• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Monthly competitions (1 Viewer)

Reader

Well-known member
Having looked at the standard of photos in these contests I have to say that we have some very talented people on this forum.

I have one slight gripe though which this months winners bring to the fore, and that is Digital over SLR.

I doubt very much that any Digital camera would have gotten any images remotely close to those that came in the first three. This is not a gripe but a fact.

I must admit that I have only entered photos twice due to that fact. I have tried to pick catergories where we might have a level chance of competing with DSLR. i.e a solitary bird, but on this occasion a solitary bird also entailed flight shots, which I hadn't thought of.

I would have thought that DSLR would nearly always win hands down against Digital in the hands of a competent person so where does this leave the Digital photographer in relation to having a chance of winning these monthly competitions.

I haven't studdied the competitions too hard because, to be honest, my skills are not really up to it. I'm just wondering on behalf of most of the Digital Photographers within the forum.

I wouldn't mind seeing all your points of view on this whether you be Digital or DSLR users.
 
Reader said:
Having looked at the standard of photos in these contests I have to say that we have some very talented people on this forum.

I have one slight gripe though which this months winners bring to the fore, and that is Digital over SLR.

I doubt very much that any Digital camera would have gotten any images remotely close to those that came in the first three. This is not a gripe but a fact.

I must admit that I have only entered photos twice due to that fact. I have tried to pick catergories where we might have a level chance of competing with DSLR. i.e a solitary bird, but on this occasion a solitary bird also entailed flight shots, which I hadn't thought of.

I would have thought that DSLR would nearly always win hands down against Digital in the hands of a competent person so where does this leave the Digital photographer in relation to having a chance of winning these monthly competitions.

I haven't studdied the competitions too hard because, to be honest, my skills are not really up to it. I'm just wondering on behalf of most of the Digital Photographers within the forum.

I wouldn't mind seeing all your points of view on this whether you be Digital or DSLR users.


I assume you're talking about digiscoping compared with DSLR.

I can see the point, but my view would be let's have the very best entries we can and if that means those with the best equipment win, then so be it.
 
You mean dslr vs all-in-one compact? I seem to remember that Fabio who won the Zeiss 8x42fl's in our main prize contest this year used a basic non-dslr digicam. His shot beat off a shot that used mega ££ equipment.

Besides, the majortiy of photos uploaded inthe gallery these days are taken with dslr equipment... the price of a dslr can be had for what we paid for a coolpix a few years ago.

I think it comes down to photographers vs birders who take a camera with them (for convenience sake, usually a compact)... the dedicated photographer is always going to have a better chance in a photography competition. Birdforum caters for both, but it's inevitable that the more dedicated photographer (dslr or compact) will often have the better shot.
 
Last edited:
I just had a quick look through the previous winners gallery, breakdown of kit used is:
slr/dslr - 13
digiscoping - 7
digital compacts - 8
(one comp was won with a painting and one didn't list when kit was used...)

Clearly there has been a swing towards using dslr's as the price has come down. I'm sure we'll see more and more dslr user's winning the comps, however there's no reason a good digiscoped shot shouldn't win.
 
I second Andy's comments. Although better equipment increases your chances of getting a good photograph it does not guarantee it. More oftens it to do with being in right spot at the right time in perfect light. When you have a photographic eye you are on the lookout for such situations.

A shot which would of won last months competion hands down would of been say an action shot of the moment an Osprey grabs a Salmon from the surface of the water in perfect detail. A perfect static shot of a garden bird in a boring environment would stand no chance in comparision regardless of what camera equipment was used.

This is why the Excellent Red Kite shot took such a lead over many excellent record type shots. Strickly speaking the Kite shot was flawed because the wing tip was clipped and a similiar shot perfectly framed would of been classed as the better shot.

I have sat in on photo critique sessions at photography clubs where they would say "a good shot but if you had waited and taken it an hour later the lighting would of been better" and so on.

Robert
 
I was thinking. What about running seperate competition's for DSLR's and also Digiscoping. Each Competition will be judged as the current one is. At the end of the year we judge all twelve winners in both the DSLR & Digiscoping competitions to find the overall winner of the year in each section. If there were to be prizes perhaps only the winners of the best photo of the year in each of those catergories would win one. You could then go further and judge which is the overall winner out of the two winning entries, with perhaps an ultimate prize for the winner.

Does that sound feasible?
 
Reader said:
I was thinking. What about running seperate competition's for DSLR's and also Digiscoping.


Don't see the need to be honest ...I think it comes down to what Andy says, the dedicated photographer, be they a digiscoper or DSLR user, will produce the goods. Any who doubt, I'd thoroughly recommend a look at Paul Hackett's digiscoping shots - as good and professional as anything taken by a DSLR. He knows what he is doing, applies his art as a photographer and so produces the results.

I don't think it should be divided at all ....but, if we start dividing the categories, then, for starters, I'd like the DSLR category sub-divided into those who can afford the £6000 super canon prime lens and the likes of me. Once done, I'd like the digiscoping category divided into 'division a' (birders taking photos) and 'division b' (photographers taking photos of birds). Then, etc, etc, etc.

Finally, of course, I like a category which excludes all those which stand a chance of beating me ...and naturally, this is the only category I would ever enter 3:)
 
Last edited:
I think it is up to the expertise of the photographer.I posted a shot of a Wagtail on to the gallery a couple of days ago,using the same equipment as Robski,who also posted a shot of a Wagtail.His shot was far superior to mine.So the equipment used is only akin to the person in whose hands it is being used.Granted ,a 600mm lens really cannot compare with a 100-400,but in the right hands a shot from the latter could compare easily with the larger lens.
 
I am not quiet sure where all this is aiming ??

Do you feel that the compact user is intimidated by the SLR user from entering these Competitions ?

Do you feel it would make the Competitions more active to subdivide them into different classes.

Or has the current format and themes become stale and needs revamping ?

Robert

PS Don't be jealous Christine of the Wagtail shot - there was a large element of luck with that shot - as I have said before being in the right place at the right time in ideal light. My skill was to see it and know it would make a good shot. It was one of those shots you knew you had right the moment the shutter was released and was in the can.

I only regard myself as a bit better than average. I regard a great photographer as somebody who can make shots like that happen most of the time. There are a number of photographers in the forum who have there own unique skills and that is what makes the gallery interesting and drives you on to improve your own skills.
 
Last edited:
I think the playing field regarding digiscoping and dslr is pretty even, both have their advantages.. o.k. birds in flight are always going to be a struggle with digiscoping gear, but the sheer reach of the latter is a major benefit.

Those who do struggle will be those with compact cameras with no real focal length but, as postcard has found looking at previous winners, these photographers have held their own.

The actual 'quality' of the shot isn't too important when they're all downsized to about 800x600.

What really counts is subject matter and composition.

cheers,
Andy
 
Jos Stratford said:
Finally, of course, I like a category which excludes all those which stand a chance of beating me ...and naturally, this is the only category I would ever enter 3:)

I'm with you on that one Jos. lol

It was just a thought that I threw into the melting pot. It would never benefit me as I haven't the expertise to catch up to the likes of Paul Hacket. I just thought that keeping the different disciplines apart and only bringing them together at the end would be something that might interest some Digiscopers into putting forward an image that they might have a chance with on a monthly basis.

IMHO there would be no need to further split the disciplines.

I have spoken to a few BF members on my travels that do digiscoping and almost to a man (or woman) they do feel that there is no point in entering a contest where DSLR's are being judged alongside them. Give them a chance in their own own competition and there is a possibility that you might draw out the odd unexpected photo that blows you away. I know I have actually decided not to bother entering because I knew I would have no chance (and that was before I had even seen an entry by anyone). Looking at the end product of each competion and i feel that i was proved right.

I have the feeling though that the consensus of opinion so far is that leave it as things are already.

Oh well!! it was worth asking the question.
 
I can see both sides of the discussion, the current format is certainly interesting and I do really feel that digiscopers still have a chance. However the two competition idea is also interesting, how woudl you catergorise someone using a dslr for digiscoping...

Perhaps a compromise would be to make one of next years catergories 'a digiscoped image'.
 
I agree Reader the idea is worth exploring. I think people should be incouraged to enter shots purely as an image because it is either interesting, usual or a good example. Maybe for Competitions equipment details should be omitted.

Robert

I just fear that Ian and his colleagues will be overwhelmed with entries that are drab, blurry, badly composed and uninteresting because somebody got talked into it.
 
Last edited:
Firstly, thanks to all who voted for my photo. There were some real crackers in there.

Its an interesting discussion. I only really got interested in birds as a result of photography and Red Kites. I was directed to this site by a friend who had seen my pics.
A few years back i had tried taking pics of the local Kites using a film SLR and small lens without much success. This then drove me to improve my equipment which i have now done a number of times. Birds are a real challenge to photograph but it can be extremely satisfying when it works out.
I had never entered any photo comp before joining birdforum and this was my third attempt having been close on one another occasion.

It may be a good idea to split the comp into Photographers (DSLR), and Birders (Digiscoping).

I think i will sit and watch from the sidelines now..........
 
Hi Gerry

The detail in your photo was absolutely incredible. I certainly wish I had one photo of any bird in my collection as good as that.

As you say you have upgraded your equipment over time so now you are able to get this sort of photo but don't put down your own input. If you don't possess the talent then no matter how good the camera is a good photo like this would be beyond your reach, but a lot of us can't really afford to go down the DSLR route.

Andy has stated that DSLR is getting as cheap as Digital cameras but It is a different way of photography. On the one hand you can take near and distant photos with Digiscoping but with the DSLR your distance shots are nowhere near as distant as with Digiscoping.

If I wanted a chance of your type of shot I would have to purchase another set up, which I can't afford. I suspect a lot of photographers have started bird photography down the Digscoping route and are happy with their results. However I suspect that from time to time they drool over the quality of image that the DSLR can produce but because of the additional cost they are stuck with the set up they have already. I know I can't afford to go for a DSLR so I have to try and improve the images I can get with my set up. But there is the rub. There are a lot of categories where DSLR will leave Digiscoping standing and that is why I put forward the idea of splitting the two disciplines.

I will let the debate rage on. lol
 
I bumped into this site whilst googling for bird photography tips. I liked what I saw and became a member. I am principally a photographer with an interest in birds and got hooked much the same way as Gerry by the sound of it. I have learnt a lot about birds and photography from the forum which has helped me improve. To be honest I can't see myself getting a scope and digiscoping although the idea had crossed my mind when I first saw folk with this setup.

If it were to be split then maybe " camera alone " and " camera and scope " as two groups.

The type of photo you get through an extreme telephoto lens is much different to shorter focal lengths.

Robert
 
Following Salty's recent "which camera" thread and because I'm a digiscoper hovering on the unaffordable need for a DSLR I did a quick analysis of equipment used for the final 30 of this month. Results as follows:

Cameras:
Canon DSLR: 10d - 2, 20D - 6, 350 - 3, 300 - 1
Nikon DSLR: D100 - 1, D70 - 4, D2X - 3, D1H -1
Digiscoping: CP4500 - 3, Oly C60 - 1, Kyocera 400 - 1
Others: Fuji 5000.

Lens/Scopes.
Prime - 12, Zoom - 9.
Min - 200mm, Max - 800mm
Canon - 7, Nikon - 5 Sigma - 7
Digiscoped, Nikon 1, Kowa 1, Leica 1, Pentax 1, Swarovski 1.

So What - Well for what it's worth it would appear to depend more on the person behind the equipment (plus a bit of right time, right place luck/skill) than it does on the equipment itself.

(LoL - So why do I still have an aspiration for a new D200 and long lens ;) )
 
That works out at more than a 4-1 ratio in favour of DSLR's in this month alone. I wonder what the ratio's were in previous months.
 
Reader said:
That works out at more than a 4-1 ratio in favour of DSLR's in this month alone. I wonder what the ratio's were in previous months.

I certainly agree that the ratio heavily favours the DSLR and I was quite surprised to find that 5 digiscoped entries had made it.

Perhaps, as the monthly catergory "Flight Shots" almost rules out the digiscoper, one of the other months could have a theme that favours the long reach of the digiscoper. How about "Waders" or better still "Whole Frame" where no cropping is permitted ?
 
Nigel G said:
I certainly agree that the ratio heavily favours the DSLR and I was quite surprised to find that 5 digiscoped entries had made it.

Perhaps, as the monthly catergory "Flight Shots" almost rules out the digiscoper, one of the other months could have a theme that favours the long reach of the digiscoper. How about "Waders" or better still "Whole Frame" where no cropping is permitted ?

It's a nice idea, but I'm not sure either of those would actually favour digiscopers, certainly the local waders give themselves up for the slr users.

I think the only way to make a catergory that give digiscopers the edge is to have one month that is digiscoped shots only.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 18 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top