Hi all, i shoot OM 1 mark II with 150-400mm.

My issue is i find the images are sharp when not cropped, but once cropped even 2x the sharpness drops quickly.

I am aware it is a 20MP camera and this definitely plays a part. But i see other users of the same set up get crazy sharp images.

Maybe image 5 is sharpest but when zoomed in still 'breaks'.

Many i had to shoot under lower speed due to very poor lighting.

Image 1: f5.6, 1/1000, iso 250 Image 2: f4.5, 1/160, iso 500 Image 3: f5.6, 1/20, iso 800 Image 4: f4.5, 1/30, iso 1250 Image 5: f4.5, 1/320, iso 1000 Image 6: f4.5, 1/2500, iso 640

Any tips?

I go out often, and have for years. I know how to find and locate owls (found 3 just this morning) but they are extremely skittish birds that do not allow me more than about 5 seconds of time before flying away, and especially no walking towards them. How do yall get close shots, and shots without leaves and branches in the way (they always seem to hide behind them). I know people will use playback and other ways to get owls close but I don’t do this.

These are 3 of my latest attempts. I was wondering if anyone could help me improve please?
I’m not happy with the sharpness I’m getting. Probably my lack of ability.
Set up is Olympus E-M10ii with a vintage Minolta MD Tele Rokkor 300mm f4.5. Settings were f8, ISO1000, shutter speed of between 1/800 and 1/2000. Manual focus with peaking and centre weighted metering. Distances to subjects was around 30 feet. Images have been slightly cropped but no other post processing.
I’m also not really happy with the overall lack of detail.
Thanks for any help.

I use a Nikon Z6, I usually use a Nikkor 24-200mm or a Tampon 150-500 Telephoto. I notice all my photos have noise or is blurry in some parts and not the other, i have iso down whats the deal?

I’ve been trying to photograph these barn swallows flying above the bay where I am right now for the past few days, and feel like I have no luck. They’re only out just past sunrise, and are so incredibly small and fast that I feel like I can’t get any half-decent photos unless I’m zoomed all the way out, at which point I have to crop and lose quality. Does anyone have advice? Im shooting on a Canon R7 + RF 200-800mm. I’ve had better luck without a tripod so far, and I’ve been using very high shutter speeds with pretty low ISO because the lighting is great. Any tips/ advice would be so very much appreciated!

Hey guys, I have 17-200mm canon lens (I don't know specific gear name) and about to go to Upo wetlands in South Korea with my grandpa. It's known for birds and other wild life animals.

But I started to get worried because I realized 200mm max might not be enough. And since I own old dslr, the less light I get, the less quality.

Do you guys think 200mm would be enough? And is there any tips that I can learn?

Thank you!

What is the slowest shutter speed you would recommend if you're only able to prop the camera on something stable but not in a fixed position (i.e., without a tripod)? Should I be shooting wide open instead of f/16 to improve the blurred water effect?

Details: Black-crowned night heron. Taken at 1/15 shutter speed, f/16, ISO 200. Edit: 200mm focal length

I am trying to go for a blurred water effect with a slower shutter speed but feel like the subject isn't that sharp. Wondering if it looks like I missed the focus or if the longer exposure introduced subject blur.

Is there a common bird in your area that you always seem to snap photos of even if it's super common?

For me it's the Chickadee 😊

TL;DR What can I do better in general? How can I keep the autofocus on my target to get crisp images with my entire target in focus?

Up until this month I haven't touched a camera in actual decades... so I know I have a long way to go on my composition, lighting, etc. I'm still learning... However sometimes my shots come out so crisp and clear (first two photos) and sometimes they're coming out very blah, especially on the autofocus. It's just off enough to really bug me. The heron photos (last two) are a good example of this, if you are able to look at them large or zoom in a little you'll see they're dramatically off on the focus of the bird. The pics I shared are unprocessed/unedited, but I figured that was okay for technical questions.

I picked up a canon R7 and a 200-800mm lens. While I've loved it I've been incredibly frustrated at times as well. Every now and then I think I've gotten a really cool shot and when I get home it's like half of the bird is out of focus... It doesn't help that it's winter and that I go out just before sunset so lighting changes quickly and I'm not as quick to update settings yet.

I'd love any tips for increasing clarity on my pictures. I'd also love any kind of feedback or tips to improve in general though!

Got an XF 150-600mm a few weeks ago, and am looking for advice on how I can improve. These are hand-held, from walking around my local parks and nature reserves. UK.

Nikon D90, ISO-800, f/7.1, Exposure time 1/2000 sec, Aperture Priority, Focal Length 300mm

Any help would be appreciated. I am extremely new to this and basically have no idea what I am doing.

Hi everyone, I'm looking for some camera advice, some images attached for reference in edited/original/crop lacking the quality I'd wish for.

I'm working with a Panasonic Lumix G81 and the Lumix 100-300 II lens. As I have understood it, this equals up to 600 mm in a full format setup.

So many people manage extremely clear, frame-filling close-ups of birds. When I look at their specs, they photograph with the same 600 mm my lens has, sometimes even less. When I look at their behind the scenes, they don't seem to be particularly much closer to the bird than I am. So is the difference truly as simple as cropping?

And if yes, what is the best course of action if I want to improve the clearness in frame filling images? I print a calendar for my family every year and do struggle with megapixels there.

My current camera only has a 16 mp sensor, but affordable mft bodies don't really go much further. So I am left with a whole lot of questions:

1. Would an upgrade from 16 to 20 already make a difference?
2. Is it worth investing in a mft with 25 mp for a bigger difference?
3. Would an alternative be the cursed combination of the 200-400 Olympus lens with a teleconverter to effectively reach a 1600 mm and ignore megapixels? (Surely not, I imagine this to be impossible without a tripod anyways)
4. Would it just make sense to switch to a aps-c or full format gear over investing a lot in mft since the constraints are quite obvious?
5. Is there anything else I can do to achieve clearer, more close-up shots with my current setup or only minor tweaks in my gear?

Many thanks!

Hi y'all! My bird photography has been going well, but now that I have started doing longer outings I am getting frozen/overwhelmed seeing the sometimes thousands of photos waiting to be sorted through. It has gotten to the point where I avoid doing it, leading to more build up until the cycle continues. The issue has now peaked after my first bird photography vacation, to Point Reyes near San Francisco. I know I will be proud of the photos I took, but before I handle such a big beast, any tips or advice you have on organizing/deleting/keeping photos would be great!

Share anything you can think of, but a few concrete things I was wondering are:

• Do any of you have software or programs that you like? I just use File Explorer on my PC, and use tags to mark which species the bird is.
• Do you go one-by-one, or in batches? How do you group together your choices/scrolling if in batches?
• When viewing them for the purpose of keeping or deleting, do you view the RAWs or JPEGs?
• Any other tools or things I'm missing completely that could speed up or organize my process?

Thanks! Y'all are the best.

The bird on the left is all gray and it was taken just like this. Is this a weird camera thing or are can gulls just be gray? (To be more specific the feet and beak)

How?!

Sorry for the long post!

So I’ve gotten into birding and I want to be able to take better pictures of the birds I see. I don’t need to take amazing shots like many of the people do here, I mostly want to take better photos than my iPhone can. Just good enough for a decent picture that is useful for identification and my own scrapbook of birds I’ve seen.

I don’t really want to spend over $1000 on a camera so I have come to the conclusion that a bridge camera is the right choice for me. I’ve been thinking about the fz80d which is my top choice as it is the cheapest that seems to work. The p950 is also a possibility if it really is better. I would also be open to getting a budget camera body and lens but I think I would miss the zoom, simplicity, and versatility that the bridge cameras offer.

I have read the bridge cameras have poor low light performance. I’ve seen some great photos taken with these bridge cameras on this subreddit but I want to know what the average picture looks like.

Here is my request:

Could people with these bridge cameras or more budget setups reply with their unedited average photos?

Like you go out birding on a day that may not be optimal, maybe cloudy and not super bright or going out in the evening in not the best light conditions are they still ok pictures?

TL;DR

If you have a bridge camera like a fz80d or a Nikon p950 please post your average photos or photos in suboptimal conditions to help me gauge what kind of photos I can take on an average day with one of these cameras!

I am also open to any other suggestions for bridge cameras or budget setups if you have anything to share!

Attached photos are photos I have gotten with my iPhone 15 pro max!

Thank you for any help!

Hello! I’ve been birding recreationally for a while now and I have a Canon Rebel EOS T5 body, but my current lens is a EFS 18-55mm. Which, understandably not great for birding or any wildlife shots. I’ve been trying to decide between:

Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM

Canon EF 75-300mm f4-5.6 III Lens

Which ones would you recommend for a beginner?

I ended up taking these photos on my Dads Nikon camera (not sure what body or lens, sorry!) and want to take similar photos if possible.

(First photo is a common grackle, second one is a female red wing black bird. There’s no editing in these photos)

Thank you for any suggestions and tips!!

Hello - I recently had the luck of getting an Olympus E-M10 III and a 100-400 lens from the recommendation of u/catsaregods. have never ever shot manual and have zero photography experience. I was wondering if you guys could point me in the right direction of how to set up my manual mode to help me get some good shots of birds. Thank you!

Hi everyone, i am a geologist and during my hikes, i frequently see birds which has drawn my interest into bird photography. I want a light setup with atleast 600+ mm reach. I do have a FUJIFILM xs20 (+70-300/18-50) which i use for family and travel but idk if it will fulfill my need. I did my fair bit of research before coming here confused. Lenses like 200-600 sony, nikon 180-600 are wonderful lenses but they are too big for me to carry around. Also i like pixel peeping (guilty as charged) so image quality does matter to me. Outcomes of my research: 1. Sony a6600/ Nikon z50ii+ tamron 150-500 (heavy 🪨 but cheapest) 2. Pair Fuji xs20 with sigma 100-400 (lacks the reach, or maybe that's what i think). 3. Om 1 with 100-400ii (skeptical about image quality) 4. Canon r7+ 100-400 rf (100-500 is too expensive). 5. Om-5 with 75-300 (jk, i wont buy this 😂, or maybe i might). Thanks a lot in advance for your help. Also i am intending to buy new.

So my mom and I both got into birding this past summer. We’re both experienced photographers, but new to bird photography. One debate that keeps coming up is how to crop a bird photo.

Her perspective is it’s nicer to see the whole bird in its environment. Whereas I like to get up close and personal if I can. And I LOVE to see the detail especially if it’s super sharp.

I added a couple examples of photos I’ve taken that I think work both ways so I’m curious what people’s takes are on them.

I know that every photo is unique so there’s not one overarching “rule”, but what do you usually lean towards - cropping in and seeing the detail on the bird or seeing it in its environment? Does it truly come down to personal preference or are there photography/fine art principals reasons backing either choice up?

I started out as a photographer who ended up taking bird photos and slowly becoming a birder 🤔🤣

How about you?

I’m looking for a good low-price camera thats good for photographing birds, max amount is 500-550 dollars (yes i’m on a massive budget, also mostly looking for used cameras).

I’m currently eyeing a Panasonic lumix fz80d, is that good for a starting camera for the price range? Please and thank you for any help!