Hunting with a Camera?

[Manfred M]

This topic brings up memories of me driving along the tracks in Etosha National Park, in Namibia,with my camera sitting on my lap, on the ready for most of our "hunting" trips (thankfully, we seemed to be the only ones around).

Some of my favourite shots were taken, while I was driving in reverse up the track (of course the truck had a standard transmission and the steering wheel was on the right side). Camera was pointing out the open rear window (my wife was blocking the front window with her own shooting). When those "one in a lifetime" opportunities come up, we do tend to take a few risks...





We had been stalking (nicely said, sitting in the truck, right beside the thornbush where this beauty had been hiding) for about 45 minutes. The f/2.8 70-200mm lens on the D90 was used on this shot; yes, we really were that close; the shot is very lightly cropped; just the left and right edges so that I could print it on a standard sheet of photo paper.

[Brownbear]

Hi Nick,

I just wanted to show you that if you get close it is possible to fill the frame sufficiently. Not easy, and I still photograph wildlife when it is too far away, but I'm quickly learning that close is better. All of these images were taken real close.

Alas, the tree swallow is nice and sharp but far too wee, so I will be sending him you know where.

They need cropping for compositional purposes.

I'm not the most technical saavy person, but if I were upgrading my camera, I would go for the larger sensor. I can see a huge difference in the amount of detail/sharpness captured in my images since upgrading to the d7100 and the 300 mm lens. Especially in my images of birds.

I hope someone will come along and fill in the details and/or correct me but I suspect that the longer focal lengths on your point and shoot is a lot like when I put the extender on my lens (loss of quality, light, slower focusing speed) but likely much worse simply because my camera and lens is of a far higher quality. So if you love to photograph birds I would save up for a used DSLR.

Hi Cristina,

Thanks for sharing, all those were great shots, and I didn't think many of them were in any need of cropping, except for maybe the black bird for positioning.

I'm not sure if you were indicating that the tree swallow was flying into the trash bin, but there's really no need that he do so


I would probably trade a little bigger sensor for a little of my zoom if I had a chance, or hypothetically anyway, as these things compete for proportions in super zooms. Saying that though, I do continue to tell myself that I couldn't get some of the shots I do without all of that 1200 mm equiv. I wonder if there is a factor involving a crop frame sensor which makes a mm length on a DSLR not really equivalent to the mm equiv. focal length on my P&S, because I'm still just not sure how those subjects appear so close with only 75-500 mm. Wait, now that I test it out on my camera, though, I see that 500 mm equiv. is at about 20 out of my possible 50x zoom and so that doesn't seem too odd after all. For some reason the remaining 30x after 20x zoom seem to be less affective than the first 20x on my camera. I'm just not technically savvy enough to know if there is any validity to these points.

[NorthernFocus]

...There may not be a single answer to this, but at what focal length are most of your animal photographs taken?....

I, for one, have a single answer. I typically shoot at the longest focal length that I have with me at the time. After all, why not? Why get any closer than necessary? Personal safety and a desire to leave wildlife undisturbed dictate that strategy for me.

I'm not being a smart a** with this answer. If one knows the conditions that will be encountered on the shoot, focal length should be chosen appropriately. For small critters/birds that typically means the longest lens you can get your hands on. In a couple of months I'll be out shooting the moose rut. In that case 200-400 zoom with a full frame body is plenty, sometimes too much.

[Brownbear]

Thank you for adding that Dan.

Nick... Please note that when I say get close I don't mean so close as to disturb wildlife or place one self in danger.

[Nicks Pics]

Nick... Please note that when I say get close I don't mean so close as to disturb wildlife or place one self in danger.

Thank you, I was out to find a Least Chipmunk recently, ( a species that doesn't live around my immediate area) but all ways stayed at a good distance for safety - No, seriously, especially if I ever go out where it is even possible to get close to animals that are dangerous, ( Many in the Eastern US can't always do that very easy), I should keep that in mind. Of course, I prefer not to disturb the animals either, because then you loose your chance to photograph them. This is usually more of a problem, in my experience, than getting too close for safety. I wouldn't want to disturb animals causing them to abandon nests etc. either.

For small critters/birds that typically means the longest lens you can get your hands on. In a couple of months I'll be out shooting the moose rut. In that case 200-400 zoom with a full frame body is plenty, sometimes too much.

Are moose not as shy as deer?

This topic brings up memories of me driving along the tracks in Etosha National Park, in Namibia,with my camera sitting on my lap, on the ready for most of our "hunting" trips (thankfully, we seemed to be the only ones around).

Cars work really well don't they.

[Manfred M]

One other piece of advice for getting shots of animals is to go to places where there is a lot of contact between humans and animals. Nicely said; they are less afraid of humans and let you as a photographer get quite close. I often see deer when I am out on my bicycle and have gotten to within around 10 ft / 3 m of them, and even closer with Mallard ducks and Canada Geese (except when there are some young around and the parents can get quite protective).

Case in point. We were able to visit the western part of Etosha National Park in Namibia. It had been closed to tourism for many decades (and unless you are staying at the Dolomite camp or on tour run by a tour operator), you still cannot enter the area. We were staying at Dolomite, and thought it would be very interesting to explore the area. The animals all stayed away from the road and we saw some game in the distance; once we crossed over to the eastern part, we were literally surrounded by birds and animals; which have been exposre to lots of humans.

[Manfred M]

Cars work really well don't they.

One reason that they work is that they don't look like predators and the fumes and smell of cars masks the human scent, so animals are not afraid.

[drjuice]

I second IzzieK's suggestion but with a suggestion to expand the venues. My next door neighborhood leads a group of people with more money than sense around an arboretum that's very well populated with birds. He'll sometimes be still waiting for a specific bird to show up in a particular tree/pond/flower bed for as much as 30-45 minutes but because he's familiar with the critters around there that he'll almost always get his image! He does similar things around Santa Anita which is about 3 miles from here. He goes both to races and workouts. Regardless he always comes back with excellent images, even though he does the stand and wait thing just like he does with the birds.

If you have a woods nearby or a large backyard, you could probably find some wildlife there and try out the stand and wait thing.

Good luck.

v

[NorthernFocus]

...Are moose not as shy as deer?...

In areas where they are hunted heavily they will avoid people. But in areas where they are protected from human hunting they are not shy at all and at times can even be aggressive. Deer are much the same in protected areas. I've seen deer on golf courses that won't even stand up to move out of the way of a golf cart. When they behave that way I believe the term is "habituated".

[rtbaum]

Nick, I recommend checking this site out. When she began, she had little experience. She dispenses a lot of valuable advice. It is also nice that she is shooting in areas that are accessible for you. http://nancybirdphotography.com/#sthash.ZgMWVHZ7.dpbs

[Nicks Pics]

Thanks everybody for your responses!

One reason that they work is that they don't look like predators and the fumes and smell of cars masks the human scent, so animals are not afraid.

That was an interesting observation about cars! I'm not sure I've thought about that before.

I second IzzieK's suggestion but with a suggestion to expand the venues. My next door neighborhood leads a group of people with more money than sense around an arboretum that's very well populated with birds. He'll sometimes be still waiting for a specific bird to show up in a particular tree/pond/flower bed for as much as 30-45 minutes but because he's familiar with the critters around there that he'll almost always get his image! He does similar things around Santa Anita which is about 3 miles from here. He goes both to races and workouts. Regardless he always comes back with excellent images, even though he does the stand and wait thing just like he does with the birds.

If you have a woods nearby or a large backyard, you could probably find some wildlife there and try out the stand and wait thing.

This was an interesting example about this birder you know. I'm not sure I have that much persistence unless it was for something in particular I really wanted to shoot, and then, possibly I might!?

In areas where they are hunted heavily they will avoid people. But in areas where they are protected from human hunting they are not shy at all and at times can even be aggressive. Deer are much the same in protected areas. I've seen deer on golf courses that won't even stand up to move out of the way of a golf cart. When they behave that way I believe the term is "habituated".

Thanks again for more cool knowledge about the animals!

Nick, I recommend checking this site out. When she began, she had little experience. She dispenses a lot of valuable advice. It is also nice that she is shooting in areas that are accessible for you. http://nancybirdphotography.com/#sthash.ZgMWVHZ7.dpbs

I appreciate the link Randy! It looks like there is some good reading there, on this topic, as it talks about the experience of bird photography.