BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Andy Adcock" data-source="post: 3636414" data-attributes="member: 31710">Yes, to a point, but as you allude to earlier, many (most?), people, really are not that adept with the tech side of photography.The time you invest in camera settings is also important, for those that just point a press, like me, results won't be as good as those who prepare their camera and understand light, relative to shutter speed, exposure etc.Even with the best equipment, you need to know what you're doing with it, if we have a stationary subject, my wife will spend a lot of time setting the camera, taking sample shots and getting things just so but that's not always possible in wildlife photography.The OP has also stated that blowing up his images is an important factor so MP count will definitely be a factor at least as important as the lens.Lets not forget that even with a big lens, a Willow Warbler at 50m will be a challenge so the object is also a consideration whereas a stationary Hippo at the same distance is another matter.Bird photography, IMHO, provides the most challenging variation of conditions for photographers, it's not always hides and bird feeders, it's often tiny birds in a high dark canopy or skuling in undergrowth. It's also possible that polar opposite condition can be experienced within a few metres which will mean totally resetting your camera.Given the right conditions i.e light, distance, relatively still subject, even low end cameras these days can capture images to challenge even the top end equipment. My wife has a samsung phone and the macro lens on that is just unbelievable, coloure reproduction is fantastic, it's acually better than my Olypmus Tough in many cases!A</blockquote>

Verification