Welp. I guess I'm getting a ghillie suit. Thanks for the explanation! I kinda knew that ducks (other than mallards, it seems) are very skittish. Songbirds seem a little less sensitive since they're way more mobile than waterfowl. Just camo clothes seem to be enough. I think the quote you were looking for is "Luck is when preparation meets opportunity." Of course, as Gary Player once said, "The more I practice, the luckier I get." Can't wait to see your new lens at work.
Very good discussion. As a "white lens" user, I was interested to see if you were worried about the lens itself being a problem. I'm also a fly fisherman and I've noticed how animals reacted totally differently when I'm wading in the river and fishing. I become part of the furniture, and though I'm casting away and moving around, the birds and animals can actually be curious rather than frightened. One day I'm fishing a run when I see a mink running along the far bank. Thought it cute then went back to my fishing. A minute later I noticed something black in my peripheral vision. I looked down and to my right. It was the mink popping out of the water literally right beside me. I could have petted it on the head (resisted the urge though). The mink looked at me, checking me out, then swam away. While in the water I've been approached by loons, deer, raccoons, and near approaches from all manner of other birds. Ducks and geese are like, "Ya whatever, another fisherman." Carp are probably the smartest freshwater fish and they're very hard to approach, yet I can get quite close to them and fish to them for a while by first ignoring them. Again, I become part of the furniture. The issue being, from the point of view of the animal, I'm busy predating on something else so they can ignore me. They also probably instinctively know that a land mammal in the water is not a danger to them. But as soon as we act like a predator, they become skittish and trying to take their picture is acting like a predator. I'll have to try it one day - set up my tripod in an area frequented by birds, sit down and then eat a sandwich in full view of the birds. It will be interesting to see how they react when I ignore them.
Yes, movement (or rather lack thereof) is definitely one of the most important things when getting close to wildlife. And if you can't avoid it at all then at least move slowly.
I spend a couple of months trying to get pictures of a kingfisher, with very little luck and it always only sat a few seconds.. Then bought some camouflage and on the very first day I had more time with the kingfisher than all the previous months in total ;-)
Brent, I really appreciate the depth with which you answered my (and apparently many others') question. I wasn't expecting a whole video out of it! This was incredibly informative and has certainly given me some things to think about as I work on my photography.
oh this is going to be a good one! without watching the video i wanna share my experience AFTER i had a major shopping spree for camo stuff. so far there are mixed feelings. first of all it definitely helps getting closer to wildlife. feeling like a bloody ninja sometimes walking around invisible. when i sit down in a corner of a park 2 minutes all kinds of stuff flapping by and lands closer to be than before. but when i go full camo mode with a tent, chair and tripod i usually sit there for 4 hours without ANYTHING coming close to me. and now i gonna watch the video to see how far i am off lol! ps: tactical ninja rolls like grandpa brent dont help at all but boy do i feel cool doing it. 🤣 love the channel mate!
finished watching. yeah nah i agree. did i mentioned i cant get any camo gear in my size because i am living in china as foreigner? i swear sometimes birds must think "what is that huge half invisible sausage waddling at the shore?! 🤨"
I felt a big change in being able to get close by wearing muted green and brown colors, and staying closer to the ground and tree trunks. Want to invest in camo because I feel if just clothes worked that well, camo ought to be better. But I see a lot of diametrical positions online on this, my hunch is that people that don’t like wearing camo in public say that it doesn’t work 😂
It's like spear fishing When you swim WITH the fish they come right up to you. You can watch them, the small ones first, then mediums,and the large, well they just float outside all the activity. Watching, You can pick your fish
In my experience with Bird and Wildlife Photography, it is most often how you behave more than to hide, but some Bird and Animals are too shy and you may have to hide.
I mostly use camo when I don't want to be seen by people, for one reason or another. I always go out to photograph with my dog as my partner. Most critters, including birds, tend to focus on her allowing me to take all the photos I want. Most importantly they have saved my butt from walking into resting bears and such. If one needs camo, then one most definitely should use it. Always enjoy your videos. Many thanks for making and sharing them.
I looked around differing camo types and settled on the Flectarn German camo. It has worked for me and got me closer to Deer and Hares, only thing is I look a right tool walking to locations and back Hope you are well, all the best.
Hi Brent. Good advice. Like you say, time and patience are key when photographing wildlife. Having all the equipment in the world does not guarantee success. Cheers.
I've always had the best luck by arriving at the shoreline before it gets light out. I've been all hidden and still got spotted because of the large front lens reflecting. 😡
My 2c, know your subject, it 'helps' you anticipate when the action is about to happen - although this is getting less important with all the 'pre-shooting' features that are coming to cameras 🙂
Excellent commentary, indeed. All parts make superb points. It is no different than hunting, really... Study hunting and you've already studied for the photography aspects, for that is what I always tell anyone that asks. I hunt but have an unlimited bag limit of .raw files... (Well, perhaps limited by my cards lol). I live along a flyway here in northwest North Dakota and also shoot all other forms of wildlife here whenever possible, for there's a huge array. We won't discuss how many images of animal posteriors I've obtained, though, for it was glaringly obvious on such occasions that I had disturbed whatever it was that was my subject. Even wild horses that receive a lot of human interest offer subtle clues that they aren't acting naturally. I have witnessed a lot of incredible interactions when I've been patient but I've also shot myself in the foot on more occasions than I care to admit! Camo will help improve the odds, of course, as well as removing one's human odors to the best extent possible. We are all "hunting" but returning from the field with trophies of a different sort. :)
Looks like the 400mm F/4 to me 🤔. Can't wait to see some videos on it, as it's both the most expensive non-L canon lens and their (i think) only grenn ring lens, as the lens has aroused my interest since the first time i've ever heard of it.
Very helpful, thank you! I recently got a camo net to start dipping my toe in wildlife photography. It was cheap, lightweight, and seems pretty versatile. I’m more of a hiker though, so I’m curious if I’ll be able to stay still for long periods haha!
It isn't easy! The hardest part of wildlife photography is having infinate patience and sometimes sitting for hours in horribly uncomfortable positions or places, sometimes wet, sometimes freezing, waiting, waiting, waiting, and just as often as not, going home with nothing! But sometimes you see things (even if you don't get a shot) that you would never see otherwise! Makes it all worthwhile!
@@alansach8437 I can definitely see how it’s a labor of love! I enjoy the wildlife I encounter while hiking/backpacking, so hopefully this can introduce me to a whole new way of experiencing it 🙂 Thank you for the words of wisdom 🙏🙏🙏
Just stumbled on a couple of your videos and subscribed to your channel! Thanks for sharing this precious information. I've been doing landscape photography for over 15 years, but I just started wildlife photography a few months ago so I still have everything to learn about it. I know that getting as low to the ground as possible often helps you get eye level with the animal and produces very pleasing angles and blurred backgrounds, but I must admit I'm worried about spending hours lying on the ground in bushes and high grass, since I live in an area that is infested with ticks and lyme disease (considering I already have other health issues)! I don't know what the "ticks situation" is where you live, but is that also a consideration for you, and do you have any advice in that regard?
Hey thanks for the kind words, and the sub, I really appreciate it! There are ticks here, but not as many, nor with lime disease like on the east coast. When laying down out here, ticks are the least of our concerns. Scorpions, spiders, centipedes, harvester ants, and snakes are higher on my list out here.
I also live in a tick infested area and have pulled countless ticks (either crawling or attached) off of myself. You can use natural repellents or synthetics like Picaridin. As long as you do a thorough check when you get home you should be fine. It takes 36 to 48 hours for a feeding tick to transmit Lyme disease. I'd suggest investing in a Tick Key or something similar.
Good video explaining the reasons for camo vs no camo. Question for you though: I notice you never use camo on your lenses. I realize that under a ghillie cover it greatly reduces the exposure of the lens but it still leaves a very extreme contrast to the camo. On the other hand, being in NM the temps do get quite high. Leaving the lens its natural white helps reduce heating of the barrel. Is this why you don’t add the camo to your lenses? I live in NW Florida and use the vinyl type camo on my two L series lenses (70-200 f2.8 & 100-500) my 800 f11 is native black and does get extremely hot in summer sun whereas the two covered ones do not. So I’m just hoping to hear your thoughts on this. Hopefully in a future video 🙏👍🏻
They're certainly useful for a bit of surficial damage protection. Mostly I don't have one because if I'm going to seriously camo up then I'll just get under the ghillie blanket or in a blind. That and I just haven't wanted to spend the money on one yet.
Another great video, thank you. Question...in talking about camo while you are out taking pictures you spoke about using camo to hide yourself or wearing camo to blend in. That got me thinking...what is your opinion on using camo covers for the lenses (and maybe the camrea). I was gifted a camo sleeve for my 70-200 L lens and am now considering getting a camo "sleeve" for my 100-500 lens that i just bought for my R5. Are they worth the investment and how well do they work when you are out there taking pictures? Can you maybe consider a video on this topic? Thank you and keep up the great work.
I think maybe they would help a bit, and they're certainly decent for a bit of surficial damage protection, but mostly I don't have one because if I'm going to take it seriously and really camo up, then I'll just put the lens under the ghillie blanket or get in a blind. That and I just haven't wanted to spend the money on one yet.
I was stationary watching a loon last year and got to see what a stalking human looks like to them. John Q Public guy kept trying to get in front of it, and the loon and I both saw this big glowing orb of a face and bald head in the sunrise glow. I kept whispering to myself "dude, stop moving around..."
When I was a young man, a friend and I were using rabbit calls to lure in coyotes to photograph. All we had were 300mm lenses. We had this friendly argument about camo. I wagered a green chili cheeseburger that I could wear my '70's lavender with black trim wedding suit and still get coyoters to come close. Going to different locations we both called in eleven coyotes - him in full camo and me in my monkey suit. We both knew to sit IN FRONT OF a bush or rock in move with absolute slowness when coyotes approached. It's the human form that spooks animals. Everything runs from us, but once you break up the human shape you can get pictures. Thats why a vehicle always works as a great blind (hide) becasue our shape is not evident. But camo is certainly part of a wildlife photographers identity. When I go to Yellowstone I never use camo since 90% of the time I stay in my truck. But I agree with folks here who have said if it gives you confidence, put it on.
I get the feeling most of the commenters are shooting pics of very human-habituated animals in/around town and parks (Yellowstone for example is as close to a zoo as it gets without cages). Nothing wrong with that, but of course it isn't representative of wild animals in wilderness type areas If you're trying to get close enough to fill the frame in actually wild settings (bighorn sheep, elk, cranes, predators, etc)... you need every advantage you can get. Staying still is critical, but even if you sit perfectly still in street clothes, they will see you unless you are camouflaged in clothing, or better yet, camo and natural blind material.
Yeah, I just really feel like a lot of people aren't really grasping what I said in the video, or where I live, lol. Out here in the real wild, away from cities, parks, national parks, etc., where wildlife is HUNTED, they know to fear people because people = death. Everything is so skittish out here. That's just how it is in national forests/on blm where there's hunting seasons and few people. Also, (I'm not a hunter) would you tell a real hunter that camo is useless? I wouldn't, lol, but then I did make this video...😄
High up in the mountains, at 10k + I had a ghillie suit on and the first one to notice me was an Osprey, this bird circles over me for about 2 min. Screaming the entire time. The Eagles I saw, flew away. The Redtail I didn't see, flew away. And then, the Osprey left. So, Nope
I have always said that camo is not (usually) needed to hide from the animals. Although it can be helpful with some skittish species and birds (remaining still is more important imo), the primary reason I wear camo is to hide from looky lous and other photographers! "What chu takn' pictures of mister?" "Nothing now! Thank you very much!"
"What are you taking photos of mister? Birds. "I don't see any birds." You should have been here a minute ago. There were lots of birds........ They never get the point! SMH
No I never got it. Too expensive and heavy. I got the 24 1.8 and use that now more than anything for astro lately. I also used 14-35 and 24-70 for astro a lot too.
@@BrentHall thanks for the reply! Love ur video's, have learned ALOT. Wildlife is my fav.. I have the r5, 100-500 and 24-200, and a 50. was looking for an all around for landscape, macro, and astro and hoped I get do alittle of all with it without having 4 lens. Had a decent cameras for 40 years, and retired, & taking some photo classes now.
I don't necessarily disagree with anything Brent said, but I will emphasize the point that wearing full camo is just about the least important element. If you're doing the other 99.5% of stuff you can do to get close, then adding camo to get to 99.7% couldn't hurt. But what I see out in the field is people doing 10% of what they need to being decked out and getting to 10.2% which is kind of pointless. (Blinds which got mixed into the conversation are a different kettle of vultures, and work well.) My experience from years in nothing-flashy street clothes is lots of wildlife inside my minimum focus distance including rails walking over my shoes, a tree swallow on my ball cap, a chickadee on my shoulder, and I'm sure many other close encounters I'm not remembering.
Ive found camo has little benefits to my photography outcome. Even with waterfowl which is where camo would be the "most important." For me its more planning, research, movement discipline, and a little luck. Waterfowl and especially hawks, rapters, and bald eagles can smell and see you half a mile away even in your camo and knows something is up lol. I wear camo, but rarely and when i do its minimal like just a camo shirt or jacket. Nothing really else. It makes almost no difference in my opinion for the vast majority of wildlife. A blind would be a better alternative. I just usually wear mute darker colors and still come away with shots i enjoy.
Just cover your hands and face folks and don't make fast movements. you can be cammo'ed but your face and hands look like bright flood lights to their eyes. Especially when you have light skin.
Yeah, idk where everyone else is taking all their wildlife images, but I live out here in the middle of nowhere NM, and in a national forest/on blm, where there's hunting seasons and few people, wildlife is stupid hard to get close to and photograph.
@@BrentHall same here in Montana. You can get within 30 yards of a moose in Grand Teton, which I love btw… but you can’t even get within 100 yards of a moose in the backcountry. If they see you, you are gonna have a bad afternoon. I’ve been chased from 100 yards, a few times.
Chocks out. There's an AF guy. I see all these great pictures of park ducks and songbirds here where they are fed and get depressed at the amount of effort I put into getting acceptable pictures of wild ducks. But, at the end of the day, its worth it just to be out there.
is camo a need? no, most of us can go into town where the birds are fed and we can get them so close that our lens can't focus, should it be a thoughtful purchase if we go to a trickier area? yeah sure we can invest in some form of camo it doesn't need to be real tree or mossy oak, just something basic to break up our silhouette and that does in most cases.
JMPO, but I think camo makes very little difference to the wildlife, as they pretty much know your there anyway. On the other hand, I'm the guy who has a camo bed spread, and wears camo cargo pants / shorts / hat just because I like the look of camo :) AND because it can get dirty or stained, and not show it :) lol I do stop short of wearing T-shirts that are really loud and flashy... Like many of my Christian T-shirts which are like black, with bright, contrasty red and white graphics ! Seems kind of like warning colors... But even so, whether the birds pay any attention to that is still questionable. Maybe some birds, some of the time ? Oh and @14:13 .... SO true ! Like using a tripod. Sure, they are a little bit painful, but how much does it matter to you, to maximize your odds ? I use a tripod 100% of the time > even with my 800 F11 + R7, which together, weigh slightly less than the tripod itself. Nothing to do with weight. It's all about stability.
I always find out. If you wear brown, green or camouflage clothes and you stay still in a place, slowly slowly the animals will come close to you. Because you’re not acting as a predator.
nope. would have been amazing to see it, but 1. the black rings dont fit, 2. the 200-800 has no knob on the tripod collar, 3. the 200-800 is a lot more cylinder-shaped. My guess is on the EF 400 F/4, but i'm not 100% sure
No, she doesn't wear camo. She has zero interest in wildlife photography. The way we film is that we go out and film the video parts, and then when I need to stay and hide and photograph for a while, she goes a way and brings her kindle and reads, out of sight. Then when I'm ready to move on, I radio her and we go to the next spot and film b roll and talking bits in between.
Animals don't care about your clothes. You can wear anything, even a reflective vest, as long as you stay reasonably calm and keep your face and hands covered. In terms of camouflage, mainly lens camo is essentially a placebo.
This tells me you shoot in areas where animals are very used to people. I can assure you that, in truly wild settings, animals do notice your clothes. Try getting within frame-filling range of a wild elk, or bighorn, or Sandhill crane, or fox, or coyote, or even a beaver outside of a national or city park, or where they aren't typically around restricted people and you'll feel the struggle. People take pics in the Grand Teton National Park or Yellowstone, or out of a safari vehicle and then think that's normal wild animal behavior. It certainly is not.
It's almost like you didn't even watch the video and went straight to the comments to bloviate self-importantly. I'll take Brent's well informed, well explained opinion (not to mention a wealth of my own personal experience) over your obviously uninformed, nature-is-just-like-a-Disney-movie hot take. Thanks.
I fully respect him and his thoughts. My comment is just about my own findings; it wasn't meant to refute what he said. For example, even the most skittish animals don't care about parked cars, no matter how big, bright, or shiny they are. The same applies to lenses or people lying on the ground, as long as characteristic human shapes aren't highlighted.@@ryancheney2761
Welp. I guess I'm getting a ghillie suit. Thanks for the explanation! I kinda knew that ducks (other than mallards, it seems) are very skittish. Songbirds seem a little less sensitive since they're way more mobile than waterfowl. Just camo clothes seem to be enough.
I think the quote you were looking for is "Luck is when preparation meets opportunity." Of course, as Gary Player once said, "The more I practice, the luckier I get." Can't wait to see your new lens at work.
Very good discussion. As a "white lens" user, I was interested to see if you were worried about the lens itself being a problem.
I'm also a fly fisherman and I've noticed how animals reacted totally differently when I'm wading in the river and fishing. I become part of the furniture, and though I'm casting away and moving around, the birds and animals can actually be curious rather than frightened.
One day I'm fishing a run when I see a mink running along the far bank. Thought it cute then went back to my fishing. A minute later I noticed something black in my peripheral vision. I looked down and to my right. It was the mink popping out of the water literally right beside me. I could have petted it on the head (resisted the urge though). The mink looked at me, checking me out, then swam away. While in the water I've been approached by loons, deer, raccoons, and near approaches from all manner of other birds. Ducks and geese are like, "Ya whatever, another fisherman."
Carp are probably the smartest freshwater fish and they're very hard to approach, yet I can get quite close to them and fish to them for a while by first ignoring them. Again, I become part of the furniture.
The issue being, from the point of view of the animal, I'm busy predating on something else so they can ignore me. They also probably instinctively know that a land mammal in the water is not a danger to them. But as soon as we act like a predator, they become skittish and trying to take their picture is acting like a predator.
I'll have to try it one day - set up my tripod in an area frequented by birds, sit down and then eat a sandwich in full view of the birds. It will be interesting to see how they react when I ignore them.
Yes, movement (or rather lack thereof) is definitely one of the most important things when getting close to wildlife. And if you can't avoid it at all then at least move slowly.
I spend a couple of months trying to get pictures of a kingfisher, with very little luck and it always only sat a few seconds.. Then bought some camouflage and on the very first day I had more time with the kingfisher than all the previous months in total ;-)
Kingfishers are SOOOO skittish! I have like 2 halfway decent shots of them from the past 10 year combine, lol.
Brent, I really appreciate the depth with which you answered my (and apparently many others') question. I wasn't expecting a whole video out of it! This was incredibly informative and has certainly given me some things to think about as I work on my photography.
You bet man, I hope it helped!
oh this is going to be a good one! without watching the video i wanna share my experience AFTER i had a major shopping spree for camo stuff. so far there are mixed feelings. first of all it definitely helps getting closer to wildlife. feeling like a bloody ninja sometimes walking around invisible. when i sit down in a corner of a park 2 minutes all kinds of stuff flapping by and lands closer to be than before. but when i go full camo mode with a tent, chair and tripod i usually sit there for 4 hours without ANYTHING coming close to me.
and now i gonna watch the video to see how far i am off lol!
ps: tactical ninja rolls like grandpa brent dont help at all but boy do i feel cool doing it. 🤣 love the channel mate!
finished watching. yeah nah i agree. did i mentioned i cant get any camo gear in my size because i am living in china as foreigner?
i swear sometimes birds must think "what is that huge half invisible sausage waddling at the shore?! 🤨"
I felt a big change in being able to get close by wearing muted green and brown colors, and staying closer to the ground and tree trunks. Want to invest in camo because I feel if just clothes worked that well, camo ought to be better. But I see a lot of diametrical positions online on this, my hunch is that people that don’t like wearing camo in public say that it doesn’t work 😂
One of the greatest sailors of all time, Paul Elvstrom, said something like, The more you practice, the luckier you get"😊
It's like spear fishing
When you swim WITH the fish they come right up to you. You can watch them, the small ones first, then mediums,and the large, well they just float outside all the activity. Watching,
You can pick your fish
Best bet is to plant yourself, and move as little as possible
Even in an Orange ski jacket, that works , sway and lean from the wind. Move naturally.
In my experience with Bird and Wildlife Photography, it is most often how you behave more than to hide, but some Bird and Animals are too shy and you may have to hide.
Looking forward to the review on that 'secret' kit in the background. :) Great informative video.
😄😁
Once again, great and sensible advice from you and a great help to less knowledgable bird photographers like myself.
Thanks man, I'm glad it helped!
I mostly use camo when I don't want to be seen by people, for one reason or another. I always go out to photograph with my dog as my partner. Most critters, including birds, tend to focus on her allowing me to take all the photos I want. Most importantly they have saved my butt from walking into resting bears and such. If one needs camo, then one most definitely should use it. Always enjoy your videos. Many thanks for making and sharing them.
I looked around differing camo types and settled on the Flectarn German camo. It has worked for me and got me closer to Deer and Hares, only thing is I look a right tool walking to locations and back Hope you are well, all the best.
Hi Brent. Good advice. Like you say, time and patience are key when photographing wildlife. Having all the equipment in the world does not guarantee success. Cheers.
Hey Brent... that lens beside the Canon 500mm F4 is a Canon 300mm F2.8.. 😁
It's not a Canon lens, or a Canon body 😁🤪
My general advice is... wear dull, move slow, stop often. My biggest conceals are Lens, face, and hands. That usually covers most situations.
It's like asking if you need to upgrade your gear. The answer is usually: It can help, but you often don't necessarily "need" it.
I've always had the best luck by arriving at the shoreline before it gets light out. I've been all hidden and still got spotted because of the large front lens reflecting. 😡
And remember, you have a giant eyeball looking right at them. That's what they see.
Many time it's very very helpful to have camo.
My 2c, know your subject, it 'helps' you anticipate when the action is about to happen - although this is getting less important with all the 'pre-shooting' features that are coming to cameras 🙂
Excellent commentary, indeed. All parts make superb points. It is no different than hunting, really... Study hunting and you've already studied for the photography aspects, for that is what I always tell anyone that asks. I hunt but have an unlimited bag limit of .raw files... (Well, perhaps limited by my cards lol). I live along a flyway here in northwest North Dakota and also shoot all other forms of wildlife here whenever possible, for there's a huge array. We won't discuss how many images of animal posteriors I've obtained, though, for it was glaringly obvious on such occasions that I had disturbed whatever it was that was my subject. Even wild horses that receive a lot of human interest offer subtle clues that they aren't acting naturally. I have witnessed a lot of incredible interactions when I've been patient but I've also shot myself in the foot on more occasions than I care to admit! Camo will help improve the odds, of course, as well as removing one's human odors to the best extent possible. We are all "hunting" but returning from the field with trophies of a different sort. :)
Looks like the 400mm F/4 to me 🤔. Can't wait to see some videos on it, as it's both the most expensive non-L canon lens and their (i think) only grenn ring lens, as the lens has aroused my interest since the first time i've ever heard of it.
...It's not a Canon lens...😉🤫😁
Tracking is the biggest part not just the gear
Very helpful, thank you! I recently got a camo net to start dipping my toe in wildlife photography. It was cheap, lightweight, and seems pretty versatile.
I’m more of a hiker though, so I’m curious if I’ll be able to stay still for long periods haha!
It isn't easy! The hardest part of wildlife photography is having infinate patience and sometimes sitting for hours in horribly uncomfortable positions or places, sometimes wet, sometimes freezing, waiting, waiting, waiting, and just as often as not, going home with nothing! But sometimes you see things (even if you don't get a shot) that you would never see otherwise! Makes it all worthwhile!
@@alansach8437 I can definitely see how it’s a labor of love! I enjoy the wildlife I encounter while hiking/backpacking, so hopefully this can introduce me to a whole new way of experiencing it 🙂
Thank you for the words of wisdom 🙏🙏🙏
Just stumbled on a couple of your videos and subscribed to your channel! Thanks for sharing this precious information. I've been doing landscape photography for over 15 years, but I just started wildlife photography a few months ago so I still have everything to learn about it.
I know that getting as low to the ground as possible often helps you get eye level with the animal and produces very pleasing angles and blurred backgrounds, but I must admit I'm worried about spending hours lying on the ground in bushes and high grass, since I live in an area that is infested with ticks and lyme disease (considering I already have other health issues)!
I don't know what the "ticks situation" is where you live, but is that also a consideration for you, and do you have any advice in that regard?
Hey thanks for the kind words, and the sub, I really appreciate it! There are ticks here, but not as many, nor with lime disease like on the east coast. When laying down out here, ticks are the least of our concerns. Scorpions, spiders, centipedes, harvester ants, and snakes are higher on my list out here.
I also live in a tick infested area and have pulled countless ticks (either crawling or attached) off of myself. You can use natural repellents or synthetics like Picaridin. As long as you do a thorough check when you get home you should be fine. It takes 36 to 48 hours for a feeding tick to transmit Lyme disease. I'd suggest investing in a Tick Key or something similar.
Another great explanation! Love it!
Good video explaining the reasons for camo vs no camo. Question for you though: I notice you never use camo on your lenses. I realize that under a ghillie cover it greatly reduces the exposure of the lens but it still leaves a very extreme contrast to the camo. On the other hand, being in NM the temps do get quite high. Leaving the lens its natural white helps reduce heating of the barrel. Is this why you don’t add the camo to your lenses? I live in NW Florida and use the vinyl type camo on my two L series lenses (70-200 f2.8 & 100-500) my 800 f11 is native black and does get extremely hot in summer sun whereas the two covered ones do not. So I’m just hoping to hear your thoughts on this. Hopefully in a future video 🙏👍🏻
They're certainly useful for a bit of surficial damage protection. Mostly I don't have one because if I'm going to seriously camo up then I'll just get under the ghillie blanket or in a blind. That and I just haven't wanted to spend the money on one yet.
That is exactly how it is.
Another great video, thank you. Question...in talking about camo while you are out taking pictures you spoke about using camo to hide yourself or wearing camo to blend in. That got me thinking...what is your opinion on using camo covers for the lenses (and maybe the camrea). I was gifted a camo sleeve for my 70-200 L lens and am now considering getting a camo "sleeve" for my 100-500 lens that i just bought for my R5. Are they worth the investment and how well do they work when you are out there taking pictures? Can you maybe consider a video on this topic? Thank you and keep up the great work.
I think maybe they would help a bit, and they're certainly decent for a bit of surficial damage protection, but mostly I don't have one because if I'm going to take it seriously and really camo up, then I'll just put the lens under the ghillie blanket or get in a blind. That and I just haven't wanted to spend the money on one yet.
I was stationary watching a loon last year and got to see what a stalking human looks like to them. John Q Public guy kept trying to get in front of it, and the loon and I both saw this big glowing orb of a face and bald head in the sunrise glow. I kept whispering to myself "dude, stop moving around..."
I think sudden movement is more of a problem than non camo attire...
Most definitely...pretty sure I mentioned that in the video too...🙃😉
When I was a young man, a friend and I were using rabbit calls to lure in coyotes to photograph. All we had were 300mm lenses. We had this friendly argument about camo. I wagered a green chili cheeseburger that I could wear my '70's lavender with black trim wedding suit and still get coyoters to come close. Going to different locations we both called in eleven coyotes - him in full camo and me in my monkey suit. We both knew to sit IN FRONT OF a bush or rock in move with absolute slowness when coyotes approached. It's the human form that spooks animals. Everything runs from us, but once you break up the human shape you can get pictures. Thats why a vehicle always works as a great blind (hide) becasue our shape is not evident. But camo is certainly part of a wildlife photographers identity. When I go to Yellowstone I never use camo since 90% of the time I stay in my truck. But I agree with folks here who have said if it gives you confidence, put it on.
I get the feeling most of the commenters are shooting pics of very human-habituated animals in/around town and parks (Yellowstone for example is as close to a zoo as it gets without cages). Nothing wrong with that, but of course it isn't representative of wild animals in wilderness type areas
If you're trying to get close enough to fill the frame in actually wild settings (bighorn sheep, elk, cranes, predators, etc)... you need every advantage you can get.
Staying still is critical, but even if you sit perfectly still in street clothes, they will see you unless you are camouflaged in clothing, or better yet, camo and natural blind material.
Yeah, I just really feel like a lot of people aren't really grasping what I said in the video, or where I live, lol. Out here in the real wild, away from cities, parks, national parks, etc., where wildlife is HUNTED, they know to fear people because people = death. Everything is so skittish out here. That's just how it is in national forests/on blm where there's hunting seasons and few people.
Also, (I'm not a hunter) would you tell a real hunter that camo is useless? I wouldn't, lol, but then I did make this video...😄
High up in the mountains, at 10k + I had a ghillie suit on and the first one to notice me was an Osprey, this bird circles over me for about 2 min. Screaming the entire time. The Eagles I saw, flew away. The Redtail I didn't see, flew away. And then, the Osprey left. So, Nope
I have always said that camo is not (usually) needed to hide from the animals. Although it can be helpful with some skittish species and birds (remaining still is more important imo), the primary reason I wear camo is to hide from looky lous and other photographers! "What chu takn' pictures of mister?" "Nothing now! Thank you very much!"
"What are you taking photos of mister?
Birds.
"I don't see any birds."
You should have been here a minute ago. There were lots of birds........
They never get the point! SMH
@@terrygoyan and they're often walking their dog 🤣
off topic, in your astro video u talked about getting the 15-35mm canon rf lens. did u get that and do u have a review? thanks!
No I never got it. Too expensive and heavy. I got the 24 1.8 and use that now more than anything for astro lately. I also used 14-35 and 24-70 for astro a lot too.
@@BrentHall thanks for the reply! Love ur video's, have learned ALOT. Wildlife is my fav.. I have the r5, 100-500 and 24-200, and a 50. was looking for an all around for landscape, macro, and astro and hoped I get do alittle of all with it without having 4 lens. Had a decent cameras for 40 years, and retired, & taking some photo classes now.
Could you please do astrophotography with Vivo x100 pro
Sorry but I don't have one of those.
@@BrentHall oh alright man love your contents though thanks
I don't necessarily disagree with anything Brent said, but I will emphasize the point that wearing full camo is just about the least important element. If you're doing the other 99.5% of stuff you can do to get close, then adding camo to get to 99.7% couldn't hurt. But what I see out in the field is people doing 10% of what they need to being decked out and getting to 10.2% which is kind of pointless. (Blinds which got mixed into the conversation are a different kettle of vultures, and work well.) My experience from years in nothing-flashy street clothes is lots of wildlife inside my minimum focus distance including rails walking over my shoes, a tree swallow on my ball cap, a chickadee on my shoulder, and I'm sure many other close encounters I'm not remembering.
Ive found camo has little benefits to my photography outcome. Even with waterfowl which is where camo would be the "most important."
For me its more planning, research, movement discipline, and a little luck.
Waterfowl and especially hawks, rapters, and bald eagles can smell and see you half a mile away even in your camo and knows something is up lol. I wear camo, but rarely and when i do its minimal like just a camo shirt or jacket. Nothing really else. It makes almost no difference in my opinion for the vast majority of wildlife. A blind would be a better alternative. I just usually wear mute darker colors and still come away with shots i enjoy.
Just don't move 😊
Just cover your hands and face folks and don't make fast movements. you can be cammo'ed but your face and hands look like bright flood lights to their eyes. Especially when you have light skin.
Comment section shows that most folks shoot in local parks or national parks. In the backcountry, camo is a great tool.
Yeah, idk where everyone else is taking all their wildlife images, but I live out here in the middle of nowhere NM, and in a national forest/on blm, where there's hunting seasons and few people, wildlife is stupid hard to get close to and photograph.
@@BrentHall same here in Montana. You can get within 30 yards of a moose in Grand Teton, which I love btw… but you can’t even get within 100 yards of a moose in the backcountry. If they see you, you are gonna have a bad afternoon. I’ve been chased from 100 yards, a few times.
One huge benefit besides the obvious......a full camo suit will protection from mosquitoes!
What's a mosquito? JK, but seriously, I live in the desert and mosquitos are the least of our problems when laying around outside...😉
Chocks out. There's an AF guy. I see all these great pictures of park ducks and songbirds here where they are fed and get depressed at the amount of effort I put into getting acceptable pictures of wild ducks. But, at the end of the day, its worth it just to be out there.
Navy AW Rescue Swimmer and then AT for F/A-18 E/F Super Hornets actually. 😁
is camo a need? no, most of us can go into town where the birds are fed and we can get them so close that our lens can't focus, should it be a thoughtful purchase if we go to a trickier area? yeah sure we can invest in some form of camo it doesn't need to be real tree or mossy oak, just something basic to break up our silhouette and that does in most cases.
JMPO, but I think camo makes very little difference to the wildlife, as they pretty much know your there anyway. On the other hand, I'm the guy who has a camo bed spread, and wears camo cargo pants / shorts / hat just because I like the look of camo :) AND because it can get dirty or stained, and not show it :) lol
I do stop short of wearing T-shirts that are really loud and flashy... Like many of my Christian T-shirts which are like black, with bright, contrasty red and white graphics ! Seems kind of like warning colors... But even so, whether the birds pay any attention to that is still questionable. Maybe some birds, some of the time ?
Oh and @14:13 .... SO true ! Like using a tripod. Sure, they are a little bit painful, but how much does it matter to you, to maximize your odds ? I use a tripod 100% of the time > even with my 800 F11 + R7, which together, weigh slightly less than the tripod itself. Nothing to do with weight. It's all about stability.
I always find out. If you wear brown, green or camouflage clothes and you stay still in a place, slowly slowly the animals will come close to you. Because you’re not acting as a predator.
Issue in UK with wearing a Gillie suit is that you could very well frighten someone to death or get shot at by some farmer 🙀
Trust me...that issue is even worse here in the US...
If not using Camo, at least use Earth tone clothing. Intention and calmness helps a lot too.
In most instances, big mammals are going to smell you before they see you.
200-800?
nope. would have been amazing to see it, but 1. the black rings dont fit, 2. the 200-800 has no knob on the tripod collar, 3. the 200-800 is a lot more cylinder-shaped. My guess is on the EF 400 F/4, but i'm not 100% sure
Still want to know if camera lady is wearing camo also while you’re stalking.
No, she doesn't wear camo. She has zero interest in wildlife photography. The way we film is that we go out and film the video parts, and then when I need to stay and hide and photograph for a while, she goes a way and brings her kindle and reads, out of sight. Then when I'm ready to move on, I radio her and we go to the next spot and film b roll and talking bits in between.
@@BrentHall my wife and I were wondering!! Great videos!
I look stupid in camouflaged clothing. So, I don't have any.
Everyone looks stupid in camouflaged clothing, but it doesn't matter because none knows who you are..........
Animals don't care about your clothes. You can wear anything, even a reflective vest, as long as you stay reasonably calm and keep your face and hands covered. In terms of camouflage, mainly lens camo is essentially a placebo.
Yes, the hands are like bright semaphores when you move them around.
This tells me you shoot in areas where animals are very used to people. I can assure you that, in truly wild settings, animals do notice your clothes. Try getting within frame-filling range of a wild elk, or bighorn, or Sandhill crane, or fox, or coyote, or even a beaver outside of a national or city park, or where they aren't typically around restricted people and you'll feel the struggle.
People take pics in the Grand Teton National Park or Yellowstone, or out of a safari vehicle and then think that's normal wild animal behavior. It certainly is not.
It's almost like you didn't even watch the video and went straight to the comments to bloviate self-importantly. I'll take Brent's well informed, well explained opinion (not to mention a wealth of my own personal experience) over your obviously uninformed, nature-is-just-like-a-Disney-movie hot take. Thanks.
I fully respect him and his thoughts. My comment is just about my own findings; it wasn't meant to refute what he said. For example, even the most skittish animals don't care about parked cars, no matter how big, bright, or shiny they are. The same applies to lenses or people lying on the ground, as long as characteristic human shapes aren't highlighted.@@ryancheney2761
From what ive heard camo is especially usefull with birds of prey?