Good places in San Diego for bird photography?

Anyone have first hand knowledge of hot spots for birds near SD in January? I
want places were the *photography* ops are good, not just the birding since a
lot of birders are ecstatic if they can spot a rare species at 200 yards but we
photogs need close access with good light

Thanks.

Bill

My favorite place in SD is along the south bank of the SD River from near
its mouth (dogs have run of the beach right at the mouth) up to a mile or so
upstream (Park behind Robb Field and go both ways). In the winter the sun
is low and always behind you, but it's especially good at sunrise/set (duh).
It's a popular walking path, so birds are somewhat used to people. Even
though the "river" there has walled banks, there are grasses and islands in
it, especially near the mouth. There are lots of waders, pelicans, Brant,
and Osprey. A good place to see birds is along the north bank on Sea World
Drive, but you're facing south. I didn't have much luck the one time I went
to the Tijuana Slough preserve, near Mexico. You might have some luck
around Mission Bay. Some folks like the shore by La Jolla (a good place for
Harbor Seals).

For Riparian habitat, try Marion Bear Memorial Park (along rte. 52, E. of
I-5) or Tecolote Cyn (just south of there). For coastal scrubland birds
(and some gorgeous landscape photography of sculpted cliffs) go to Torrey
Pines State Park.

For tidepooling, go out Point Loma.

If you want to drive a little north, there's Upper Newport Bay and Bolsa
Chica Ecological Reserves in Orange County.

And for a good Mexican meal, try Casa de Bandini in Old Town (SD).

Good Luck.

--
- Alan Justice

"Bill Hilton" wrote in message
...
Anyone have first hand knowledge of hot spots for birds near SD in
January? I
want places were the *photography* ops are good, not just the birding
since a
lot of birders are ecstatic if they can spot a rare species at 200 yards
but we
photogs need close access with good light

Thanks.

Bill

Bill,

Before I was into bird photography, I remember photographing birds in La Jolla
along the coast, usually among sea lions with waves crashing over them. That can
be dramatic and different than the usual bird photo ops. So the
beaches in and around La Jolla (right in town I remember) seemed pretty good.
There is a park with access somewhat north of La Jolla but I didn't see much
in bird ops there, nor 4x5 ops for my tastes (depends on how much pure scenery versus
houses you can tolerate). I saw bird ops at the San Diego wild animal park,
and photogs there with 500-600mm lenses photographing birds.

Art Morris runs a bird field class in the San Diego area, but exactly where?

Roger


Bill Hilton wrote:

Anyone have first hand knowledge of hot spots for birds near SD in January? I
want places were the *photography* ops are good, not just the birding since a
lot of birders are ecstatic if they can spot a rare species at 200 yards but we
photogs need close access with good light

Thanks.

Bill

Bill,

Before I was into bird photography, I remember photographing birds in La Jolla
along the coast, usually among sea lions with waves crashing over them. That can
be dramatic and different than the usual bird photo ops. So the
beaches in and around La Jolla (right in town I remember) seemed pretty good.
There is a park with access somewhat north of La Jolla but I didn't see much
in bird ops there, nor 4x5 ops for my tastes (depends on how much pure scenery versus
houses you can tolerate). I saw bird ops at the San Diego wild animal park,
and photogs there with 500-600mm lenses photographing birds.

Art Morris runs a bird field class in the San Diego area, but exactly where?

Roger


Bill Hilton wrote:

Anyone have first hand knowledge of hot spots for birds near SD in January? I
want places were the *photography* ops are good, not just the birding since a
lot of birders are ecstatic if they can spot a rare species at 200 yards but we
photogs need close access with good light

Thanks.

Bill

Morris likes the La Jolla coast, too. I don't recall Sea Lions, but Harbor
Seals have taken over what was once a popular beach (La Jolla Cove). He
also likes the two places in Orange County (up near LA), Bolsa Chica and
Upper Newport Bay.

The SD Wild Animal Park (north of SD, owned by SD Zoo) is a pretty good
place, but not for the close-ups one can get at the SD Zoo. Much can only
be seen from their train. The WAP has a great African Savannah (or is it a
veldt?) which allows for natural-looking wide shots of large animals. They
also have a special "photo safari" into it. The only walk-through area I
remember (it's been a few years) was for wallabies and 'roos. I don't
remember the bird ops.

The zoo has a couple of enclosed bird cages that one can go in and get close
shots of various species. (Bill - like the AZ Sonora Desert Museum, but not
with native species). Most exhibits are wild-looking, usually with no fence
or glass to block your shot. The SD Zoo is one of my favorite places in
this sector of the gallaxy.

--
- Alan Justice


"Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" wrote in
message ...
Bill,

Before I was into bird photography, I remember photographing birds in La
Jolla
along the coast, usually among sea lions with waves crashing over them.
That can
be dramatic and different than the usual bird photo ops. So the
beaches in and around La Jolla (right in town I remember) seemed pretty
good.
There is a park with access somewhat north of La Jolla but I didn't see
much
in bird ops there, nor 4x5 ops for my tastes (depends on how much pure
scenery versus
houses you can tolerate). I saw bird ops at the San Diego wild animal
park,
and photogs there with 500-600mm lenses photographing birds.

Art Morris runs a bird field class in the San Diego area, but exactly
where?

Roger


Bill Hilton wrote:

Anyone have first hand knowledge of hot spots for birds near SD in
January? I
want places were the *photography* ops are good, not just the birding
since a
lot of birders are ecstatic if they can spot a rare species at 200 yards
but we
photogs need close access with good light

Thanks.

Bill

From: "Alan Justice"

My favorite place in SD ...

Alan, thanks for the good info. Meant to send you an email but lost your
address at some point and didn't work

Bill

I'm pertty much a newbie to photography, but taking photos of birds seems
great and good timing as SD is close to me and so is the opportunity in
January. My Question is this. I'm going to need to rent a lens. I have a
Digital Rebel 300d and a Rebel Ti, (probably be using the 300d the most).
What should I rent? Keep in mind the digital has a 1.6x magnification on
all lenses. Should I go Prime or is a zoom whats needed in the field? Is
The 200mm f2.8 has good reviews and I was thinking of purchasing that one,
but is it going to be enough? what is the minimum to really get some good
shots. Would the 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 lens be too slow? is Image
stableization helpful? Your experience and expertese will be helpful.
Thanks.

Tom Callahan

"Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" wrote in
message ...
Bill,

Before I was into bird photography, I remember photographing birds in La
Jolla
along the coast, usually among sea lions with waves crashing over them.
That can
be dramatic and different than the usual bird photo ops. So the
beaches in and around La Jolla (right in town I remember) seemed pretty
good.
There is a park with access somewhat north of La Jolla but I didn't see
much
in bird ops there, nor 4x5 ops for my tastes (depends on how much pure
scenery versus
houses you can tolerate). I saw bird ops at the San Diego wild animal
park,
and photogs there with 500-600mm lenses photographing birds.

Art Morris runs a bird field class in the San Diego area, but exactly
where?

Roger


Bill Hilton wrote:

Anyone have first hand knowledge of hot spots for birds near SD in
January? I
want places were the *photography* ops are good, not just the birding
since a
lot of birders are ecstatic if they can spot a rare species at 200 yards
but we
photogs need close access with good light

Thanks.

Bill

From: "Tom Callahan"

I'm pertty much a newbie to photography, but taking photos of birds
seems great and good timing as SD is close to me and so is the
opportunity in January.

Hi Tom,

Here's a site by Art Morris with some excellent San Diego bird photos. If you
can find out where he's going for these you'll be in the right spot (he
mentions a couple of places in his book, like the La Jolla cliffs down the hill
from Prospect Avenue for breeding pelicans) ...
http://www.birdsasart.com/sandiegoexperience.htm

My Question is this. I'm going to need to rent a lens. I have a
Digital Rebel 300d and a Rebel Ti, (probably be using the 300d the most).
What should I rent?

Roger Clark and myself both use the 500 f/4 IS but it's a bit much for a
starter lens and I don't know if you can find one for rent in San Diego. Roger
does a lot of his bird photography with the Canon 10D so is using gear closer
to what you have (my wife has a 10D but I usually stick with film for birds).

Keep in mind the digital has a 1.6x magnification on
all lenses. Should I go Prime or is a zoom whats needed in the field? Is
The 200mm f2.8 has good reviews and I was thinking of purchasing that one,
but is it going to be enough?

I don't think it's long enough for birds, personally, even with the crop
factor. I prefer primes but the zooms are very handy and I have a couple of
those as well.

what is the minimum to really get some good
shots. Would the 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 lens be too slow?

Roger and I both have this lens, it's not too slow for flight shots on slow
moving birds (the AF will lock on these birds and you can shoot them in flight
.... Morris also uses this lens at times).

For focal length, I probably shoot my 500 f/4 70% of the time with the 1.4x
converter, for 700 mm equivalent. With your digital you'll need 400 mm to get
close to this (640 mm equivalent field of view). Either the 400 f/5.6 L or the
100-400 IS will be fine for this. Morris has some good info on lens choices
for birds in his FAQ page ... http://www.birdsasart.com/faq.html

is Image stableization helpful?

I have three IS lenses and would never buy another telephoto that didn't have
it. It's very useful for bird photography, I feel. Obviously you can shoot
without it (people have done it for decades) but once you use it you'll find
there are situations where it extends what you can shoot.

Bill

Bill Hilton wrote:

From: "Tom Callahan"

I'm pertty much a newbie to photography, but taking photos of birds
seems great and good timing as SD is close to me and so is the
opportunity in January.

Hi Tom,

Here's a site by Art Morris with some excellent San Diego bird photos. If you
can find out where he's going for these you'll be in the right spot (he
mentions a couple of places in his book, like the La Jolla cliffs down the hill
from Prospect Avenue for breeding pelicans) ...
http://www.birdsasart.com/sandiegoexperience.htm

My Question is this. I'm going to need to rent a lens. I have a
Digital Rebel 300d and a Rebel Ti, (probably be using the 300d the most).
What should I rent?

Roger Clark and myself both use the 500 f/4 IS but it's a bit much for a
starter lens and I don't know if you can find one for rent in San Diego. Roger
does a lot of his bird photography with the Canon 10D so is using gear closer
to what you have (my wife has a 10D but I usually stick with film for birds).

Tom,
The longer the lens the better. But there are side effects.
1) cost! 2) bigger and heavier. 3) bigger and heavier means yet
more cost in upgrading to better tripods and heads. 4) narrow
field of view means harder to frame, especially on moving subjects.

I got the 500 f/4 a little over a year ago. It took me two years
to get the nerve to spend that kind of money on a lens. I haven't
spend that much on my telescopes, 4x5 or even 8x10 camera gear
(individual purchases, not all together). But boy was it worth it!
'Course, after the lens, then another $600 for a new carbon
fiber tripod, then another $600 on a wimberly head. Then a new
telescope mount for tracking astrophotos, then an autoguider to keep
the tracking accurate. It never seems to end. Oops, then
computer upgrades to handle the images. Next will be a
top end carbon fiber (after the credit card quits smoking).
(I'm not complaining; I'm having fun. But be prepared!)

Keep in mind the digital has a 1.6x magnification on
all lenses. Should I go Prime or is a zoom whats needed in the field? Is
The 200mm f2.8 has good reviews and I was thinking of purchasing that one,
but is it going to be enough?

I don't think it's long enough for birds, personally, even with the crop
factor. I prefer primes but the zooms are very handy and I have a couple of
those as well.

what is the minimum to really get some good
shots. Would the 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 lens be too slow?

Roger and I both have this lens, it's not too slow for flight shots on slow
moving birds (the AF will lock on these birds and you can shoot them in flight
... Morris also uses this lens at times).

I agree, 200 really isn't long enough. I love the 100-400 zoom for
the framing ability, but it simply isn't sharp enough. The Canon
10, d-rebel, D60 have 7.4 micron pixel spacing. You need a sharp
lens for this resolution. The 100-400 wide open just doesn't cut it.
I recently bought the 300 f/4 IS L (it's around $1,100) and am
very pleased with the sharpness of the lens wide open.

The key is wide open and fast shutter speeds. Animals, especially birds,
move fast enough (except for portraits) that you need shutter speeds faster
than 1/1000 sec for any action (1/4000= better). That means fast
lenses and they must be sharp wide open. telephoto zooms and lower
end glass can equal pro level lenses at f/8 or f/11, but rarely
match wide open.

The advantage of f/4 or faster lenses is that you can use a telextender.
The 300 f/4 and 1.4x TC gets you to 420 mm f/5.6. The lens is small
enough that you don't need $600 tripods and you can hand hold it.
Knowing what I know now (after buying 70-210, 70-300 consumer lenses
years ago) I could have saved a lot of money in the long run and
gotten better pictures. So the 300 f/4 will get you in the
ballpark, allow you to get very sharp pictures, and not break the
bank like a 500 or 600 mm f/4 lens.


For focal length, I probably shoot my 500 f/4 70% of the time with the 1.4x
converter, for 700 mm equivalent. With your digital you'll need 400 mm to get
close to this (640 mm equivalent field of view). Either the 400 f/5.6 L or the
100-400 IS will be fine for this. Morris has some good info on lens choices
for birds in his FAQ page ... http://www.birdsasart.com/faq.html

is Image stableization helpful?

I have three IS lenses and would never buy another telephoto that didn't have
it. It's very useful for bird photography, I feel. Obviously you can shoot
without it (people have done it for decades) but once you use it you'll find
there are situations where it extends what you can shoot.

I agree with Bill. I will only buy image stabilized lenses from
now on, except perhaps for very short focal length 28mm.
For animals, I too use the 500 f/4 at least 70% of the time.

Roger Clark
My bird photos:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird

Thanks for the great info Bill and Roger. I appriciate you taking the time
to respond. You have offered some great info and I will study the Morris
Site before I make my choice. Roger, your bird photos are fantastic.


Tom

"Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" wrote in
message ...
Bill Hilton wrote:

From: "Tom Callahan"

I'm pertty much a newbie to photography, but taking photos of birds
seems great and good timing as SD is close to me and so is the
opportunity in January.

Hi Tom,

Here's a site by Art Morris with some excellent San Diego bird photos.
If you
can find out where he's going for these you'll be in the right spot (he
mentions a couple of places in his book, like the La Jolla cliffs down
the hill
from Prospect Avenue for breeding pelicans) ...
http://www.birdsasart.com/sandiegoexperience.htm

My Question is this. I'm going to need to rent a lens. I have a
Digital Rebel 300d and a Rebel Ti, (probably be using the 300d the
most).
What should I rent?

Roger Clark and myself both use the 500 f/4 IS but it's a bit much for a
starter lens and I don't know if you can find one for rent in San Diego.
Roger
does a lot of his bird photography with the Canon 10D so is using gear
closer
to what you have (my wife has a 10D but I usually stick with film for
birds).

Tom,
The longer the lens the better. But there are side effects.
1) cost! 2) bigger and heavier. 3) bigger and heavier means yet
more cost in upgrading to better tripods and heads. 4) narrow
field of view means harder to frame, especially on moving subjects.

I got the 500 f/4 a little over a year ago. It took me two years
to get the nerve to spend that kind of money on a lens. I haven't
spend that much on my telescopes, 4x5 or even 8x10 camera gear
(individual purchases, not all together). But boy was it worth it!
'Course, after the lens, then another $600 for a new carbon
fiber tripod, then another $600 on a wimberly head. Then a new
telescope mount for tracking astrophotos, then an autoguider to keep
the tracking accurate. It never seems to end. Oops, then
computer upgrades to handle the images. Next will be a
top end carbon fiber (after the credit card quits smoking).
(I'm not complaining; I'm having fun. But be prepared!)

Keep in mind the digital has a 1.6x magnification on
all lenses. Should I go Prime or is a zoom whats needed in the field?
Is
The 200mm f2.8 has good reviews and I was thinking of purchasing that
one,
but is it going to be enough?

I don't think it's long enough for birds, personally, even with the crop
factor. I prefer primes but the zooms are very handy and I have a
couple of
those as well.

what is the minimum to really get some good
shots. Would the 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 lens be too slow?

Roger and I both have this lens, it's not too slow for flight shots on
slow
moving birds (the AF will lock on these birds and you can shoot them in
flight
... Morris also uses this lens at times).

I agree, 200 really isn't long enough. I love the 100-400 zoom for
the framing ability, but it simply isn't sharp enough. The Canon
10, d-rebel, D60 have 7.4 micron pixel spacing. You need a sharp
lens for this resolution. The 100-400 wide open just doesn't cut it.
I recently bought the 300 f/4 IS L (it's around $1,100) and am
very pleased with the sharpness of the lens wide open.

The key is wide open and fast shutter speeds. Animals, especially birds,
move fast enough (except for portraits) that you need shutter speeds
faster
than 1/1000 sec for any action (1/4000= better). That means fast
lenses and they must be sharp wide open. telephoto zooms and lower
end glass can equal pro level lenses at f/8 or f/11, but rarely
match wide open.

The advantage of f/4 or faster lenses is that you can use a telextender.
The 300 f/4 and 1.4x TC gets you to 420 mm f/5.6. The lens is small
enough that you don't need $600 tripods and you can hand hold it.
Knowing what I know now (after buying 70-210, 70-300 consumer lenses
years ago) I could have saved a lot of money in the long run and
gotten better pictures. So the 300 f/4 will get you in the
ballpark, allow you to get very sharp pictures, and not break the
bank like a 500 or 600 mm f/4 lens.


For focal length, I probably shoot my 500 f/4 70% of the time with the
1.4x
converter, for 700 mm equivalent. With your digital you'll need 400 mm
to get
close to this (640 mm equivalent field of view). Either the 400 f/5.6 L
or the
100-400 IS will be fine for this. Morris has some good info on lens
choices
for birds in his FAQ page ... http://www.birdsasart.com/faq.html

is Image stableization helpful?

I have three IS lenses and would never buy another telephoto that didn't
have
it. It's very useful for bird photography, I feel. Obviously you can
shoot
without it (people have done it for decades) but once you use it you'll
find
there are situations where it extends what you can shoot.

I agree with Bill. I will only buy image stabilized lenses from
now on, except perhaps for very short focal length 28mm.
For animals, I too use the 500 f/4 at least 70% of the time.

Roger Clark
My bird photos:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird