Hi Michael,
I’m fairly new here and am in no way an accomplished or expert photographer, rather someone starting out on a journey into photography, but I read your blog and have an opinion too, hope you don't mind if I express it. 42 reads and no-one else has one??
I agree that technology has changed photography (not just bird) and so it should and digital has allowed it to be more accessible to the masses and quality photographs are more abundant than ever, you just have to look at the galleries here to see that. Even I can turn up with my 500mm prime and quality body (D300 in my case), set everything up, press a few buttons and bingo, perfect detail, every feather visible, etc. Technology has made this accessible to us all. Easy, the camera does it all for us provided we read the manual and get the settings right.
But I do think that advances in technology are slightly detrimental to photography as well. Because it does give instant results (I'm as guilty as anyone), I think that there are too many people who expect that and don't take the time to learn about using their equipment to take great photos whatever the circumstance. I read lots of posts (all over the net) basically saying why is my camera crap, too much noise etc, etc. I think they're missing the point in that it isn't technology that takes a great photo but rather the person behind the camera understanding the technology.
The issue of noise is one that especially gets my hackles up and one that everyone seems to be obsessed with, especially given technologies ability to reduce it. We seem to expect the camera to produce a noise free photo even when it's a half an hour before sunset on a cloudy day and AutoISO is at 3200. I for one have taken the decision not to change my current camera until I can take good photos and am forcing myself to concentrate on learning the art of taking photos and overcoming the restrictions that nature can force on us sometimes, even if it means that a photo has a bit of noise. Subject, composition, mood, message play a far more important part in a photo than noise I feel.
Your point over weight and a 500mm zoom over a 500mm prime, well if the 500mm prime (sharper, more aperture) gets you a better photo than the zoom then surely a it’s the tool for the job. I agree it can be a pain to lug around sometimes but aren't we after the perfect photo? I concede that a 500mm prime isn't a hand holder unless you're Arnie Schwarz, my personal compromise, when I don’t want my shoulder in ice the next day, is a 300mm prime and I accept that I have to get closer or expect a heavier crop in the edit, reduced detail etc. I know that money is an issue with a lot of us, especially with glass but that’s another compromise we have to make and learn the art of photography and not expect technology to solve it for us. But then nobody ever said that photography is a cheap hobby.
To return to your post, yes I agree that technology has changed past held assumptions regarding quality bird photography and for the better I’m sure, but I wonder if some of those past held assumptions were based on some people’s lack of understanding of the skill of photography and the art of the photographer? I said this on another post but a bad craftsman blames his tools a good one blames himself and technology makes it harder to blame ourselves sometimes. I’m sure that the great photographers could take a point and shoot and produce better photos than lots of us.
I really hope that this isn’t read as a personal rant or as an attack on your blog as I agree with what you say but my point is that we should take advantage of technology, applaud its advances but don’t use it as an excuse for taking poor photos, that’s where we come in.
Just my opinion in the interest of debate.
Chalky