Posted by Mike Andrews on November 1, 2009 at 1:30 PM
I spotted this little fellah on the west coast of Scotland last week, when the weather was .....wet. I was shooting from the van with a x2 converter on, and struggled to get anything sharp, but it was an experiment, and not much else was going on. I have scoured several books on birds and have found a couple of things it might be, but can anyone tell me what it is please?
Nikon D300 with Nikon 600/F4 with x2 converter. Effective focal length is 1800 mm. F8, 1/40 sec, ISO 400, EV 0. Manual focus, cropped from landscape to portrait to remove some glaringly white grass. I have done a little sharpening, but am aware it is soft. I just want to know what it is.
Posted by Craig Nash on November 1, 2009 at 1:37 PM
Please don’t take this the wrong way, but in the long term I think you are asking the wrong question.
What I think you should be asking is, “How do I identify this bird ??”, you will learn far more that way.
First look at the shape of the subject, overall size including its bill and leg colour, this will immediately eliminate around 95% of subjects, time of year, location are all also relevant.
Then refer to a guide, for final identification.
There are two “Bibles” on the market at the moment:
1. Collins - “Bird Guide” ISBN 0-00-219728-6, this is available either as a pocket field guide, or as a coffee table version.
2. Oxford University Press - “The Birds of the Western Palearctic”, This comes in two versions the concise , ISBN 0-19-854099, two A4 volumes at £100 approx. used, and the full version of nine volumes, ISBN 0 19 857358 8 vol. 1, these would set you back about £1000, perhaps more.
There are some inter active DVD’s available, but I prefer books for this sort of thing.
Hope this helps.
By the way its a juvenile Stonechat, sex indeterminable at this stage, but most likely a female.
Neil
Posted by Mike Andrews on November 2, 2009 at 2:10 AM
Hi Neil. I appreciate the advice regarding ID., and to some extent that is what I did. I used the RSPB "Handbook of British Birds" and another much larger volume of the birds of Western Europe. My confusion came from the fact that I couldn't decide on whether it was a Redstart, Black Redstart, or Stonechat. The pics in the book made me think it was the Black redstart, but my mind kept saying Stonechat (I had seen a few adult males about), but this still doesn't look too much like the book version, which has a much paler underside.
I have several pictures of birds that I struggle with, one of which looks like a Meadow pippit but is very yellow. I'll check my local library to see if they have the books to which you refer.
Many thanks for taking the time to reply so fully.
Posted by Andy Shepherd on November 2, 2009 at 7:32 AM
Let me explain a little further my thought process.
First seeing your image I thought “Chat”, couldn’t be a finch for example, wrong bill, yours has a thin bill for mainly eating insects. “Chat” brought to mind a number of possibilities, Black Redstart, Wheatear, Robin, Redstart, Whinchat and Stonechat, so let’s go through them.
1. Black Redstart, you said taken in Scotland. Black Redstarts are restricted to south east England. So very unlikely.
2. Wheatear, wrong body shape.
3. Robin, possible when you think of the juvenile, right shape, size and range, but wrong plumage.
4. Redstart, possible, right range, but not quite right body wise, and plumage is wrong. Also Redstarts are deciduous woodland birds and you are showing grass in the B.G.
5. Whinchat, right range, same habitat, body shape, but the plumage is not quite right, there is an eye stripe, to some degree, at all stages, once fledged.
6. So that left Stonechat, everything is right, body shape, range, suggested habitat from B.G., etc.. The fluffy plumage said juvenile or immature.
Juveniles/immatures are notoriously difficult to identify accurately, you have to take into account other factors, body shape, habitat , range, etc., and not forgetting what other similar subjects are around, all can give you clues. Don’t rely on plumage alone, just look at the juvenile robin, it’s that plumage in order that the resident adults, its parents, won’t see it as an intruder and will allow it to mature in peace, even to the extent of inadvertently defending the area for it. This is very common.
You shouldn’t have too much trouble finding a copy of the Collins field guide, W.H. Smiths, Waterstone’s, RSPB and Wetland trust shops should all carry copies, the coffee table version would be another matter. The only difference is the size of the illustrations, they are twice as long in the coffee table version. I believe it is currently being revamped, visit Amazon. Doubt if you will easily find the Oxford Press on the shelves.
Compared the Collins against the Oxford Press book, and for Stonechat there were twelve illustrations in the Collins, with no juveniles shown, as against thirty in the Oxford, with juveniles shown, both showed sub species to varying degrees. The Oxford versions also contains a lot more scientific data.
You know it can be very challenging at times.
Hope this helps further, good luck.
Neil
Posted by David Sewell on November 2, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Neil is right, immatures can be very difficult to identify with certainty. The Oxford Press book, which most of us refer to as BWP (Birds of the Western Palearctic) is great for scientific detail, but is also hjeavy, expensive, and in, the nine volume version at least, out of print for some years. I recommend the Collins guide for general identification. Beware though, bird books can be as addicitive as camera equipment, and not much cheaper in the long term.
Discussion
9 repliesNikon D300 with Nikon 600/F4 with x2 converter. Effective focal length is 1800 mm. F8, 1/40 sec, ISO 400, EV 0. Manual focus, cropped from landscape to portrait to remove some glaringly white grass. I have done a little sharpening, but am aware it is soft. I just want to know what it is.
David
Please don’t take this the wrong way, but in the long term I think you are asking the wrong question.
What I think you should be asking is, “How do I identify this bird ??”, you will learn far more that way.
First look at the shape of the subject, overall size including its bill and leg colour, this will immediately eliminate around 95% of subjects, time of year, location are all also relevant.
Then refer to a guide, for final identification.
There are two “Bibles” on the market at the moment:
1. Collins - “Bird Guide” ISBN 0-00-219728-6, this is available either as a pocket field guide, or as a coffee table version.
2. Oxford University Press - “The Birds of the Western Palearctic”, This comes in two versions the concise , ISBN 0-19-854099, two A4 volumes at £100 approx. used, and the full version of nine volumes, ISBN 0 19 857358 8 vol. 1, these would set you back about £1000, perhaps more.
There are some inter active DVD’s available, but I prefer books for this sort of thing.
Hope this helps.
By the way its a juvenile Stonechat, sex indeterminable at this stage, but most likely a female.
Neil
I have several pictures of birds that I struggle with, one of which looks like a Meadow pippit but is very yellow. I'll check my local library to see if they have the books to which you refer.
Many thanks for taking the time to reply so fully.
I.D. has been nailed Ian.
Andy...
Your welcome.
Let me explain a little further my thought process.
First seeing your image I thought “Chat”, couldn’t be a finch for example, wrong bill, yours has a thin bill for mainly eating insects. “Chat” brought to mind a number of possibilities, Black Redstart, Wheatear, Robin, Redstart, Whinchat and Stonechat, so let’s go through them.
1. Black Redstart, you said taken in Scotland. Black Redstarts are restricted to south east England. So very unlikely.
2. Wheatear, wrong body shape.
3. Robin, possible when you think of the juvenile, right shape, size and range, but wrong plumage.
4. Redstart, possible, right range, but not quite right body wise, and plumage is wrong. Also Redstarts are deciduous woodland birds and you are showing grass in the B.G.
5. Whinchat, right range, same habitat, body shape, but the plumage is not quite right, there is an eye stripe, to some degree, at all stages, once fledged.
6. So that left Stonechat, everything is right, body shape, range, suggested habitat from B.G., etc.. The fluffy plumage said juvenile or immature.
Juveniles/immatures are notoriously difficult to identify accurately, you have to take into account other factors, body shape, habitat , range, etc., and not forgetting what other similar subjects are around, all can give you clues. Don’t rely on plumage alone, just look at the juvenile robin, it’s that plumage in order that the resident adults, its parents, won’t see it as an intruder and will allow it to mature in peace, even to the extent of inadvertently defending the area for it. This is very common.
You shouldn’t have too much trouble finding a copy of the Collins field guide, W.H. Smiths, Waterstone’s, RSPB and Wetland trust shops should all carry copies, the coffee table version would be another matter. The only difference is the size of the illustrations, they are twice as long in the coffee table version. I believe it is currently being revamped, visit Amazon. Doubt if you will easily find the Oxford Press on the shelves.
Compared the Collins against the Oxford Press book, and for Stonechat there were twelve illustrations in the Collins, with no juveniles shown, as against thirty in the Oxford, with juveniles shown, both showed sub species to varying degrees. The Oxford versions also contains a lot more scientific data.
You know it can be very challenging at times.
Hope this helps further, good luck.
Neil
David