Question 1: I've got a ton of bird coming to a feeder just outside my home. I have a huge picture window that I COULD shoot through but I don't like the idea of shooting through another two sheets of glass (it's a double pane window) so I want to get outside.
I'm looking at photography blinds but want to stay on the cheap side of things as I don't feel this is something that I should break the bank on. Now for around my home could I not just modify an old tent to work as a blind? Does it need to be painted or just set up and left there in order for the birds to get accustomed to it?
Also, what is the best bang for the buck option for a blind that would allow to go on trips without a long setup time? Pop-up or something? I've recently found a lake with TONS of waterfowl that are rare for my area but also extremely skiddish. I get within 30 yards of them and they bug out to the other side of the lake. Are we talking a camo suit and being very still or a full-blown blind or what?
I'm new to blinds and would appreciate any feedback on this issue!!!
Question 2: I've got the Canon 100-400mm, which I freakin' love!!! I also have a Sigma 150mm Macro lens. I am gearing up for some butterfly photography this season and would like to know what my best bet is. I'm thinking that the 100-400 with extension tubes, which I don't currently have, is my best option but I'm not sure on this. What would you all use to photograph butterflies?
I'm just really looking to be set in a direction on this as the 100-400 is good for butterfly photography right now (the 150mm takes too long to manually focus on them I feel. It also requires me to be too close and they fly off!!) I'm just wanting to possibly get a little closer to the butterflies as I have to stay about 6 feet away with the 100-400 due to its minimum focusing distance. I would also like to not lose my autofocus in doing so, I don't know if this is a issue or not?
What would you guys and gals do in this situation?
Thanks everyone!
Posted by Wim Reyns on February 17, 2009 at 10:01 AM
for the blind, if you wanted to stay really cheap you could use some camo netting, that shouldn't cost more than $30 or so. I personally use a blind from cabelas called the cabelas full draw X3 but i don't see it listed anymore.
As for the butterflies, i haven't shot either of those lenses but i assume the macro lens would be a bit sharper, so i bet the 150macro coupled by a 1.4 extender would be nice combo.
Posted by Steve Foss on February 17, 2009 at 10:24 AM
Kyle, since you specified back yard as well as transporting the blind, your best bet for blind portability and economy
is a camo pop-up blind designed for hunters. You can get them from Cabela's ranging from $65 on up. Mine cost $65.
It folds down in seconds into a flat disc a bit over a foot in diameter and pops up in seconds as well.
Being so flat and light it's easy to strap to a camera backpack and take into the woods.
I prefer to leave it out for a day or so before I start using it so that birds are used to it. It has plenty of room
for one person and photography gear, with zip doors and/or windows facing all four directions.
A push-pull zoom is a bit dicey to learn to use with extension tubes. The 100-400 is plenty for most butterfly situations,
and in fact is nearly the ideal butterfly lens, in my opinion, and for the way I shoot butterflies. With an MFD of six feet,
the 400mm reach is just right for portraits of a medium to large butterfly on a single blossom. A monarch on a
daisy, for example, can fill the frame, and I tend to want to shoot them a bit more loose so the comp can breathe.
I've shot fritillaries, which are medium-sized, on single blooms with that lens at 400mm and filled half the frame,
which is enough for me. The compression at 400mm and 8-blade aperture also make for some sweet creamy backgrounds,
particularly with butterflies because most of them are shot in open areas with more distant backgrounds. The 150
macro will do well in some situations when the butterflies are small and will let you come closer, but being able
to stay six feet away instead of a foot or two is a big plus with some species. The IS also is a plus here, because
I always shoot butterflies handheld (or at most with a monopod) so I can easily follow the butterfly with the lens and recompose.
I've always had my best luck with butterflies not by stalking within range, but by plopping myself down in the
middle of where the butterflies have been feeding, sitting still and waiting for them to come back once they are used to me.
I'll also add that the 6-ft MFD on the 100-400 makes is a wonderful lens for small birds on perches attracted
to backyard feeding stations. A chickadee can take up half or more of the frame at 400mm and just beyond 6 feet.
I used the lens that way with excellent results. And again, stopping down to f8 at 400mm whenever possible will
allow the sharpest images. With a perch set up between six and seven feet from your sensor and a BG 30 feet
away, you'll get great buttery backgrounds, and if a somewhat larger bird lands on the perch it's simple to
zoom out a smidge to get the shot. I'm always set up on a tripod when shooting in that situation.
Posted by Kent Staubus on February 17, 2009 at 11:55 AM
Just about anything will work for a blind. They mainly just hide your movements and break up your outline. Get a big tarp for ten bucks from Walmart along with some clothesline and rig something up. I wouldn't spend fifty bucks, for sure. The idea is to have something between you and the birds so they simply don't see you. I think I saw some Hannah Montana bedsheets on clearance the other day....
Posted by Steve Foss on February 17, 2009 at 12:24 PM
I often thought about picking up a 500D when I owned the 100-400, but wondered about image degradation.
Kent or anyone else, does it have the same IQ effect as a top-quality 1.4 TC or is there no degradation
at all? The 100-400 isn't quite as tack sharp as the Nikon 80-400 wide open at 400mm, so if there's image
degradation that could be an issue. I almost bought the 500D anyway for floral work on the 100-400 but
picked up the 100 macro instead for that.
I think the tarp is a usable option for the back yard if it stays up so the birds get used to it (and its
tendency to flap in the wind.) Also, birds flying behind and to the side will still see the photographer
and flare off. A bit hard to drag it around to the woods or the local lake and set it up, too, like Kyle wants.
I think Charlie's option is the best for laying on your belly shooting waterfowl at the lake's edge. When I do it,
I'm in full camo with a camo cover over my lens/camera and my face camoed with a mask as well. If you
already have the camo that approach works great. If not, it'll be time to spend some money on camo or the
shroud already mentioned. The shroud will be less obtrusive to waterfowl than the blind, partly
because of difference in size, but also because you'd really want to leave the blind there for a day or
two before shooting, and that can get dicey on public water.
You could also save some money by buying camo burlap fabric at Cabela's or a similar outfitter
for not much money. It isn't as effective when you're sitting up, but it's great to drape over you and
tuck in when you're laying prone, and it's also great in the woods strung between a couple tree trunks.
You can easily cut a hole in it in those situations and shoot through the hole. I've used it a number
of times for impromptu blinds and was happy with the results. It will also work for a back-yard blind.
You can find the various patterns at the Cabela's Web site mentioned earlier and search for "burlap camo."
I have found that a home made bag blind out of camo material from a local sporting goods store works just fine when I'm in the woods or on sloughs shooting water fowl. It cost $14 and I just folded it in half over the tripod mounted camera, cut a hole for my flash and tied shut the side of the fold that the lens stuck out of with about 4 stitches. The camo has loose flaps of cloth shaped roughly like leaves cut out all over it giving me a way to view my surroundings.
As to your backyard, the need for camo depends somewhat on the species you're after. I find that just sitting quietly for a half hour or so is all it takes to acclimate small birds like goldfinches, chickadees and nuthatches. Larger birds like hairy or red-bellied woodpeckers are much more skittish and for them I use camo. Being able to leave a blind out overnight for them is definitely helpful.
Thanks for the replies everyone. It seems like it's going to rain tomorrow so I may not be able to go on with my avian plans in the morning.
All of the ideas sound great so far....I'm leaning towards the burlap sack/camo sheets idea as it will be cheap and still get the job done. In the future if I need a blind then I'll get one but for right now I'm going to need to be on the ground anyway since these ducks are at ground level.
Keith...as for my birdies in the yard. I've got Chickadees, White-Breasted Nuthatches, Tufted Tits, Goldfinches, House Finches, Mourning Doves, Blue Jays, Brown Thrashers, Northern Mockingbirds, Bluebirds, Cardinals, Starlings, Downy Woodpecker, and a Red-Bellied Woodpecker....The Gambit is very large.
Right now my platform feeder is set up hanging from a tree about 8 feet up. I was planning on moving it down to a shepard's hook that would put it around 4.5 to 5 feet off the ground, mounting some perches next to it, and then setting up my blind accordingly.
The only thing that I'm using to feed right now is thistle in a tube feeder off the the right in the tree, some suet in a hanging cage (which was empty this morning), and sunflower seeds in the platform feeder. The Red-Bellied was eating the Sunflower seeds today oddly enough.
Is there anything I should do differently with my setup?
Should I offer other food to attract other birds?
Posted by Kent Staubus on February 17, 2009 at 10:32 PM
If you aren't taking photos in bare, flat places a pop-up deal like mentioned above would work well. The main purpose is to hide your movements. It's movement that most birds pick up on. Hunted birds pick up on everything--color, movement, and your silhouette.
The Canon 500D macro attachment works quite well. It's sharp, with just a little sharpness falling off at the edges. Unlike tubes, you lose no light. There is no image degradation as with a TC. Working distance on my 80-400mm VR is about 18 inches. I take the 500D with me on trips, mostly. It's lightweight, compact, and gives me serious macro capability in a very small package. I have tried it on my Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 just for fun. It allows some VERY close up ultrawide shots.
Ok guys, I've got my tent blind set up. It's around 7 feet from my perches. The perches are a couple of small limbs that are tied to a shepard's hook with a platform feeder hanging on the other side out of view with my camera lens. I also have a log hanging from the tree next to the shepard's hook with some suet stuffed into a crevice on it. I'm hoping that my Red-Bellied will notice the food along with some nuthatches and such. It's raining here right now, might be snowing in the morning. I'm not sure if I'll be able to shoot tomorrow but at least I'll be able to see how the birds use what i've set up from my picture window and modify it for the day I do get to take some photos.
I couldn't find any sheets of camo or anything at my local Dick's Sporting goods store so I may have to order it online. I'll be busy with this blind setup for a couple days though, so I'm not in a hurry to order anything just yet.
As for the 500D....it's relatively cost effective for what it does. Just how close can I get and still be able to focus with my 100-400? I may have to get one just to have it in my arsenal. Right now I've only got one camera body (Rebel XT) and it's hard to switch from my 100-400 to the Macro quickly in the field so I may be better off just carrying the 500D so I can just screw that sucker on when I see something that I want to approach a little closer to...insects and such.
Thanks!!
Posted by Steve Foss on February 18, 2009 at 9:15 PM
Kyle, while I have three feeding stations clustered in the same area in my yard, when I do perched bird work
I take down all but one feeder and all but a single, uncluttered perch. The more perches there are, the harder
it is to get locked on a bird that has a choice of perches. This is especially important because small birds
staging at feeder rarely sit on perches long. The more perching options they have, the less likely one can get a
focus fix on them in the second they sit still. Also, the perch should be on the side of the feeder away from the camera.
Birds staging at feeders tend to face the direction they want to go, so a perch behind and above the feeder will put most
birds facing the camera and pointing somewhat down.
On getting closer to butterflies with the 100-400, if the native ability of the lens itself isn't enough to suit, and
the 500D produces edge softness, wouldn't you end up cropping out that edge softness anyway? Since you already have a macro
and don't need the 500D for that type of close macro work, why not save your money?
That's just IMO, of course, and not meant to spur any sort of debate.
Sounds good Steve...I'm growing to be along the same lines as you with the 500D, it would seem to be helpful but it doesn't really fit any niche in my gear at the moment. I think I'm going to go as-is and if I feel the need for that 500D during the season I'll order one.
Thanks big guy!
Posted by Bill Fach on February 19, 2009 at 8:39 AM
Kyle: I'm a little late to this party but DO NOT expect to use the 500D for butterflies. The focal length of the 500D is 500mm or about 19 inches. That is your far point of focus. You will not be able to focus beyond that. If you're able to get withihn 19 inches use your 150 macro. I personally find using tubes with zoom lenses to be really frustrating but I suppose if you set your focal length at 400mm and leave it there it would work. It sounds to me as if you are looking for reach and not magnification. I shoot a lot of butterflies in my garden with a 200mm macro and sometimes with a 300 f2.8 with tubes/TC if I really need a long reach. I know a lot of guys who use 300 f4 lenses with tubes and do great work. With your existing gear there is no inexpensive fix without compromise. I think I would be inclined to get a good TC for the macro. Just my 2¢. >=))>
Thanks Bill...that is what I was thinking with the 500D.
As for photography today...the light is good but it's is windy as all getout here!! Also blowing a misty snow around. I don't know how active the birds will be but I'm keeping a lookout. If they start hitting the feeder I'll give it a go.
Discussion
13 repliesI'm looking at photography blinds but want to stay on the cheap side of things as I don't feel this is something that I should break the bank on. Now for around my home could I not just modify an old tent to work as a blind? Does it need to be painted or just set up and left there in order for the birds to get accustomed to it?
Also, what is the best bang for the buck option for a blind that would allow to go on trips without a long setup time? Pop-up or something? I've recently found a lake with TONS of waterfowl that are rare for my area but also extremely skiddish. I get within 30 yards of them and they bug out to the other side of the lake. Are we talking a camo suit and being very still or a full-blown blind or what?
I'm new to blinds and would appreciate any feedback on this issue!!!
Question 2: I've got the Canon 100-400mm, which I freakin' love!!! I also have a Sigma 150mm Macro lens. I am gearing up for some butterfly photography this season and would like to know what my best bet is. I'm thinking that the 100-400 with extension tubes, which I don't currently have, is my best option but I'm not sure on this. What would you all use to photograph butterflies?
I'm just really looking to be set in a direction on this as the 100-400 is good for butterfly photography right now (the 150mm takes too long to manually focus on them I feel. It also requires me to be too close and they fly off!!) I'm just wanting to possibly get a little closer to the butterflies as I have to stay about 6 feet away with the 100-400 due to its minimum focusing distance. I would also like to not lose my autofocus in doing so, I don't know if this is a issue or not?
What would you guys and gals do in this situation?
Thanks everyone!
As for the butterflies, i haven't shot either of those lenses but i assume the macro lens would be a bit sharper, so i bet the 150macro coupled by a 1.4 extender would be nice combo.
is a camo pop-up blind designed for hunters. You can get them from Cabela's ranging from $65 on up. Mine cost $65.
It folds down in seconds into a flat disc a bit over a foot in diameter and pops up in seconds as well.
Being so flat and light it's easy to strap to a camera backpack and take into the woods.
I prefer to leave it out for a day or so before I start using it so that birds are used to it. It has plenty of room
for one person and photography gear, with zip doors and/or windows facing all four directions.
You can find it here: http://www.cabelas.com and search for Trekker T-200 Blind.
A push-pull zoom is a bit dicey to learn to use with extension tubes. The 100-400 is plenty for most butterfly situations,
and in fact is nearly the ideal butterfly lens, in my opinion, and for the way I shoot butterflies. With an MFD of six feet,
the 400mm reach is just right for portraits of a medium to large butterfly on a single blossom. A monarch on a
daisy, for example, can fill the frame, and I tend to want to shoot them a bit more loose so the comp can breathe.
I've shot fritillaries, which are medium-sized, on single blooms with that lens at 400mm and filled half the frame,
which is enough for me. The compression at 400mm and 8-blade aperture also make for some sweet creamy backgrounds,
particularly with butterflies because most of them are shot in open areas with more distant backgrounds. The 150
macro will do well in some situations when the butterflies are small and will let you come closer, but being able
to stay six feet away instead of a foot or two is a big plus with some species. The IS also is a plus here, because
I always shoot butterflies handheld (or at most with a monopod) so I can easily follow the butterfly with the lens and recompose.
I've always had my best luck with butterflies not by stalking within range, but by plopping myself down in the
middle of where the butterflies have been feeding, sitting still and waiting for them to come back once they are used to me.
I'll also add that the 6-ft MFD on the 100-400 makes is a wonderful lens for small birds on perches attracted
to backyard feeding stations. A chickadee can take up half or more of the frame at 400mm and just beyond 6 feet.
I used the lens that way with excellent results. And again, stopping down to f8 at 400mm whenever possible will
allow the sharpest images. With a perch set up between six and seven feet from your sensor and a BG 30 feet
away, you'll get great buttery backgrounds, and if a somewhat larger bird lands on the perch it's simple to
zoom out a smidge to get the shot. I'm always set up on a tripod when shooting in that situation.
http://essentialphotogear.com/proddetail.php?prod=KwikCamo-Max4
For butterflies, buy a Canon 500D and stick that on the end of your 100-400mm. I use one on my Nikon 80-400mm VR and it works great on butterflies. I'm surprised no one has mentioned them yet. I stop down to about f8 and use a hand held, off camera flash.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/87503-REG/Canon_2824A002_77mm_500D_Close_up_Lens.html
Kent in SD
Kent or anyone else, does it have the same IQ effect as a top-quality 1.4 TC or is there no degradation
at all? The 100-400 isn't quite as tack sharp as the Nikon 80-400 wide open at 400mm, so if there's image
degradation that could be an issue. I almost bought the 500D anyway for floral work on the 100-400 but
picked up the 100 macro instead for that.
I think the tarp is a usable option for the back yard if it stays up so the birds get used to it (and its
tendency to flap in the wind.) Also, birds flying behind and to the side will still see the photographer
and flare off. A bit hard to drag it around to the woods or the local lake and set it up, too, like Kyle wants.
I think Charlie's option is the best for laying on your belly shooting waterfowl at the lake's edge. When I do it,
I'm in full camo with a camo cover over my lens/camera and my face camoed with a mask as well. If you
already have the camo that approach works great. If not, it'll be time to spend some money on camo or the
shroud already mentioned. The shroud will be less obtrusive to waterfowl than the blind, partly
because of difference in size, but also because you'd really want to leave the blind there for a day or
two before shooting, and that can get dicey on public water.
You could also save some money by buying camo burlap fabric at Cabela's or a similar outfitter
for not much money. It isn't as effective when you're sitting up, but it's great to drape over you and
tuck in when you're laying prone, and it's also great in the woods strung between a couple tree trunks.
You can easily cut a hole in it in those situations and shoot through the hole. I've used it a number
of times for impromptu blinds and was happy with the results. It will also work for a back-yard blind.
You can find the various patterns at the Cabela's Web site mentioned earlier and search for "burlap camo."
Soooo many options.
As to your backyard, the need for camo depends somewhat on the species you're after. I find that just sitting quietly for a half hour or so is all it takes to acclimate small birds like goldfinches, chickadees and nuthatches. Larger birds like hairy or red-bellied woodpeckers are much more skittish and for them I use camo. Being able to leave a blind out overnight for them is definitely helpful.
All of the ideas sound great so far....I'm leaning towards the burlap sack/camo sheets idea as it will be cheap and still get the job done. In the future if I need a blind then I'll get one but for right now I'm going to need to be on the ground anyway since these ducks are at ground level.
Keith...as for my birdies in the yard. I've got Chickadees, White-Breasted Nuthatches, Tufted Tits, Goldfinches, House Finches, Mourning Doves, Blue Jays, Brown Thrashers, Northern Mockingbirds, Bluebirds, Cardinals, Starlings, Downy Woodpecker, and a Red-Bellied Woodpecker....The Gambit is very large.
Right now my platform feeder is set up hanging from a tree about 8 feet up. I was planning on moving it down to a shepard's hook that would put it around 4.5 to 5 feet off the ground, mounting some perches next to it, and then setting up my blind accordingly.
The only thing that I'm using to feed right now is thistle in a tube feeder off the the right in the tree, some suet in a hanging cage (which was empty this morning), and sunflower seeds in the platform feeder. The Red-Bellied was eating the Sunflower seeds today oddly enough.
Is there anything I should do differently with my setup?
Should I offer other food to attract other birds?
http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/templates/product/standard-item.jsp?id=0021457228230a&navCount=2&podId=0021457&parentId=cat601993&masterpathid=&navAction=push&cmCat=MainCatcat20712-cat601993_TGP&catalogCode=XJ&rid=&parentType=index&indexId=cat601993&hasJS=true
If you aren't taking photos in bare, flat places a pop-up deal like mentioned above would work well. The main purpose is to hide your movements. It's movement that most birds pick up on. Hunted birds pick up on everything--color, movement, and your silhouette.
The Canon 500D macro attachment works quite well. It's sharp, with just a little sharpness falling off at the edges. Unlike tubes, you lose no light. There is no image degradation as with a TC. Working distance on my 80-400mm VR is about 18 inches. I take the 500D with me on trips, mostly. It's lightweight, compact, and gives me serious macro capability in a very small package. I have tried it on my Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 just for fun. It allows some VERY close up ultrawide shots.
Kent in SD
I couldn't find any sheets of camo or anything at my local Dick's Sporting goods store so I may have to order it online. I'll be busy with this blind setup for a couple days though, so I'm not in a hurry to order anything just yet.
As for the 500D....it's relatively cost effective for what it does. Just how close can I get and still be able to focus with my 100-400? I may have to get one just to have it in my arsenal. Right now I've only got one camera body (Rebel XT) and it's hard to switch from my 100-400 to the Macro quickly in the field so I may be better off just carrying the 500D so I can just screw that sucker on when I see something that I want to approach a little closer to...insects and such.
Thanks!!
I take down all but one feeder and all but a single, uncluttered perch. The more perches there are, the harder
it is to get locked on a bird that has a choice of perches. This is especially important because small birds
staging at feeder rarely sit on perches long. The more perching options they have, the less likely one can get a
focus fix on them in the second they sit still. Also, the perch should be on the side of the feeder away from the camera.
Birds staging at feeders tend to face the direction they want to go, so a perch behind and above the feeder will put most
birds facing the camera and pointing somewhat down.
On getting closer to butterflies with the 100-400, if the native ability of the lens itself isn't enough to suit, and
the 500D produces edge softness, wouldn't you end up cropping out that edge softness anyway? Since you already have a macro
and don't need the 500D for that type of close macro work, why not save your money?
That's just IMO, of course, and not meant to spur any sort of debate.
Thanks big guy!
As for photography today...the light is good but it's is windy as all getout here!! Also blowing a misty snow around. I don't know how active the birds will be but I'm keeping a lookout. If they start hitting the feeder I'll give it a go.