Pictures of Wildlife with EOS Rebel

[soufiej]

Wildlife photographers use long focal length lenses a lot. I think your telephoto zoom option will help quite a bit.

Thanks Fred for providing one of the short useful answers in this thread.

Most of the other posters must be on drugs. I never asked about balancing the camera, never asked about alternative cameras and so on and so forth. Yes, you may know something, but it is not on the point.

Soufei, you answered my basic question with this?

"You shouldn't have tried to get any closer to the bear so, in one sense, yes. Depending on the size of image you wish to display, now it's up to your editor/processor."

I do not see your answer to your suggestion to get more pixels of the image on pixels of the sensor in what you wrote above.

Gee, I don't know, cougar. Are you saying you think I'm on drugs and I am not helpful but you still want me to answer your question? You want/need to be spoon fed in single sentence replies?




I'm going to believe you are simply not well informed and therefore don't yet realize when someone is offering you advice.




In your op you said "I guess a 55-250mm lens and a steady hand would have given me a perfect shot in this case."

You have several things wrong in that one sentence.

First, the "mm" setting on the lens is not a determining factor as to the distance between the lens and the subject. Do some research.

Second, longer zoom lenses tend to be heavier with most of the mass appearing at the front of the lens. This causes an imbalance when used with a small, lightweight camera body such as that found on the SL1.

This is, despite your current level of knowledge, a significant factor in creating a useful camera/lens system. Hand holding such a system becomes ever more difficult as the zoom power increases.

So, no, I am not on drugs and you really should not go around insulting those who are attempting to help you.

If your attention span is so short that you are about to stop reading this post, be my guest.



I've given you two alternatives to your present kit lens. If you read my posts to the end, you may find them.

A 250 mm lens will not place significantly higher amounts of subject on more pixels in comparison to your present kit lens when the subject is the size of the bear and at the same distance as the bear.

Will such a lens give you more usable pixels? Yes, but not that many when the subject is at that distance. Thankfully, in this case, a bear is a rather large subject. That's not the case with most "wildlife".

You need to head to a local camera shop and try several lenses to get a real world idea of just how much more zoom power you would need to engage in "wildlife" photography. I can't tell you how to buy because I'm not even sure you are that interested in "wildlife" photography. Seems you came a cross a bear and that's about the extent of your interest.

Go discuss this with a shop where you can handle various lenses and possibly a superzoom camera.

At this point, it would seem all I can do is tell you a teleconverter will be a less expensive way to gain reach with any lens and to say that a 1250mm reach is greater than a 250mm reach.

 

[astroNikon]

As time goes on one desires to have additional features (faster FPS, more focus points, better in low light, etc). And as you strive to improve long distance photography (wildlife, etc) on may look at longer lenses (after all, you don't want to get too close to a bear, or mountain lion, etc). And many start looking for the DSLR zuper zooms such as My One Night Stand with the Tamron 150-600mm

essentially. You can do just fine with what you have an the 55-250 you mentioned. Or you can get a longer focal length lens. Then in the future you may want something even longer. or higher quality. It's all dependent upon your budget. But considering what you currently have and want to do you are doing just fine.

What you should also do is learn more about controlling your camera rather than using automatic controls. Learn to shoot in Manual Exposure and why you should select a certain Aperture, and Shutter Speed and ISO. Learn the various Focus Modes of the camera and how to use them. Learn more about Post Processing the images to get the most from them. Then you'll notice an improvement in your photos technically.

 

[cougar]

You want/need to be spoon fed in single sentence replies?

Sorry, didn't mean to insult anyone. I only found your replies to be off topic.

Instead of 30 sentences, I was expecting to get something like 30 characters.

ISO = X
Aperature = F
Speed = Y

I will post the settings for my picture once I get back home and take a look at the original file.

Then I have 1 more picture than I can post for similar comparison where the light situation is different.

Yes, I needed to adjust my light metering from matrix to center based. The only reason I took this picture was, I was prepared to see the bear and was looking for him with the camera beside me. I could have made all adjustments before he showed up.

But then, yes, I needed the 250mm lens, so I will order it this week

 

[astroNikon]

ISO = X
Aperature = F
Speed = Y

This really cannot be answered unless you just like an "auto" mode type reply, something that can get the job done but not perfectly. Such as the Sunny 16 Rule ==> Sunny 16 rule - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Aperture totally depends upon the Depth Of Field (DOF) that you want, which also is totally dependent upon the aperture range of the lens (f/1.8 or f/2.8 or something smaller) and distance to subject. For example, this DOF calculator lets you calculate how deep the in focus range is dependent upon aperture and distance to subject ==> A Flexible Depth of Field Calculator

Shutter speed totally depends upon how you want to stop action which may be more than "normal" if you are using along range lens. Or sync with a flash. Or you may want to be a bit creative with Shutter Speed and not totally stopping action. Such as getting an animal running and showing some leg blur ==> Using Camera Shutter Speed Creatively

And ISO lets you pull the other two together dependent upon available lighting before you change ISO ==> Camera Exposure: Aperture, ISO & Shutter Speed

Otherwise you use an AUTO mode, or a SCENE/EVENT mode or something similar and let the camera try and figure it out.

 

[cougar]

Thanks AstroNikon,

I may have a tendency to over simplify things. What I was first looking for is an obvious mistake I had made which affected the quality of my image, like having a shallow DOF where the bear ended up behind it, wrong focus settings or speed.

With the equipment I bought I do not intend to make submissions to National Geographic but hope to get some acceptable images for my own use. And my thought was that Canon would have had the general user like me in mind for their entry level DSLR-s, making it easier to take a picture of a large animal at 50 meters, even if the user doesn't have all the knowledge required.

So far I am inclined to think that the number one item that could have improved the quality of that bear image is the 250mm zoom lens.

 

[chuasam]

Thanks AstroNikon,

I may have a tendency to over simplify things. What I was first looking for is an obvious mistake I had made which affected the quality of my image, like having a shallow DOF where the bear ended up behind it, wrong focus settings or speed.

With the equipment I bought I do not intend to make submissions to National Geographic but hope to get some acceptable images for my own use. And my thought was that Canon would have had the general user like me in mind for their entry level DSLR-s, making it easier to take a picture of a large animal at 50 meters, even if the user doesn't have all the knowledge required.

So far I am inclined to think that the number one item that could have improved the quality of that bear image is the 250mm zoom lens.

Oh suuuuure...make photography even EASIER than it already is.
Perhaps someone should design and market a bear lure to get the bear to move to the right spot and pose on command.

 

[table1349]

You want/need to be spoon fed in single sentence replies?

Sorry, didn't mean to insult anyone. I only found your replies to be off topic.

Instead of 30 sentences, I was expecting to get something like 30 characters.

ISO = X
Aperature = F
Speed = Y

I will post the settings for my picture once I get back home and take a look at the original file.

Then I have 1 more picture than I can post for similar comparison where the light situation is different.

Yes, I needed to adjust my light metering from matrix to center based. The only reason I took this picture was, I was prepared to see the bear and was looking for him with the camera beside me. I could have made all adjustments before he showed up.

But then, yes, I needed the 250mm lens, so I will order it this week

 

[chuasam]

Best thing to do is to take those rules and completely ignore them.

 

[zombiesniper]

I'll make this short.

Question one. How can you have done better with current gear?
Learn more about photography and how to expose/ compse a picture. Learn your camera.
Regardless of gear this will help the most.

Question 2. What could I buy to make this shot (wildlife) better.
The most under used but most bang for your buck is the Canon 400 f5.6. It's not the fastest lens but it is hands down the best wildlife lens for under a couple grand.

 

[cougar]

This is what the data from the Bear picture says:

Focal Length: 49mm (didn't want to go all the way to 55)
Exposure time: 1/60 sec
ISO: 100
F-Stop: 5.6

In my view, looking at the picture all seems to be properly exposed (for my liking) but I am just missing the pixels on the bear. If the wasted pixels I cropped to get the second posted picture could be used to populate the image of the bear, I would have had a perfect picture.

Here is another situation. I see the bear; I set the camera to:

Focal Length: 49mm (didn't want to go all the way to 55)
Exposure time: 1/125 sec
ISO: 100
F-Stop: 5.6


And I get this picture:



If I crop the middle portion of this dreary landscape I get this:



Was there any way, or set of settings allowing me to capture a better image of the two bears at 30 meters from me; maybe not?

 

[zombiesniper]

The bear is the darkest thing in the photo. Add to this that you'll be cropping most of the surrounding away anyhow I would expose for the bear and over expose the background by a 1/2-1 stop to ensure I had as much fur detail as I could.

Hope this helps.

 

[cougar]

I would expose for the bear and over expose the background by a 1/2-1 stop to ensure I had as much fur detail as I could.

Complicated stuff. I think I just need to tie a salmon to a line , throw it into those bushes and then pull the line back slowly.

I bought the 250mm lens. Delivery time 2-4 weeks. Once I get fresh shots with it I will update the thread.

 

[astroNikon]

Oh suuuuure...make photography even EASIER than it already is.
Perhaps someone should design and market a bear lure to get the bear to move to the right spot and pose on command.

Pour liberal amounts of BBQ sauce on your arm.
Approach bear, stick out arm.
have camera ready in other hand
You'll be able to take some shots that no one else has probably taken.
of course, this is not recommended by anyone sane. LOL

 

[table1349]

Paddington looks a little cranky. Perhaps some salmon would help.

 

[astroNikon]

This is what the data from the Bear picture says:

Focal Length: 49mm (didn't want to go all the way to 55)
Exposure time: 1/60 sec
ISO: 100
F-Stop: 5.6

In my view, looking at the picture all seems to be properly exposed (for my liking) but I am just missing the pixels on the bear. If the wasted pixels I cropped to get the second posted picture could be used to populate the image of the bear, I would have had a perfect picture.

Here is another situation. I see the bear; I set the camera to:

Focal Length: 49mm (didn't want to go all the way to 55)
Exposure time: 1/125 sec
ISO: 100
F-Stop: 5.6


And I get this picture:



If I crop the middle portion of this dreary landscape I get this:



Was there any way, or set of settings allowing me to capture a better image of the two bears at 30 meters from me; maybe not?

1/60th is too slow for anything on 4 legs.
at least 1/125 as your other photo if they aren't moving.
Try 1/250th though. But I wasn't there to see how they were moving.

Also learn about your Metering Modes ==> Canon metering modes: how to get perfectly exposed images in any situation | TechRadar

You have a dark bear in the shadows and when it isn't in the shadows it's bright sunlight.
You'll have to expose for the bear and crop out the blown out areas (if they do get blown out).
But you'll have to tell your camera to SPOT meter or a small area - but check out the options.

Also faster shutter to make sure you don't get any motion blur. You can also get motion blur from you pressing the shutter button at speeds of 1/60. Thus higher speeds recommended.

You might want to see how the shutter speed affects thing.
have a person stand in front of you, but slighlty moving side to side.
take a shot at 1/60, then 1/125 then 1/250

then do the same experiment with them walking, taking the speeds even higher to get the photo sharp.