When you look at glossy pictures of wild animals in books, magazines or on the internet, spare a thought for the photographer. I’ve decided that consistently taking good pictures of wildlife is a lot more difficult than it looks.
Photography has been on my mind today, for two reasons. Firstly, I’ve just bought myself a new camera. Secondly, by coincidence, I was asked by a publisher if they could use some of my pictures in a book on British mammals (and since the publisher is a wildlife charity, I’m happy for them to use what they want).
The new camera is probably overdue. All the pictures on this site have been taken on my medium-sized ‘compact bridge’ camera. It’s a great piece of kit – an Olympus with an 18x zoom lens – and it’s given faultless service for the last four years and is still going strong. But I’m afraid that I do push it to it’s technical limits and beyond. The problem is that most of my photographs tend to be taken at long range and in poor light conditions. It’s a challenge for any camera, and although I don’t like to blame my equipment for my failings, I have to admit that the quality does suffer.
So I’ve bitten the bullet and bought a new camera. It’s a Sony DSLR with an extra 70-300mm zoom lens (I say ‘new’, but it’s actually an old model bought second hand – I’m a real cheapskate). Now I’m ready to join the big league of wildlife photographers!
I’ve had a little play with it, and a few things have instantly struck me. It is insanely complicated, compared to my little fully automatic compact. Sony should have put the words ‘don’t panic’ in large friendly letters on the back. I’ve actually bought a whole book on how to use the thing.
It is a different beast to use too. It’s quick – you can fire off pictures as quickly as you can press the button (and if you keep your finger on the button it keeps shooting, like a machine gun). It doesn’t have the little delay before taking a picture that most digital cameras do, or the pause afterwards. This can only be a good thing when trying to capture animals in action. The magnification is not much more than my 18x Olympus, but I’m hoping the images will be better. Here’s some pictures that I snapped from our bedroom window of some of the birds in the garden as a test:
So – so far, so good. Does this mean I can retire my Olympus? Well, yes and no. The Olympus is portable and easy to carry. It is also versatile – I can photograph anything from close-up of an insect to a distant bird. To do that with the Sony I’ll need to change lenses (and carry them round with me). The Olympus shoots video too, which is handy, and it even records sound. With the long lens, the Sony should be good for distant shots, which is what I want it for, but it’s a specialised piece of kit. I think I’ll hang on to the Olympus for a while yet – it’s still useful.
I can see how people become quite obsessed with photography. Before you know it you start adding extra lenses, extra flash units, extra accessories and you stagger around the countryside under a mountain of gear. And the perfect shot will still elude you, even after you’ve bought that £1,500 telephoto lens…
Let’s see how it goes. I’m looking forward to trying the Sony in the field and seeing how it performs. At least I can’t blame my camera for my bad pictures any more…
Tales from the Wood - The Diary of a Badger Watching Man 
I changed brands in the other direction. I started with a Sony DSC-H1, which I bought to take to South Africa. Now I have two Olympus DSLR bodies and a few lenses. Don’t ditch your Olympus, for the reasons you already know, but do enjoy your new Sony. It will open up new opportunities.
Hi there bananabatman, and thanks – that reassures me!
I know that once I get over my bewilderment at the controls of the DSLR then it’ll give me a lot more scope, but years of point and shoot have dulled my abilities. I probably should have bought one years ago…
All the best
BWM
Congratulations on your “Big Boy’s” camera acquisition. I am sure you will have lots of fun with it. You will soon be lusting for a 500 mm lens.
Thanks. And I’ve started looking at them already.
A few years ago I asked a friend at work (who is a very good – and published – photographer) what I needed to photograph distant badgers in poor light. He showed me an advert for a lens that was the shape, size and colour of an Apollo 11 moon rocket, and said “there you are, one of these should do it”. It cost £1,750. I nodded politely, and never asked him again.
But who knows? Perhaps I’ll win the lottery…
s/h dslr is probably a sensible choice, but photography is nearly all (95%??) about being there rather than kit…anything shiny, new & expensive is less likely to travel well than something ‘run in’ while I would not turn my nose up to a dslr, my venerable lumix fz-30 bridge has won me some clients, (& a local birding award) despite its 8mp res & 7 yrs of wear, it is very well suited to work in the field, is virtually valueless, battered, with bits stuck on etc, I dropped it hard today (would have destroyed any motorized zoom) & I’m fairly sure being familiar, & realizing strengths & weakness with any tools are likely to achieve better results than simply having the best.
recomendation – if you spot a cheap lumix fz series bridge camera – BUY IT – even if only for a back up fz-7 fz-8 fz-20 fz-30 & fz-50 etc can regularly be found for under 100 quid.
btw most of those have a cable remote, which could be particularly useful for badger work/composition etc…
RAW shoot RAW for best results if possible those fz bridges mostly do…Im fairly sure your sony will, & though its tedious at first, compatibility wise using a different format, once you recognize the difference you will not look back, bigger uncompressed images look better!
nehttps://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.245102945568976.58620.100002078177767&type=3#!/photo.php?fbid=245114538901150&set=a.245102945568976.58620.100002078177767&type=3&theatervertheless a link to a very lo-res image of a tree-creeper
and one of many studies made recently (xmas day) of the eurasian dipper https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.216549268424344.52276.100002078177767&type=3
Hi there Spiney
I agree. There’s a lot that you can do with kit that isn’t shiny and top of the range, and on the other hand the most expensive camera in the world won’t help you to get good pictures without fieldcraft and being in the right place at the right time. I still like my bridge camera – it is good for so many things and very flexible (and you’re right, it wasn’t so expensive that I get scared to climb a tree with it or crawl through ditches).
Interesting about the RAW files too. I’ll have to check that out. I’ve got my book on digital photography, but I haven’t read it through yet.
All the best
BWM
Sounds great. I have only ever used compacts but love photography. One day I will fork out on a good DSLR! Only trouble is the photography I like doing is a right mix from macro to landscapes and sunsets to long range stuff like birds and badgers etc. Do you mind me asking what sort of price you paid second hand? As thats the option I think I’ll be looking at when I finally bite the bullet!