# camera dummy wants to get birds in flight but doesnt understand aperture



## WalkingintheAir25 (Oct 24, 2013)

-


----------



## amolitor (Oct 24, 2013)

Smaller numbers mean a bigger hole to admit light.

A bigger hole to admit light means that you can leave the shutter open for less time, and still gather enough light to get a good exposure.

That translates to faster shutter speeds, which will freeze the birds in flight better.

A complication here is that a smaller number means a bigger hole which ALSO means less depth of field, which means that you will be punished for focusing errors more severely.

You definitely want the biggest aperture (biggest hole; smallest number) you can get. Focusing errors you can learn to make less and less often.


----------



## robbins.photo (Oct 24, 2013)

UpWiththeBirds said:


> I mostly want to take pictures of birds in flight, and the moon. I'm still trying to understand camera basics.
> What difference would I notice in using an 80-400mm lens f/5.6 vs a 400mm fixed lens f/2.8 ?
> Would I be able to take pictures of birds flying in low light better and the bird be brought into focus more? Also, I noticed they have a 80-400 f/5.6 zoom lens, and one that is f/5.6 but is not a zoom. What exactly does the zoom do?



Ok.. first the basics.  Aperture is a measure of how wide a lens opens.  The lower the number, the wider the opening, so F 2.8 is a much wider opening than F 5.6, meaning it lets in a lot more light.  Ok, so what does all that extra light do for you?  Well first of all the more light you have, the faster your camera can focus.  So if your using an F 2.8 lens, well your camera is going to focus faster which for a fast moving subject is good news.  Also the exposure of your final image is based off of three factors.  Aperture, Shutter Speed and ISO.

We've already covered aperture.  ISO is an adjustable setting that can increase or decrease the sensitivity of the sensor in your camera to light.  The higher the ISO, the more light the sensor has to work with - however the higher the ISO the more noise that will be introduced into the final image as a result.  Most good camera's the noise won't really be noticeable till you start getting above ISO 800.

Shutter speed, the last piece of the puzzle, is how long the shutter stays open when you take the picture.  The faster your shutter speed, the more you can "freeze" the action for fast moving subjects and make them appear as if they are frozen with no blur.  However the faster your shutter speed, the faster the shutter opens and closes, thus letting less light in and having less light to work with to create your final image.

So, the wider you can open your aperture the more light you have to work with and therefore you can use a lower ISO for less noise and still keep your shutter speed high to stop motion. In lower lighting conditions the wider aperture f/2.8 lens would allow a lot more light in to the camera, thus allowing you to use lower ISO and higher shutter speed and still get a proper exposure vrs the higher ISO/ lower shutter speed combo you'd need for the 5.6.

The fixed 400 mm means that when you use it, the focal length is always 400 mm.  The focal length determines how "close" or "far away" an object your focusing on will appear in your photograph.  When you photograph objects using a fixed lens like this you will need to practice a little so you can maintain a proper distance between you and your subject.  If you want something to be "farther away" or "closer" you will have to move the camera further away or closer as needed.  The higher the number in mm, the closer the object will appear to be in your picture, so at 400 mm even objects that are very far away will seem very close up.  

What a zoom does is it allows you to vary your focal length.  So the 80-400  mm allows you to make a far away object very close (up to 400 mm focal length) or further away (all the way out to 80 mm focal length) by simply adjusting the lens -  You don't have to move the camera closer or further away from your subject.  For moving targets, particularly those in flight, this can be very handy for keeping a shot framed properly.


----------



## KmH (Oct 24, 2013)

(BIFs = birds in flight)

f/x.x means the lens opening size is some fraction of the lens focal length. f = focal length of the lens, or you can say that the focal length of the lens is 1.

1/2 of the lens focal length is a bigger number than 1/5 of the lens focal length would be.

So - a 100 mm lens set to f/2 (1/2) has a lens aperture that is 50 mm wide.
The same 100 mm lens set to f/5 (1/5) has a lens aperture that is 20 mm wide.

A 200 mm lens set to f/2 has a lens opening that is 100 mm wide, and when set at f/5 the lens aperture is 40 mm wide.

*Here is the tricky part about lens aperture.*
If you double or halve the diameter of the lens opening, you don't change the amount of light the lens opening allows in, or blocks, by a factor of 2.
To achieve a doubling (x2) or a halving (/2) of the amount of light the lens aperture AREA has to be doubled or halved.

To double the lens aperture area relative to the lens focal length you change the lens diameter by a factor of 1.4142....., which is the square root of 2 (to just 4 decimal places).

If you want to let in 2 times more light you open the lens aperture *1 stop.* If you want to let in 1/2 as much light, you close the lens aperture by *1 stop*.
In other words - 1 stop is double or half as much.

Half of much of the light f/2 lets in is then 2 x 1.4142 = 2.8284 which gets rounded to just f/2.8. 2.8 x 1.4142 = 3.95976, which is rounded to f/4.
The classic full stop steps of lens aperture are f/1, f/1.4, f/2, f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, f/8, f/11, f/16/ f/22...etc.

DSLR cameras are usually set by default so they can be adjusted in 1/3 stop steps, so f/1.8 to f/3.5 is also a full stop - 1.8 times 1.41542 = 2.54556, which is rounded to f/2.5 - and would be 3 steps of 1/3 stop each.

Short hand notation for 1/3 stop changes are 0.3 for 1/3 of a stop, and 0.7 for 2/3 of a stop.

If you want 2x more light let in, divide by 1.4142. So 4.5 / 1.4142 = 3.1820, which gets rounded to f/3.2

Shutter speed and ISO are not about area so you can use a factor of 2 to know that 1/1000 of shutter speed will let in 2 times more light (1 stop) than 1/2000 will.
ISO 400 is 2 times less sensitive to light than ISO 800 is, or turned around ISO 800 is 2 times more sensitive to light than ISO 400 is.

Since there are 3 adjustments that control exposure, you can use any combination of the 3 to make an exposure change.

If you want a full stop change of exposure you can make a 1/3 stop change to the lens aperture, a 1/3 stop change to the shutter speed, and a 1/3 stop change to the ISO.
Or a 2/3 stop change to 1 and a 1/3 stop change to 1 of the remaining 2.


----------



## Braineack (Oct 24, 2013)

UpWiththeBirds said:


> What difference would I notice in using an 80-400mm lens f/5.6 vs a 400mm fixed lens f/2.8 ?



$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.


----------



## DarkShadow (Oct 24, 2013)

Braineack said:


> UpWiththeBirds said:
> 
> 
> > What difference would I notice in using an 80-400mm lens f/5.6 vs a 400mm fixed lens f/2.8 ?
> ...



And then some.


----------



## KmH (Oct 24, 2013)

$9000 - Nikon 400mm f/2.8G ED VR II AF-S SWM Super Telephoto Lens

Plus a good gimbal tripod head: $330 - Jobu Design BWG-J3K Junior 3 Gimbal Kit with Swing-arm HM-J2


----------



## Bulb (Oct 25, 2013)

KmH said:


> $9000 - Nikon 400mm f/2.8G ED VR II AF-S SWM Super Telephoto Lens
> 
> Plus a good gimbal tripod head: $330 - Jobu Design BWG-J3K Junior 3 Gimbal Kit with Swing-arm HM-J2



Go big or go home: $475,000 - Nikon | Recollections | Zoom-Nikkor 1200-1700mm f/5.6-8P IF-ED


----------



## robbins.photo (Oct 25, 2013)

UpWiththeBirds said:


> Thanks for the explanations everybody    I think I'm beginning to understand it.  I noticed the price tag.  I also noticed the 400mm f/2.8 lens weighed almost 10 lbs.  That would be like holding up my cat.



Lol.. well I'm sure your cat wouldn't have any trouble at all focusing on the bird.  Honestly I've gotten pretty good results with a 70-300 mm.


----------



## robbins.photo (Oct 25, 2013)

Ok, couple of quick thoughts on birds in flight.

One, shutter speed is key to getting the best results.  Some people like a little blur at the wingtips, me I prefer a sharp "frozen in time" sort of photograph.  So if I'm shooting larger birds in good lighting conditions I will use A (aperture priority) mode.  I set the aperture at the widest setting possible (the lowest number available) and adjust the ISO so that the camera will use a good fast shutter speed.  1/500 or higher is usually my preference.  

If I'm shooting smaller birds I generally use S - Shutter priority mode.  It's a little more involved than A mode - but I like having a shutter speed at 1/1000 or higher, for something like a hummingbird 1/2000 or higher if at all possible.  Again I adjust the ISO to get the proper exposure and I'm ready to shoot.   For small birds in particular I find autofocus area to be the most effective, it's not as fast as center point but keeping the bird dead center in the frame is very difficult for small birds in particular, they tend to move erratically and change direction often.  

When shooting anything in flight I've found my best results come from shooting a little wide and then cropping the photo in post processing to center and properly size the bird.  If I try to zoom in too much the bird will often change direction or speed and I'm left with only part of the bird in the frame.  

The most recent bird in flight photos I have weren't taken with my DSLR, they were actually taken with a Panasonic FZ200 - but the basic idea is still the same:

P1110855 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/101097886@N03/10231165313/

P1110658 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!


----------



## robbins.photo (Oct 25, 2013)

UpWiththeBirds said:


> Those are great pictures, thanks for sharing what you've learned, it helps a lot.



No problem at all.  Taking pictures of birds can be highly rewarding and a great deal of fun - it can also be incredibly frustrating all at the same time.. lol.   

DSC_0746 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!


----------



## minicoop1985 (Oct 26, 2013)

Bulb said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > $9000 - Nikon 400mm f/2.8G ED VR II AF-S SWM Super Telephoto Lens
> ...



Baah. Not even a constant aperture. 

And I agree with the shutter speed argument here. A big aperture will help you a lot with being able to raise your shutter speed, so a low F-stop number will be beneficial here.


----------



## robbins.photo (Oct 26, 2013)

minicoop1985 said:


> Bulb said:
> 
> 
> > KmH said:
> ...



Well minicoop if your looking to adopt and would like to purchase such a lens for me, great.  I'm game.  As it is I have to work within a slightly more limited budget.  In fact I didn't even spend that kind of money on my last car.  So I have to work with the equipment I can afford, and at the moment the 300 mm is the best I can afford.  I've got a lens I spent about 300 on used, a camera I spend about 350 on used, and a monopod that was something in the neighborhood of $75 but honestly I don't use that much.  I'd say probably 90-95% of my stuff is shot hand-held.

Eventually I'd love to get something with a constant f/2.8 but it will take me a while before I can afford that kind of glass.  So in the meantime I'll just have to make due with what I have - but I've found that good technique will make up for a lot of equipment shortcomings.  Granted I could do a more with more expensive equipment, but I find it rather funny that I see a lot of folks at the zoo or the safari park carrying the huge telephoto lenses with the constant F/2.8 and camera bodies that they dumped thousands on, and in the end their pictures often end up looking like crap because they really don't have a clue how to use what they have.  It just stuns me to see them use the LCD to try and frame their shot while they are shooting in fully automatic mode.  Makes me cringe really, the thought of all that beautiful equipment just going completely to waste like that.. lol


----------



## sm4him (Oct 26, 2013)

robbins.photo said:


> minicoop1985 said:
> 
> 
> > Bulb said:
> ...



And by that statement, you are already SO far ahead of the game.
What lens do you actually have right now?  I have a Sigma 150-500 now, but until about March of this year, I was shooting with a 70-300. Neither of my birding lenses are a f/2.8 lens. Sure, I'd love to have one and maybe eventually that will happen--but you're right, learning to get the best photos you can with the equipment you have is KEY.

Great advice here. Try it and see what works best for YOU. Because there is no ONE simple "do it this way" solution; it depends on what you are most comfortable with, what kind of birds you're after and what your equipment can handle. 

For me, I shoot birds a little bit differently than some. I use manual mode, but auto ISO. That way, if I'm shooting a BIF and suddenly spot something over in the shaded woods, I can quickly turn, focus and shoot and not worry about trying to adjust my ISO on the fly.  
If I'm looking at getting BIF, I start with a shutter speed of 1/1000, but it may go as high as 1/2000, depending on the bird, the situation and the lighting. I'll also start with the aperture wide open, but as soon as the light will allow it, I'll generally stop down to about 7.1, as I've just found my lens is sharper there or at f/8 than wide open.

If you have great lighting, then you can set the aperture wherever your lens is sharpest, set the shutter speed at 1/1000 or higher and still have acceptable ISO. But in poor lighting conditions, it all becomes a tradeoff. Do I leave the aperture at f/7.1 and end up at ISO 1600 and a good bit of noise? Or do I shoot wide open, let the ISO drop a bit, but end up with softer images?
Just experiment and find what works best for you.

I also use a single focus point, and aim right at the bird's eye.  Panning is critical to getting good BIF shots. 
Just as important as all the camera settings are some other things--don't wear bright clothes and bring attention to yourself. 
I often scout out an area for a while, see where the birds are congregating, then I set myself up close to that spot, as hidden as possible--while I'm setting up, the birds may get spooked and leave, but they'll generally come back if you're patient. 

You're welcome to view some of my shots on my flickr page, link in signature.

And now...I'm about to head out and go birding for the first time in about three weeks!! WooHoo!! Just hope I don't freeze to death! Last time I went out, we had a high of about 75 that day. Today it is 32 degrees as I head out. Ouch!


----------



## flyin-lowe (Nov 19, 2013)

Best thing I ever did was to buy Understanding Exposure by Peterson. He explains important aspects of photography so a newbie can understand.


----------



## robbins.photo (Nov 19, 2013)

sm4him said:


> And by that statement, you are already SO far ahead of the game.
> What lens do you actually have right now?  I have a Sigma 150-500 now, but until about March of this year, I was shooting with a 70-300. Neither of my birding lenses are a f/2.8 lens. Sure, I'd love to have one and maybe eventually that will happen--but you're right, learning to get the best photos you can with the equipment you have is KEY.
> 
> Great advice here. Try it and see what works best for YOU. Because there is no ONE simple "do it this way" solution; it depends on what you are most comfortable with, what kind of birds you're after and what your equipment can handle.
> ...



I generally use shutter priority with the iso set to auto as well, works pretty well in the vast majority of situations.  The telephoto I have is just your standard every day run of the mill 70-300mm Nikon F4.5-5.6 - nothing flashy by any means but it does a pretty good job overall.  I try to keep my shutter speed up in the 1/1000 range for most birds, really small ones I've found 1/2000 is usually more than enough.  

Oh, and a bag of popcorn or bread crumbs can be a very handy thing to carry along, indeed.  Lol


----------



## btraven (Nov 19, 2013)

DarkShadow said:


> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> > UpWiththeBirds said:
> ...




Cubed.


----------



## flying_gadget (Nov 24, 2013)

We all shoot differently and you need to try different settings to suit you. 90% of what I take is BIF's, the other 10% would be perched. A little different in that I use MF lenses and no OIS. Most of the BIF's would read ....... full manual control, ISO 200-400, lenses wide open at F/4.5 and F/5.6, 1/2500 - 1/4000, most shots I try and get 1/3200 - 1/4000. I shoot with the sun at my back and if I can feel the heat on my neck, I'm shooting in the direction I like. 

All the best and we are all different for sure.

Danny.


----------



## The_Traveler (Nov 24, 2013)

UpWiththeBirds said:


> Thanks for the explanations everybody    I think I'm beginning to understand it.  I noticed the price tag.  I also noticed the 400mm f/2.8 lens weighed almost 10 lbs.  That would be like holding up my cat.



Yes, but it is extremely difficult to look all the way through the cat.


----------



## shaylou (Apr 7, 2014)

UpWiththeBirds said:


> I mostly want to take pictures of birds in flight, and the moon.  I'm still trying to understand camera basics.
> What difference would I notice in using an 80-400mm lens f/5.6 vs a 400mm fixed lens f/2.8 ?
> Would I be able to take pictures of birds flying in low light better and the bird be brought into focus more? Also, I noticed they have a 80-400 f/5.6 zoom lens, and one that is f/5.6 but is not a zoom. What exactly does the zoom do?



Here is a good place to learn.

Cambridge in Colour - Photography Tutorials & Learning Community

I still use it.


----------



## glun (Apr 8, 2014)

UpWiththeBirds said:


> I mostly want to take pictures of birds in flight, and the moon.  I'm still trying to understand camera basics.
> What difference would I notice in using an 80-400mm lens f/5.6 vs a 400mm fixed lens f/2.8 ?
> Would I be able to take pictures of birds flying in low light better and the bird be brought into focus more? Also, I noticed they have a 80-400 f/5.6 zoom lens, and one that is f/5.6 but is not a zoom. What exactly does the zoom do?



If you use the 80-400mm f5.6 zoomed in to 400mm, or the 4000mm fixed lens f2.8, the difference would be the f2.8 allows more light to go into your lens. With that said, you can use a faster shutter speed to freeze motion would is great for bird photography. And to answer your last question, zoom let you change the focal length of the lens. Hope this helps!


----------

