550D 18-135mm lens suitable for Bird Photography?


beebeeice

New Member
Aug 14, 2010
165
0
0
22
Serangoon
#1
Hello guys! :D
Was wondering whether my 550D with a 18-135mm lens is suitable for Bird Photography.

I know that in order for me to take a pic of the bird (which most prob is quite far), i have to zoom in. But then i won't have the Bokeh effect. And my zoom is not enough most of the time.
 

spree86

Senior Member
Feb 3, 2009
4,774
0
0
Bishan
www.flickr.com
#2
Hello guys! :D
Was wondering whether my 550D with a 18-135mm lens is suitable for Bird Photography.

I know that in order for me to take a pic of the bird (which most prob is quite far), i have to zoom in. But then i won't have the Bokeh effect. And my zoom is not enough most of the time.
Why don't you get bokeh effect at longer focal range? it should be easier to get bokeh. Also, you answered your own question, you said the range is not enough most of the time, so do you think the 18-135 is sufficient? Nothing to do with the body though.
 

CHRISSIE

New Member
Nov 24, 2009
8
0
0
#4
Invest in a good telephoto lens. won't regret! ;)
 

Sep 12, 2009
566
0
0
#5
Why don't you get bokeh effect at longer focal range? it should be easier to get bokeh. Also, you answered your own question, you said the range is not enough most of the time, so do you think the 18-135 is sufficient? Nothing to do with the body though.
The most plausible explanation is that
(1) At 135mm (at the tele end), the f-number is 5.6, which would increase the depth of field, and (2) The background that TS is shooting against is close to the bird itself.

Hello guys! :D
Was wondering whether my 550D with a 18-135mm lens is suitable for Bird Photography.

I know that in order for me to take a pic of the bird (which most prob is quite far), i have to zoom in. But then i won't have the Bokeh effect. And my zoom is not enough most of the time.
If your zoom is not enough for you, then an 18-135 probably not suitable, unless you are shooting relatively sedentary birds like pigeons.
 

beebeeice

New Member
Aug 14, 2010
165
0
0
22
Serangoon
#6
ahh.. i see.. cause most of the time, i cant get close enough to the birds.

And one more thing. Is a tripod necessary?
 

zenix84

New Member
Jun 9, 2010
288
0
0
#7
ahh.. i see.. cause most of the time, i cant get close enough to the birds.

And one more thing. Is a tripod necessary?
Tripod is NOT a MUST. But if your lens has no stabiliser then a tripod will be very very helpful.

I used to shoot some birds using a pns megazoom. Can get "half-decent" photos, but 10-20% of the time only. But now that i have tried out the tripod with my new dslr. I am likely to bring a tripod everytime. Even a 30 bucks tripod win your hand 95% of the time. The other 5% is when you have some to lean on :p

I got the 18-135mm. But haven't used much. I would think 300mm is the minimum. As my friend put it " I think your lens (300mm) only good when the bird is near" near as in 5-10metres. Btw there are some decent lens in the 300mm range and not too expensive. :)
 

dingaroo

New Member
Dec 6, 2009
1,950
0
0
Singapore | East
#8
Depending on how far away is the bird, focal length of between 100 to 400mm might be a useful telezoom range for you.

Also, a gimble head like this


That's a Wimberley Gimbal Head with a Gitzo tripod.

HTH.
 

Last edited:

slmka

Senior Member
Dec 5, 2004
595
0
16
#9
For a start I would recommend to save up for the 100-400L, or the upcoming 70-300L (we dont know its actual performance yet). Then you consider your need for prime lens (300mm up). To feel the lens like 100-400 you can go for the communical services offered section and look for some bros who can rent the lens. (ard $30 per day) before you invest in one.
 

zenix84

New Member
Jun 9, 2010
288
0
0
#10
Just another suggestion. You can try out with a cheap tripod. Maybe borrow trpod from a friend. See whether you really need it and is comfortable with using it. This may work.
 

Sep 12, 2009
566
0
0
#11
I have not done bird photography extensively, but I'm not entirely sure if a tripod is the best thing for you, because it hinders movement quite a bit and can be quite cumbersome to handle. Maybe a monopod instead? :dunno:
 

beebeeice

New Member
Aug 14, 2010
165
0
0
22
Serangoon
#12
Thanks for the input guys.

I already have a tripod that came with the DSLR. So right now, i am trying out various disciplines to see which area i prefer.

Any locations around Serangoon where i can take some good pics of birds?
 

cleonbus

Deregistered
Nov 18, 2006
7,060
0
0
Kuala Lumpur
#13
Thanks for the input guys.

I already have a tripod that came with the DSLR. So right now, i am trying out various disciplines to see which area i prefer.

Any locations around Serangoon where i can take some good pics of birds?
Birding locations are more or less the same locations.Look into the World Of Nature photo gallery and you'll see where most of them got their pictures from...
 

cks2k2

New Member
Feb 12, 2009
939
2
0
#14
Birding is one of the more expensive genres of photography. You need big-ass glass, big-ass tripod to support said big-ass glass and top-of-the range body to make full use of said big-ass glass. Most of the birders I've met are either old, retired with money and time to spare or young but loaded. :sweat:

Or you can do like me: birding with no tripod, low-end body (450D) and short tele (70-200). Need to super-crop a lot of pics.
 

Last edited:

slmka

Senior Member
Dec 5, 2004
595
0
16
#15
Birding is one of the more expensive genres of photography. You need big-ass glass, big-ass tripod to support said big-ass glass and top-of-the range body to make full use of said big-ass glass. Most of the birders I've met are either old, retired with money and time to spare or young but loaded. :sweat:

Or you can do like me: birding with no tripod, low-end body (450D) and short tele (70-200). Need to super-crop a lot of pics.
lol...fully agree. I only went to wetlands twice and already feel equipment is very important there. First round with a 100-400, second round with a 500mm mirror. While both visit also given me some wonderful shots. But when it comes to range. Even 500mm is not enough. The place is just too big and the birds can be very far away from the hunts. Sometimes I just feel a super zoom camera + a mid range zoom DSLR can do better there. ^_^|||

I would suggest you can go to bird park to try out, since most of the birds can be reach within a 200mm range. (on 1.6x).
 

Jeremy1

New Member
Oct 10, 2009
619
0
0
#16
If FF body want to really go into Bird Photography, I guess need at least a 500mm lens with a 2X teleconvertor. :sweat:
 

ovaltinemilo

Senior Member
Sep 12, 2009
2,819
0
0
Sin jia Po lah
#17
Birding involves really good equipment I feel. Good Iso performance + lens like a 400mm f2.8 IS USM :heart:

135mm is rather short for shooting wild birds. 600mm(35mm eqv) should be a start. check out te nature thread where many have posted nice shots and decide what you need.
 

Last edited:
Sep 27, 2010
58
0
0
#18
If FF body want to really go into Bird Photography, I guess need at least a 500mm lens with a 2X teleconvertor. :sweat:
A teleconverter's very useful, even on a crop body. But u sacrifice 1-2 arperture stops, some IQ n sharpness. And I heard it makes the AF less accurate some dont support at all. Still its the best budget solution around.
 

Aug 18, 2010
153
0
16
#19
@TS abit off topic but i was wondering when u place ur 18-135mm lens facedown at 18mm do the lens creep?
 

Top Bottom