Does anyone use a 70-300 mm for bird photography?

[Jeff1581 81]

Hello and welcome, 300mm is OK if you can get close but with wildlife photography, you rarely can......

 

[RVT1K]

I have a 100-400 and it really falls short most of the time. Hard to fill the frame with birds and even deer. Unless you use a blind or they are kind of tame. A lot of people recommend the Sigma 60-600 except the weight. I go between keeping what I have so I can walk around with it or getting a longer zoom but being limited because of its weight.

I've got a 600mm (Tamron 300mm + 2x tele-converter) and even from 20 feet away, birds don't fill the frame.

I fully believe that I could have a 12,000mm f/4 and at some point STILL wish I had more reach and speed....

 

[photoflyer]

This was shot last month with a 70-300 EF Mark II, albeit Canon, on a very old crop sensor camera.

I have camera / teleconverter combinations that can get me out to over 1200 mm but that is really not usable. My favorite is the 100-400 on the crop sensor resulting in a max of 640, or with the 1.4 teleconvert in bright light at a max of 896. Still, if you can get close, as in this case, you can get good results with a 70-300. I watched the bird, anticipated where it would be, and waited until it came back. I think true wildlife photographers must be extraorinarily patient.

 

[RVT1K]

I think true wildlife photographers must be extraorinarily patient.

That is the understatement of the year. It sometimes takes years for a 1-hour wildlife documentary to be filmed. I also remember someone taking years and thousands of attempts to get a shot of a kingfisher diving and beak-to-beak with its own reflection in the water.

I think it is often overlooked, but I feel that having some familiarity with the behavior of the animals you're trying to photograph can have a big impact on your success.

I'm no pro but the challenge of nature photography, even in my own yard, is a big part of what I like about it.

 

[RVT1K]

I have a 100-400 and it really falls short most of the time. Hard to fill the frame with birds and even deer. Unless you use a blind or they are kind of tame. A lot of people recommend the Sigma 60-600 except the weight. I go between keeping what I have so I can walk around with it or getting a longer zoom but being limited because of its weight.

I realized I misspoke when I commented earlier. I was thinking of a situation where the birds were quite a bit further up in a tree.

At 20-25 feet from the feeder, I can fill the frame nicely at 340mm.

 

[Jeff1581 81]

In wildlife photography patience is a virtue......