Ok here somethings that you should be considering while all you "experts" are making guesses.
#1 According to the Peterson's Guide to Mammals a bobcat's tail can range from 4 to 8 inches in length. Assuming that this animal's tail were at the maximum length it would make the body only 8 to 10 inches long and about 3 inches high. So lets rule out a bobcat--or wandering lynx since they have shorter tails.
#2 According to the specs on that camera the maximum focal length at night is 50 feet. Keep in mind this is an infrared camera that can only reach so far and have the light return to trigger it and take the picture. Since that animal is well within that 50' it isn't large enough to be a mountain lion, jaguar, tiger, leopard or African lion. Everyone looks at that last picture, which I admit looks cat-like, and assumes it is a big animal--it isn't. In order for even a young lion to look that small it would have to be over 100 yds away. My guess would be that its body is about 2 feet long at maximum plus tail of about the same length and stands maybe 10 to 12 inches high. It would be helpful if OP would just go to the spot where the animal was seen and be photographed by the camera to give some size prospective. My guess is that you'd see how small that animal really is--just look at the crows.
#3 Look at the anatomy of a mountain lion. They have big heads compared to their necks. This is especially true of young animals--see the picture someone posted a ways back. Given the small size of this animal and the closeness to the camera the head, feet and tail are not big enough. (Granted I've not encountered a mt. lion in the wild but the local (Binghamton NY) zoo has a pair that they got as kittens and I've seen them up close.)
#4 Look closely at the second picture of the animal. I see it standing with its head pointed to the left and it is raising its back left leg to mark. This is not anything any cat of any kind will do--they just back up to the spot and let fly. This leads me to believe it is canine of some type.
#5 I have about 100+ game cam photos of the pair of grey foxes that live around here. I posted a couple, one of which looks very much like one of the OP's photos. I suspect if I were to go through more of them I could match just about every one of the photos--I won't since I have over 1000 photos on a memory stick and they aren't classified as to species. Here, however, is some of the Peterson description of the grey: "Head/body 19 - 28 ", tail 11 - 17", shoulder hgt 14-1/2 " Medium sized, relatively short-legged. Back grizzled grey; ears, neck, line on sides and legs rusty-orange; belly and throat white. Bushy tail black on upper surface and tip. Usually see on the ground but can climb to the tops of trees to feed on fruit or escape predators." As someone pointed out in another post--this animal looks like a tree climber--if it is a grey fox then it is a tree climber. Don't compare the unknown animal with the red fox, there are anatomical differences and, Yes, they do exist in the same area--I have pictures of both together as a matter of fact.
I'd like to believe that there are mt. lions in the eastern part of this country and just maybe there are--most likely of the kind like the CT one that are passing through. But most of the "sightings" and kills have turned out to be mistaken identity and DNA samples have not proven the animals to be cougars--at least North American species. Usually the sightings were made by somebody's uncle-cousin--friend in the next county and when you try to run them down it turns out to be a wild goose chase. (My next door neighbor was sure she saw one but another, more knowledgeable, person happened to be there are the same time and confirmed thatit was just a big coyote.) Granted too, if there were really one or two cougars roaming around it would behoove the DEC to keep it quiet lest some idiot would take it on him/herself to kill it. (That happened when a moose came through here a few years ago.) At any rate the animal in the photos is not one.
