. I was also trying to keep within OP's budget. If OP isn't sure about the hobby, it may not be a good idea to spend $5,000 on equipment before even trying.

I also think that older lenses, without VR, shorter focal lengths, etc. can help build the photographer's skills. Poor skills and the best equipment doesn't guarantee results.


Here are two I got with that lens on a Nikon D7000,

Image
ƒ/4.5 125.0mm 1/1000s 1250 ISO

Image
ƒ/4.0 85.0mm 1/1000s 640 ISO
Deal Addict
Dec 24, 2007
1676 posts
2993 upvotes
you can also just get lucky with cheapo stuff , these are from last year on my 1000D with 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM

taiga merlin and a ruffled grouse
Images
  • 1.jpg
  • 2.jpg
science is not an opinion contest
Deal Expert
Jan 27, 2006
21844 posts
15620 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
Kurtz7834 wrote: I'm sure it's a good deal but that's not nearly enough reach for bird photography, and you really need VR on telephoto lenses.
For birding, you don't really need VR as you should be shooting at higher shutter speeds anyways just in case the bird moves. Now, if you were shooting more stationary objects with a telephoto, then I would whole heartedly agree.
Deal Fanatic
Feb 16, 2006
5264 posts
2270 upvotes
Vancouver
craftsman wrote: For birding, you don't really need VR as you should be shooting at higher shutter speeds anyways just in case the bird moves. Now, if you were shooting more stationary objects with a telephoto, then I would whole heartedly agree.
There is truth in this but to have those high shutter speeds, with a longer lens, you generally needs lots of light to get those shutter speeds due the minimum apertures are often somewhere around 5.6 to 6.3 at focal lengths of 400mm+. This would really restrict your handheld shooting on overcast days and in the golden hours, some of my fave times times to shoot. Feather colours really come out on bright but overcast days. It's hard to maintain best "hold" technique when contorted to get a shot through foliage leaning over a creek.

As well, either in body or in lens image stabilization is useful for shooting another favourite "bird" of mine, vintage WWII aircraft, where your shutter speeds are down around 1/80th to 1/320th sec in order to generate propeller blur and typically shots are in excess of 300mm.

Consider also that on many long lens their "sweet spot" for sharpness is f8, some are f11. Add in a 1.4x or 2.0x teleconverter and VR/I.S. is a welcome feature.



.
Deal Addict
Jan 31, 2007
4808 posts
1803 upvotes
Looks like I need to find another hobby. I am still so overwhelmed and confused.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Mar 18, 2005
23686 posts
5125 upvotes
Niagara Falls
EEE2 wrote: Looks like I need to find another hobby. I am still so overwhelmed and confused.
LOL, it's a deep deep hole. I ended up finding a D500 for $1200. There are a few more more on Kijiji in the GTA area. I absolutely love this camera, but it is heavy. Certainly not something someone new needs to start out with. Also, that was just for the camera, no lenses. haha.

I don't think you ever answered yet,

What type of bird photography are you currently interested in? Birds in flight, stationary birds? Birds in the backyard?
Deal Addict
Jan 31, 2007
4808 posts
1803 upvotes
Evil Baby wrote: LOL, it's a deep deep hole. I ended up finding a D500 for $1200. There are a few more more on Kijiji in the GTA area. I absolutely love this camera, but it is heavy. Certainly not something someone new needs to start out with. Also, that was just for the camera, no lenses. haha.

I don't think you ever answered yet,

What type of bird photography are you currently interested in? Birds in flight, stationary birds? Birds in the backyard?
This an excellent question. I would look at stationary birds and in flight.
Deal Expert
Oct 27, 2003
18444 posts
9757 upvotes
Greater Toronto Area
EEE2 wrote: Looks like I need to find another hobby. I am still so overwhelmed and confused.
I would start with a budget of around $500 and get a D3200 / D7000 and 55-300 VR lens. (You may be able to get this under $400 if in a bundle). Canon equivalent would be T4i or 60D with 55-250 IS lens.

See if the hobby is for you before you drop a lot of money. If and When you want to upgrade, you won't take a bath reselling.

So many people dropping 4 figures on camera gear they use a couple of times and shelve. As a buyer I have taken full advantage of this.
Deal Expert
Jan 27, 2006
21844 posts
15620 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
Kurtz7834 wrote: I would start with a budget of around $500 and get a D3200 / D7000 and 55-300 VR lens. (You may be able to get this under $400 if in a bundle). Canon equivalent would be T4i or 60D with 55-250 IS lens.

See if the hobby is for you before you drop a lot of money. If and When you want to upgrade, you won't take a bath reselling.

So many people dropping 4 figures on camera gear they use a couple of times and shelve. As a buyer I have taken full advantage of this.
Skip the 55-300 VR as it was replaced with the AF-P 70-300mm DX VR which is a much better lens in almost all regards and can be had with a bit more money thrown in but it's well worth it.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Nov 14, 2003
6675 posts
5466 upvotes
LaLaLand
EEE2 wrote: This an excellent question. I would look at stationary birds and in flight.
I usually only ever photograph birds in my back yard at not far distances and I can usually get shots with a cheap zoom lens or even a prime lens. The two photos on my previous post are from the vintage zoon lens I posted about. I've even photographed birds with a 35mm prime lens on my deck. However, a zoom lens is more convenient in most cases.

Any camera and any lens will do depending on your circumstances. There is a plethora of choice for cameras and lenses, and it is confusing, but you can definitely do it on your budget.

My current setup for shooting birds is a Nikon D7000 and a 55-200mm DX zoom lens. You can probably buy this combination for under $500 today. It's old and cheap but it works for me. I will probably move back into a FX camera body next, but I'm waiting to see what happens with the D850.
Deal Addict
Jan 31, 2007
4808 posts
1803 upvotes
PXL_20220520_164713636.jpg
PXL_20220520_164713636.jpg
PXL_20220520_164713636.jpg
batcave wrote: I usually only ever photograph birds in my back yard at not far distances and I can usually get shots with a cheap zoom lens or even a prime lens. The two photos on my previous post are from the vintage zoon lens I posted about. I've even photographed birds with a 35mm prime lens on my deck. However, a zoom lens is more convenient in most cases.

Any camera and any lens will do depending on your circumstances. There is a plethora of choice for cameras and lenses, and it is confusing, but you can definitely do it on your budget.

My current setup for shooting birds is a Nikon D7000 and a 55-200mm DX zoom lens. You can probably buy this combination for under $500 today. It's old and cheap but it works for me. I will probably move back into a FX camera body next, but I'm waiting to see what happens with the D850.
I tried to make picture of this bird, but really bad pic due to my phone. I would like something that can do better... this is just an example. a bad one.
Images
  • PXL_20220520_164838733.jpg
Deal Expert
User avatar
Mar 18, 2005
23686 posts
5125 upvotes
Niagara Falls
If you think you'll eventually be more interested in more serious birds in flight, then I think the most recent suggestions are the correct course.

Nikon D7000 - $340 - https://www.kijiji.ca/v-camera-camcorde ... ?undefined
Nikon 70 - 300 - $120 - https://www.kijiji.ca/v-camera-camcorde ... 1617807958

The 70-300 lens is pretty decent for sure. It's not going to be great for birds really far away, a P&S superzoom would be better for that, but this setup will give you way more options for the future. If things get serious, then you can upgrade the body at a later date (D500 like I suggested before :) ) and still use the 70-300 lens.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Nov 14, 2003
6675 posts
5466 upvotes
LaLaLand
EEE2 wrote: PXL_20220520_164713636.jpgPXL_20220520_164713636.jpgPXL_20220520_164713636.jpg

I tried to make picture of this bird, but really bad pic due to my phone. I would like something that can do better... this is just an example. a bad one.
If the bird isn't a foot or two away, you need to use the zoom on the phone. If it's digital zoom, the result will not be the best quality.

If you have a regular camera, any one of the lenses mentioned would be fine.
Jr. Member
May 19, 2006
142 posts
14 upvotes
I’d personally look at a mid range micro four thirds setup. Start with perhaps Panasonic Lumix G85 or even G7 and then pick up a Lumix 100-300 lens, which is equivalent to a 200-600 in full frame terms. You should be able to do that for around 1000 if you look around for used copies. If you have a bit more budget, I’d suggest a Lumix G9 as a step up and down the road consider the Lumix Leica 100-400 or Olympus 100-400.
Deal Fanatic
Jun 13, 2010
8555 posts
11766 upvotes
GTA
Evil Baby wrote: If you think you'll eventually be more interested in more serious birds in flight, then I think the most recent suggestions are the correct course.

Nikon D7000 - $340 - https://www.kijiji.ca/v-camera-camcorde ... ?undefined
Nikon 70 - 300 - $120 - https://www.kijiji.ca/v-camera-camcorde ... 1617807958

The 70-300 lens is pretty decent for sure. It's not going to be great for birds really far away, a P&S superzoom would be better for that, but this setup will give you way more options for the future. If things get serious, then you can upgrade the body at a later date (D500 like I suggested before :) ) and still use the 70-300 lens.
You don't want that cheap G version of the Nikon 70-300mm lens, it's awful. Only get one of the two VR versions.

Top

Thread Information

There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)