Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Monday 13th February 2017, 10:49   #1
katastrofa
Registered User
 
katastrofa's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 825
DSLR or mirrorless for wildlife photography

Hi,

My wife and I have been doing some wildlife photography (birds and other animals) during our holiday trips using my Canon Powershot SX700 HS superzoom. We've been pretty happy with it when used in broad daylight on slow-moving objects (e.g. cows on Scottish farmland ), but the slow AF and poor performance in dim light started to tell. We want to spend up to 2000 on a camera system which would allow us to do take photos of birds (incl. small insect-hunting birds), mammals (incl. marine animals when on a boat). I read that mirrorless cameras are catching up with the DSLRs and feel tempted by their smaller weight (my wife would appreciate it even more). Is it worth going with a mirrorless system?
katastrofa is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 13th February 2017, 10:54   #2
dalat
.
 
dalat's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 2,278
A good start may be to read through that thread (I'm asking similar questions there): http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=334772
dalat is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 13th February 2017, 11:53   #3
katastrofa
Registered User
 
katastrofa's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 825
Read it. None the wiser :(
katastrofa is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 13th February 2017, 12:59   #4
Vespobuteo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 1,669
Nikon D7200 + 300mm/f4 PF AF-S. Weight is about 1.5 kg for the combo.
Not sure about the 2000 limit though, might be a bit tight.
Vespobuteo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 13th February 2017, 13:00   #5
katastrofa
Registered User
 
katastrofa's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 825
I would prefer a zoom telephoto lens, easier to adjust to changes in the distance between me and the object.
katastrofa is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 13th February 2017, 13:21   #6
dalat
.
 
dalat's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 2,278
Quote:
Originally Posted by katastrofa View Post
Read it. None the wiser :(
Yes, me neither There is no clear answer, I fear.

In the thread above, there was a suggestion of two alternative setups, DSLR and mFT:

- Panasonic G80 + 100-400 mm, ca 2100 and 1.5 kg
- Nikon D7200 + Sigma 150-500mm, ca. 1800 and 2.6 kg

Size comparison see here: http://camerasize.com/compact/#689.505,611.243,ha,t

From what I understood, the two set-ups should be close in performance...
dalat is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 13th February 2017, 13:37   #7
Vespobuteo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 1,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by katastrofa View Post
I would prefer a zoom telephoto lens, easier to adjust to changes in the distance between me and the object.
Zooms will be bigger, have a smaller max aperture that will make the AF slower, the noise higher and the images less sharp. Also a lot of air between the subject and photographer will make photos blurrier. Getting closer is always better.

MFT might be an alternative due to portability but AF and IQ will suffer a bit.
Noise will be higher, and bokeh will be less pleasing for example (due to the smaller sensor).

1 price
2 weight/portability
3 image quality

You have to decide the balance between them.
Personally I wouldn't buy a MFT system for any telephoto/action photo purposes today,
where often high ISO and fast shutter speeds are needed.

Last edited by Vespobuteo : Monday 13th February 2017 at 13:44.
Vespobuteo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 13th February 2017, 13:52   #8
katastrofa
Registered User
 
katastrofa's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 825
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vespobuteo View Post
Zooms will be bigger, have a smaller max aperture that will make the AF slower, the noise higher and the images less sharp. Also a lot of air between the subject and photographer will make photos blurrier. Getting closer is always better.
Not when photographing animals! This article is very relevant: http://www.audubon.org/news/why-clos...graphing-birds
katastrofa is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 13th February 2017, 14:13   #9
kb57
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Durham, UK
Posts: 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vespobuteo View Post
Nikon D7200 + 300mm/f4 PF AF-S. Weight is about 1.5 kg for the combo.
Not sure about the 2000 limit though, might be a bit tight.
That's exactly what I settled on last year, and it wasn't far off 2k, bought in a real shop (London Camera Exchange, Gosforth).

Weighs almost exactly 1.5kg, evenly split between camera and lens, so sits very easily in the hand. Haven't missed having a zoom lens (coming from a superzoom background like OP) as the IQ is so much better you can crop down quite heavily anyway. Only disadvantage is it is so light my wife steals it off me and usually ends up with the best shot!

I've so far twice used it from a boat - a gentle trip around Coquet Island taking pictures of seals and BIFs in rain (when I was happy to have some degree of weather sealing on a prime lens), and more hardcore RIB trip off the Algarve with me, the boat and the sea all swaying in different directions at once - still nailed decent flight shots of shearwaters and storm-petrels. I don't think I'd be able to do that with a (longer, heavier, slower) DSLR zoom telephoto.
It would work well for marine mammals, apart from when they get really close in to the boat, at which time admittedly 300mm is too long and you're wishing you had a zoom....
kb57 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 13th February 2017, 14:18   #10
Nick-on
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: deepest darkest Herefordshire
Posts: 460
Quote:
Originally Posted by katastrofa View Post
Hi,

My wife and I have been doing some wildlife photography (birds and other animals) during our holiday trips using my Canon Powershot SX700 HS superzoom. We've been pretty happy with it when used in broad daylight on slow-moving objects (e.g. cows on Scottish farmland ), but the slow AF and poor performance in dim light started to tell. We want to spend up to 2000 on a camera system which would allow us to do take photos of birds (incl. small insect-hunting birds), mammals (incl. marine animals when on a boat). I read that mirrorless cameras are catching up with the DSLRs and feel tempted by their smaller weight (my wife would appreciate it even more). Is it worth going with a mirrorless system?
As to which camera & lens that's up to you but whether DSLR or Mirrorless then, if image quality is paramount, the answer has to be DSLR. I spent months researching it late last year and despite already owning a decent Mirrorless system (4 lenses and 2 cameras) finally went with DSLR. The images are better and in low light they are much better. I know people will say you can get good images with the Pana 100-400 and various bodies (which is true, you can) but overall the bigger sensor and better low light properties mean that DSLR is the way to go.
I would suggest something like a Nikon D7200 and Nikon 200-500 lens (should just about be in budget if you shop around) will give excellent results or equivalent Canon setup.
All the above is just MHO......

HTH

Nick
Nick-on is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 13th February 2017, 14:21   #11
MalR
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: sunderland
Posts: 449
My experience, for what it's worth, is that I started with a DSLR (Canon 40D), migrated to mirrorless (Panasonic GH2 then an Olympus EM-1) before switching back to a DSLR with my current set-up (Nikon D7200, 300 f4 PF lens and 1.4TC).

For some reason, I just never felt comfortable with mirrorless. I actually prefer the feel and ergonomics of a DSLR. The weight and size of the lenses was always the biggest drawback, but the Nikon PF lens has negated that. Of course, if you are married to the idea of having a zoom, then you are not going to make that weight saving.

There is really no "right" answer to this question. Some people will prefer one system and some the other.

It might be worth trying to rent some gear for a while. It will cost you a bit up front, but could save you money in the long term. Failing that, do you know anyone with a DSLR and/or a mirrorless system who might let you try them out.

Really, there is no substitute for holding the camera and lens in your hand. There are certain intangibles that are very personal and not a matter of the spec sheet or other people's opinions.

Good luck with your decision.

Malcolm
MalR is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 13th February 2017, 14:24   #12
katastrofa
Registered User
 
katastrofa's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 825
How much does renting cost, usually? (London prices)
katastrofa is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 13th February 2017, 14:50   #13
njlarsen
Opus Editor
 
njlarsen's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Portsmouth, Dominica
Posts: 20,195
I am currently shooting a GH2 with 100-300, and have never tried the canikon cameras. I am not sure I believe everything said above.
It will be a huge step up in quality above my camera to take a nikon 7200 or similar canon -- but it will also be a huge step up to go to a new model in m4/3. Theoretically, the larger sensor on a canikon should make low light noise performance better, however, everything I have read indicates that low light is a huge problem for those dSLR AF systems.
I therefore believe that if you want something substantially better than the AF on current m4/3 that you need to purchase something like a d500 or better.

If you feel that long term you might do just that, then going with a canon/nikon model now would make sense, because you should be able to keep whatever lens you pair it with.

In my own case, I am waiting to pull the trigger on lens upgrade as well, but likely will go with the panaLeica 100-400 when I do.

Niels
__________________
Support bird conservation in the Caribbean: BirdCaribbean
njlarsen is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 13th February 2017, 15:35   #14
Vespobuteo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 1,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by katastrofa View Post
Not when photographing animals! This article is very relevant: http://www.audubon.org/news/why-clos...graphing-birds
You should never say always...

BUT from the context, I meant when it comes to air movement and pure image quality.

From an esthetic point of view, it seems more of an artistic decision. Tele lenses gives isolation of the subject which can be nice, but images may also appear very flat. I appreciate photos, like in the article, that shows more of the environment, wide angle shots etc. And a zoom might be more versatile there and I sometimes use zooms for shorter focal lengths. SO the article might even be named, using long tele lenses is not always better...you might even stick with a 300mm..

BTW I don't mean that you should disturb ANY animals/birds by getting TOO close. Thats why I also often recommend using a hide. A hide is also much cheaper than any long telephoto lens. It's also very rewarding to experience nature being "invisible" as you sometimes can study birds natural behavior from 2-3 feet away. The only thing you need is time and patience and a quiet shutter...might actually be a reason for MFT when I think about it....

Last edited by Vespobuteo : Monday 13th February 2017 at 15:49.
Vespobuteo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 13th February 2017, 16:26   #15
katastrofa
Registered User
 
katastrofa's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 825
Indeed, avoiding the loud shutter click is one of the reasons I am considering a mirrorless system. Although I myself am clumsy enough to make as much noise as a DSLR shutter ;-)
katastrofa is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 13th February 2017, 18:07   #16
Vespobuteo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 1,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by katastrofa View Post
Indeed, avoiding the loud shutter click is one of the reasons I am considering a mirrorless system. Although I myself am clumsy enough to make as much noise as a DSLR shutter ;-)

Most MFT users tend to scream when the AF is not locking on target....
Vespobuteo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 13th February 2017, 18:12   #17
katastrofa
Registered User
 
katastrofa's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 825
I'm patient (I've been taking photos with Canon Powershot superzoom). The problem is that many birds are not as patient :)
katastrofa is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 13th February 2017, 20:38   #18
Zackiedawg
Registered User
 
Zackiedawg's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Boca Raton, Florida, USA
Posts: 884
I'll politely disagree on the comment that if IQ is paramount, the decision must be DSLR. Mirrorless cameras come in many different forms, and not all forms mean smaller sensors or less capable IQ. As with DSLRs, there are both APS-C and full-frame mirrorless bodies out there, as well as the M4:3 and 1" bodies...so given equal photographer skill, equal lens, and equal conditions, a mirrorless camera can match a DSLR with the same sensor size and resolution.

As for focus performance, indeed some mirrorless cameras have begun to catch up to DSLRs - not all, so you do have to be careful which model you buy. But for ability to focus quickly and with the ability to continuously focus on a moving subject, there are mirrorless camera bodies that will perform at the same capability levels as good mid-range DSLRs. Some entry-level DSLRs are not as capable as some mirrorless models, while some full-frame pro-body DSLRs are still at the top of the heap for tracking and predictive focus.

Lens availability is often the area in which mirrorless cameras lag a bit - for fairly obvious reasons since DSLRs and their lens lines have been around much longer, and because of the professional market they've long-served, they tend to have longer zooms and primes available. Not to say you can't find very good lenses in some of the mirrorless models - but generally not as many, and not covering as many different focal lengths. Of course, M4:3 and APS-C mirrorless bodies can take advantage of the crop factors of their smaller sensors, just as APS-C DSLRs can - to give an 'equivalent' framing of a longer lens.

I've been shooting birds and wildlife with DSLRs for about 8 years, mirrorless bodies for about 6 years, and overall for about 14 years. When I first started shooting mirrorless bodies alongside my DSLRs, it was to have a light second body along with shorter focal lengths so I could quickly switch between bodies for different types of shots. The early mirrorless APS-C bodies I had could match the IQ of DSLRs, but not the focus speed, and following a bird in flight was pointless to even try. I also only had a maximum 200mm lens available for that kit. I've gone through 5 DSLR models over that time, each one an incremental improvement in some area or another, and have shot primarily with a mix of dedicated primes (300mm F4, 400mm F4.5) and long zooms (200-500mm, 150-600mm). I've also gone through 4 mirrorless models over slightly less time - but each model was a big leap over the last in capability, speed, IQ, handling, etc. It's been very impressive how much things like focus speed and tracking/continuous focus have improved in APS-C mirrorless bodies in such a short time. I've also been able to add better glass to mirrorless - first with a nicer high-grade 70-200mm F4, then a 70-300mm with nicer reach. The mirrorless has improved so much that it actually shoots birds in flight better, more accurately, with higher hit rate, and just with more ease and pleasure, than my DSLR bodies. I'm also able to use a simple adapter ring to mount my Tamron 150-600mm to the mirrorless body...it can focus as fast in single focus mode, but can't quite continuously focus as well as the DSLR with the adapted lens.

Now, my DSLR tends to be used more in winter and migration seasons almost exclusively with the 150-600mm lens or 400mm prime, for birds more far away...while the mirrorless system has become the year-round primary system, best in summer and heat when the lighter weight and size is more convenient, and also is the first choice for bird-in-flight work because it's just so fast and capable in AF-C - acquiring the target more quickly, focusing with it continuously at up to 11fps, and being lighter and more agile. I'm currently using the Sony A6300, which has a 24MP APS-C sensor, 11fps continuous focusing frame rate, big buffer, lots of custom buttons, and primarily pairing it with the FE70-300mm G OSS lens, which is light, stabilized, and delivers very nice IQ. Take a look at the newer models of mirrorless for those that have improved their focus ability to the level of DSLRs - among them the Sony A6300 and A6500 (APS-C models), Fuji X-T2 (APS-C model), Sony A7RII (Full frame sensor), and Olympus E-M1 Mk II (M4:3 sensor).

Here's a running gallery I keep of all shots I've taken of birds/wildlife out in my local wetlands with the A6300 and FE70-300mm, FE70-200mm, and Tamron 150-600mm lenses:
http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg/a6300_wetlands&page=all
I do lots of BIF shooting with this combo. With electronic first curtain shutter engaged, the shutter sound is pretty quiet, and there's an option to shoot with full electronic silent shutter for complete silence if needed.
__________________
Justin Miller

Zackiedawg's Photography Gallery
Zackiedawg is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 13th February 2017, 20:50   #19
katastrofa
Registered User
 
katastrofa's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 825
Thanks. Could you point me to some examples of photos taken in low light condition (e.g. at dusk) with your Sony mirrorless?

My superzoom gave me most grief when I tried to photograph insect-eating birds like wrens or antshrikes which become particularly active before the sun falls (possibly because they're less afraid of predators then), but keep themselves to the bushes. It was hard to focus the camera then. I wonder how a mirrorless camera would handle such conditions.

Last edited by katastrofa : Monday 13th February 2017 at 20:57.
katastrofa is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 13th February 2017, 21:18   #20
Zackiedawg
Registered User
 
Zackiedawg's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Boca Raton, Florida, USA
Posts: 884
There are quite a few in that gallery - though it would take some searching through the EXIF to see what time of day they were and what ISO. Some examples I can pick out for post-sunset birds-in-flight, taken at high ISOs up to ISO6400, after 5pm winter - either after the sun had set in dusk light, or when the sun had fallen behind the tree line so the birds were in shadow...and I've included a few low light shots of non-flying birds or animals - some really pushing it - the African animals posted were taken at night on a safari ride, so they are at extreme ISO ranges from 25,600 to 32,000...but still demonstrating the ability to autofocus in extreme cases.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	WakoGrnCayA634dec1442.JPG
Views:	68
Size:	285.2 KB
ID:	615141  Click image for larger version

Name:	WakoGrnCayA634dec1436.JPG
Views:	58
Size:	210.3 KB
ID:	615142  Click image for larger version

Name:	DisneySep2016424.JPG
Views:	59
Size:	689.8 KB
ID:	615146  Click image for larger version

Name:	DisneyJul2016624.JPG
Views:	44
Size:	424.3 KB
ID:	615147  
__________________
Justin Miller

Zackiedawg's Photography Gallery
Zackiedawg is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 13th February 2017, 22:42   #21
Vespobuteo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 1,669
This have been mentioned in the thread but the form factor and handling is not unimportant. The camera must feel comfortable in the hand and the camera must be able to be controlled without taking the eye from the viewfinder.

We also see that the latest pro MFT cameras is growing in size (grip is larger, weight is higher) since they are expected to be handled with longer and heavier lenses. The prices also have grown unfortunately. The Nikon D500 now seems cheap compared to the Pana GH5...I never thought that would happen. But Panasonic seem to have good confidence.

Mirrorless cams with larger FF sensors won't save much weight since the lenses is as heavy as any other, and I think APS-C format at 20-24MP gives the best bang for the buck for telephoto shooting. Reasonably good performance in low light but still high sensor resolution in better light conditions, and the possibility to crop.
Vespobuteo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 14th February 2017, 09:44   #22
katastrofa
Registered User
 
katastrofa's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 825
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zackiedawg View Post
There are quite a few in that gallery - though it would take some searching through the EXIF to see what time of day they were and what ISO. Some examples I can pick out for post-sunset birds-in-flight, taken at high ISOs up to ISO6400, after 5pm winter - either after the sun had set in dusk light, or when the sun had fallen behind the tree line so the birds were in shadow...and I've included a few low light shots of non-flying birds or animals - some really pushing it - the African animals posted were taken at night on a safari ride, so they are at extreme ISO ranges from 25,600 to 32,000...but still demonstrating the ability to autofocus in extreme cases.
Impressive! Do you have examples of birds at dusk partly, obscured by vegetation? It was a common "failure scenario" of my El Cheapo superzoom.
katastrofa is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 14th February 2017, 15:08   #23
Zackiedawg
Registered User
 
Zackiedawg's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Boca Raton, Florida, USA
Posts: 884
I don't know if I can dig up that exact scenario - dusk, partially obscured, etc. But I do have to 'thread the needle' with birds a lot, focusing the smallest focus spot point through dense foliage to focus on a bird that doesn't want to be out in the open - usually this is in denser forest areas where the sun isn't penetrating well, so that usually means I'm in the higher ISO range too. A few samples I can dig up...some are with the big Tamron 150-600mm lens. The smallest focus spot point is quite tiny and does a nice job of picking through dense cover.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	GrnWakoA6326nov1339.JPG
Views:	64
Size:	295.9 KB
ID:	615199  Click image for larger version

Name:	GrnWakoA6326nov260.JPG
Views:	53
Size:	289.5 KB
ID:	615200  Click image for larger version

Name:	GreenWakoA6330oct16038.JPG
Views:	67
Size:	252.2 KB
ID:	615201  
__________________
Justin Miller

Zackiedawg's Photography Gallery
Zackiedawg is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 14th February 2017, 20:00   #24
Jim M.
Choose Civility

 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 6,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zackiedawg View Post
I'll politely disagree on the comment that if IQ is paramount, the decision must be DSLR. Mirrorless cameras come in many different forms, and not all forms mean smaller sensors or less capable IQ.
Strongly agree. In fact the latest micro 4/3s sensors appear to be the equal of the best APS-C sensors when it comes to noise and low light shooting (see Oly EM-1 mk ii and probably GH-5--though no rigorous tests of the latter yet). See here:

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Comp...00___1136_1061

Moreover, the Oly 300mm f4 is superior optically to the Nikon PF300mm f4.
Jim M. is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2013 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 14th February 2017, 20:11   #25
Jim M.
Choose Civility

 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 6,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by katastrofa View Post
I would prefer a zoom telephoto lens, easier to adjust to changes in the distance between me and the object.
If you want a zoom lens with relatively light weight, I think the panny 100-400 (200-800mm equiv) is your best option. The only issue is that it might not be within your budget, especially if you pair it with the top of the line m4/3 such as the GH5, which will give you dual IS, or the EM-1 ii, which we now know has a new DSLR-matching sensor and excellent autofocus capabilities (also lighter than the GH5). The next best option appears to be the G80.

I think the bottom line is that you can only get three of these four desidarata: excellent image quality, light weight zoom lens, top autofocus capabilities, and within your budget. You'll have to decide how you want to compromise.
Jim M. is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2013 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wildlife Art as Photography..The BBC Wildlife Photography Awards... phil baber Wildlife Art 14 Thursday 27th October 2011 03:59
Digiscoping to DSLR Photography DaveB Cameras And Photography 60 Thursday 10th December 2009 02:44
DSLR + lense for wildlife photography beginner Amarillo Canon 36 Tuesday 6th October 2009 11:11
digiscoping or dslr photography Stevebrown29 The Birdforum Digiscoping Forum 5 Monday 21st January 2008 22:17
Advice on DSLR and lens for wildlife photography markyb2 Cameras And Photography 7 Saturday 23rd September 2006 22:45

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.28234792 seconds with 35 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:17.