400mm F2.8 for Hummingbirds?

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Matt N

Matt N

Well-known member
Supporting Member
Marketplace
Member's gallery
Last summer I had over 20 Ruby-throated Hummingbirds in my backyard daily in June/July/August and I'm hoping for the same this year. At the time, I was using the R5 and RF 100-500 lens, which worked well and gave me some fantastic photos. However, I prefer to stop the wing motion and usually need a shutter speed of 1/4000 (or more) to get the shots I want. I found that they were most active at sunset when the sun went behind the trees or was very low. My ISO would quickly climb to 12000-25000+ and I would watch the best activity unfold with no viable shots on that lens (with the shutter speed I wanted).

I know that a larger aperture lens would give me the lower ISO/faster SS I want, but I'm curious if anyone else has success shooting hummingbirds at F2.8 or if the DOF will be too small? I'm been saving up for a larger aperture lens for other wildlife purposes, so something like a 400 2.8 is on my radar anyway. I have a Z8 now and I know that something like the 400mm 4.5 will help some, and that's also something I'm considering. I could probably get close enough to use a 70-200 2.8 at times, so the DOF question would apply there on a more reasonably priced lens. I am specifically interested in the personal experiences with F2.8 or F4 and DOF on hummingbirds, having not tried that myself yet.

I know that you don't NEED those lenses to get good photos of hummingbirds...I've gotten some great ones (included below) at F6.3 or F7.1, when the conditions are perfect. But I'm still curious about the higher end lenses for this use case. I spend countless days in my backyard getting great shots of 2 or 3 eating, only to get too high ISOs when the sun got lower and the 20 hummingbirds showed up and the fights began. I do think denoise software has come a long way, and I use that for a lot of shots, but when photos get above 12000 ISO, I can tell the difference with the software and I'm just not that happy with it most of the time.

R51_2350-CR3_DxO_DeepPRIME-2.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.



R51_1741-CR3_DxO_DeepPRIME-2.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
ok, i don’t have experience specifically with shooting hummingbirds with long fast glass, but i do shoot action and i will say i think the fear of narrow dof is overrated.

in the end you’re looking for a specific result and it’s part of the recipe.

might you have rejects? sure. but that’s also part of the process and the getting the result you want… priceless

go rent one and try it out!
 
Member's gallery
The 400 2.8 is an ideal hummingbird lens, because it has the smallest MFD of all of the big primes. Add a 1.4x or 2x and you get more reach, but the MFD stays the same.

I don't know if you will need to shoot at f2.8 or stop down though. here's a gallery of a ton of wildlife pics, majority taken with a Nikon 400 f2.8 (one of the older versions and now the Z):

www.instagram.com

Tom Espo (@t.spo_images) • Instagram photos and videos

3,488 Followers, 1,804 Following, 732 Posts - See Instagram photos and videos from Tom Espo (@t.spo_images)
www.instagram.com www.instagram.com

I wish he had a flickr so we could look at EXIF data. but I'll shoot him a message and ask specifically about DOF and aperture.

I haven't tried Hummingbirds yet so I don't have any personal experience
 
Member's gallery
Don't have a direct answer to your question, I have a 300mm f/2.8 and use it when light is low (ie. for owls) and haven't noticed a problem with DOF. One suggestion would be to rent the 400mm f/2.8 and try it? Or wait for cloudy days? For some of my hummingbird photos that I shot with a 400mm f/4.5 I wish I had used a smaller aperture to try to get two hummingbirds in focus. Another advantage of the 400mm f/2.8 would be I assume faster focus than 100-500mm lens? Personally, I like having a little wing blur so would think you could shoot at 1/2500 or so (just looked at my hummingbird album and saw I did do that a fair amount).
 
Member's gallery
Keep in mind that dof is not solely dependent on aperture. How far your background is from your subject and your subject is from your lens plays a big role. I use 400/2.8 wide open often to shoot sports and those variables make a big difference as to what parts of my subjects are within the focus plane. Btw - I had to think about my answer since I sheepishly confess that I have no idea about the physics involved. My choices of aperture are based on about 35 yrs of experience shooting sports. Regrettably, that experience is not teachable to others, so I’m sure you’ll get better answers from more technical photographers who can actually put it into words and pass along suggestions.
 
Member's gallery
Sure, a 400 2.8 will work - I use a 600 F/4 all the time. However, the F/stop you use will depend on distance too. I'm often pretty close when shooting them and at my range, 400 @ F/2.8 would have unacceptably thin DOF - think just the eye and then a rapid falloff. I usually shoot hummers at F/5.6 ~ F/8 (if I have the light). I learned this the hard way my first time shooting them wide open - and that was with a 300 F/4.

Of course, as you move back you'll gain DOF, but the more you have to crop, the worse the comparative output noise will look compared to a non-copped version. No free lunch.
 
Member's gallery
Matt N said:
Last summer I had over 20 Ruby-throated Hummingbirds in my backyard daily in June/July/August and I'm hoping for the same this year. At the time, I was using the R5 and RF 100-500 lens, which worked well and gave me some fantastic photos. However, I prefer to stop the wing motion and usually need a shutter speed of 1/4000 (or more) to get the shots I want. I found that they were most active at sunset when the sun went behind the trees or was very low. My ISO would quickly climb to 12000-25000+ and I would watch the best activity unfold with no viable shots on that lens (with the shutter speed I wanted).

I know that a larger aperture lens would give me the lower ISO/faster SS I want, but I'm curious if anyone else has success shooting hummingbirds at F2.8 or if the DOF will be too small? I'm been saving up for a larger aperture lens for other wildlife purposes, so something like a 400 2.8 is on my radar anyway. I have a Z8 now and I know that something like the 400mm 4.5 will help some, and that's also something I'm considering. I could probably get close enough to use a 70-200 2.8 at times, so the DOF question would apply there on a more reasonably priced lens. I am specifically interested in the personal experiences with F2.8 or F4 and DOF on hummingbirds, having not tried that myself yet.

I know that you don't NEED those lenses to get good photos of hummingbirds...I've gotten some great ones (included below) at F6.3 or F7.1, when the conditions are perfect. But I'm still curious about the higher end lenses for this use case. I spend countless days in my backyard getting great shots of 2 or 3 eating, only to get too high ISOs when the sun got lower and the 20 hummingbirds showed up and the fights began. I do think denoise software has come a long way, and I use that for a lot of shots, but when photos get above 12000 ISO, I can tell the difference with the software and I'm just not that happy with it most of the time.

View attachment 84951


View attachment 84952
Click to expand...

What about a strobe? Or Sony's new 300/2.8 with a tc mated to an a9iii?
 
Member's gallery
Nimi said:
What about a strobe? Or Sony's new 300/2.8 with a tc mated to an a9iii?
Click to expand...
Although I've seen others using it successfully with hummingbirds, using artificial light isn't really my style. I don't have Sony gear, my options are limited to Nikon and Canon. That would put it at 420mm 4.0, so similar to the Nikon 400 f4.5 lens, which I've thought about.
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
Sure, a 400 2.8 will work - I use a 600 F/4 all the time. However, the F/stop you use will depend on distance too. I'm often pretty close when shooting them and at my range, 400 @ F/2.8 would have unacceptably thin DOF - think just the eye and then a rapid falloff. I usually shoot hummers at F/5.6 ~ F/8 (if I have the light). I learned this the hard way my first time shooting them wide open - and that was with a 300 F/4.

Of course, as you move back you'll gain DOF, but the more you have to crop, the worse the comparative output noise will look compared to a non-copped version. No free lunch.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the reminder about distance and how it relates to DOF. Last year, I was about get about 10-12 feet away and they didn't care.
 
Member's gallery
Doug Herr said:
When I had a 400mm f/2.8 I found that DOF at f/2.8 at close range was sufficient to get part of a small bird's eyeball in focus.
Click to expand...
That's my concern. If that's the case and I'd have to use a smaller aperture to get an acceptable DOF, then I may just be limited to the brighter times that I found success with last year...or learn to like blurry wings. ;) I was hoping to find a way to shoot them with less light (and not using strobes). Maybe I can't.
 
Member's gallery
Matt N said:
Thanks for the reminder about distance and how it relates to DOF. Last year, I was about get about 10-12 feet away and they didn't care.
Click to expand...
At that range with that lens, you're may be in the "part of the eyeball sharp" camp, at least at F/2.8 :)

IMO, the bigger problem is how drastically the sharpness falls off in that scenario. Most of the time with wildlife, we're used to a gradual tapering off of sharpness; up close with fast glass, it's very noticeable and, most of the time and IMO, distracting.
 
Member's gallery
Nimi said:
What about a strobe? Or Sony's new 300/2.8 with a tc mated to an a9iii?
Click to expand...
Nimi, I re-read my previous response and I didn't mean to come across as dismissive. Your solution of using a strobe is quite valid and would probably solve my problem. Maybe someday in the future, I'll try something like that. Also, if I was on the Sony system, the new 300mm/2.8 and a9iii sounds like a fantastic setup for speed. Thank you for your input.
 
Member's gallery
Matt N said:
Nimi, I re-read my previous response and I didn't mean to come across as dismissive. Your solution of using a strobe is quite valid and would probably solve my problem. Maybe someday in the future, I'll try something like that. Also, if I was on the Sony system, the new 300mm/2.8 and a9iii sounds like a fantastic setup for speed. Thank you for your input.
Click to expand...

Wasn't taken as such.
 
Member's gallery
Member's gallery
Matt N said:
Thanks for the reminder about distance and how it relates to DOF. Last year, I was about get about 10-12 feet away and they didn't care.
Click to expand...
There are various DOF calculators around, you could look at the DOF values for your lens at different apertures to get an idea of what DOF you will get at your desired distance.
 
Member's gallery
arbitrage said:
I love using my 400/2.8 for the hummers in my garden. It is my goto hummer lens. I don't find the DOF an issue and I shoot pretty darn close to them.
Some examples....
August 13, 2022.jpg by Bird/Wildlife Photos, on Flickr
August 12, 2022.jpg by Bird/Wildlife Photos, on Flickr
August 13, 2022-2.jpg by Bird/Wildlife Photos, on Flickr
July 01, 2023.jpg by Bird/Wildlife Photos, on Flickr
January 13, 2024.jpg by Bird/Wildlife Photos, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Great shots Geoff!

At that range, I totally think 2.8 is fine. I was thinking a little closer with my advice to the OP. Although, I like the way you include a little more environment than I have in the past with my shots. Time to up my game a bit :)

For the OP, you can see how range has a big impact. Here are a few of mine and you can see the bird is taking up more space in the frame (to be clear, this doesn't mean they are "better," just different). So, how well 2.8 will work it comes down to how much you are filling the frame. For these I had to stop down a bit to get the DoF I wanted. Also, note that the pose makes a difference too - DOF is trickier with the first one and easier with the two from the side.

lesser-violetear-hummingbird-in-light.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.


D51_0704-Edit.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

D51_9771-Edit.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.


As one last example, here's a frame-filler 600mm @ F/4. The reason it works is because everything was on the same focal plane. I had other shots of this hummer where he was at an angle and the DoF was just too shallow.

D51_6944-Edit.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.


Finally, this one was facing me and even though I was stopped down the F5.6 with my 600mm - and did a little crop - if you look close you can see that really only his face and neck are sharp, I think it works, but I would have liked F/8 here .

D51_3945-Edit.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
I have used the 400 tc on cloudy overcast days for hummingbirds. The DOF is defiantly a challenge @ 2.8. Also the size of the lens. I use a monopod with the 2.8, since running around for hours handholding it is a bit of a chore. I much prefer the the 400 f4.5 /w TC for 560. Stopping down to f8 and still have the 8ft MFD. As far as image quality I have to look at the metadata to tell what lens was used. The image quality on these lens is so good it doesn't really make a noticeable difference.

IMG_0831.jpeg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.


IMG_0832.jpeg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
I tthink the most important change for me over the last two years is post processing capabilities, particularly noise reduction. As an old (read ancient) film guy I always felt that ISO 2000 was an upper limit for acceptable photos even with current digital cameras. I prefer f/4 for a little more depth of field or 5.6 if the background is far enough behind my subject. With shutter at 1/4000 or faster this often pushes my ISO to 3200 or even 6400. Using the newer Lightroom Denoise or the even better DxO software the images at these higher ISO values are more than good enough. I have the 400 TC 2.8 on a Z9 but rarely shoot hummingbirds or songbirds more open than f/4.
 
Member's gallery
For still images I would use flash to provide more light for the camera and in dim light the flash duration is so short that you can avoid subject motion blurring. One sees that with the multi-flash setups used to photograph hummers. With high-speed sync the Z9 can use shutter speeds up to 1/8000s and having half the power output from the speedlight is not a show stopper. Aperture still affects exposures with flash but a f/4.5 400mm is going to work well enough. The 70-200mm f/2.8 is another option as camera to subject distances can be quite short with hummers if the photograph stands still while taking the shots.

For video I purchased two LED light panels and as I have an outside power outlet they can operate using 120V AC power. This one was only $159 for two large LED panels with a storage or carry case included.

 
Member's gallery
The great thing is you can experiment with different setups. When I was photographing hummers in my backyard a few years ago, some of my best results came from using a 300mm f/2.8 at f/5.6 at near MFD on a tripod, manually pre-focusing on a flower, and using a low power fill-flash, and a wireless remote.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top