Wildlife Photography

[azurbanclucker]

I need camera suggestions if any of you have some I’d appreciate it.

How much do you want to spend? What kinds of photography do you want to do with it? What is your experience level with photography in general?

A big part of choosing a camera is finding one that suits the style of photography you want to do. Also important is learning about the features and capabilities of different makes and models and how they matter to the type of photography you want to do.

is there a legit camera store in your area? Or like a Best Buy? Some place you can put your hands on cameras and explore them? It isn't always the first thing people think of, but equally important is how it feels in your hands, how easy it is to operate, how simple or complicated the menus are, things like that. A triumph of technology isn't useful if you can't figure out how to operate it or it's too big for you to comfortably handle, for example.

 

[Patiocoturnix]

How much do you want to spend? What kinds of photography do you want to do with it? What is your experience level with photography in general?

I’d set a budget about $1,500 but I could spend a bit more.

More so wildlife, plants, nature.

A big part of choosing a camera is finding one that suits the style of photography you want to do. Also important is learning about the features and capabilities of different makes and models and how they matter to the type of photography you want to do.

is there a legit camera store in your area? Or like a Best Buy? Some place you can put your hands on cameras and explore them? It isn't always the first thing people think of, but equally important is how it feels in your hands, how easy it is to operate, how simple or complicated the menus are, things like that. A triumph of technology isn't useful if you can't figure out how to operate it or it's too big for you to comfortably handle, for example.

Just Best Buy and that sort of stuff

 

[Patiocoturnix]

I’d set a budget about $1,500 but I could spend a bit more.

More so wildlife, plants, nature.

Just Best Buy and that sort of stuff

Also forgot to say I would consider myself a beginner I’ve taken pictures before but I’ve never used an actual camera

 

[mdees88]

There's so many factors that go in to choosing the correct camera setup, it's always tough to give a good recommendation without you having a very specific use case and without knowing how dedicated you are going to be to photography in the future. I'm going to give you my recommendation based on a wildlife shooters point of view.

Nikon, Canon, and Sony are the 3 most common brands. All would be good choices. You just need physically hold them and go through the menus and see which you like best. I shoot canon but I feel like Nikon is a little better bang for your buck, money wise. The lens is the most important part of the camera. For wildlife (birds especially) you want a pretty long focal length. I would say 300mm minimum (on a crop body camera). 400 or longer is more ideal. Good lenses can cost even more than the camera and typically weigh a ton (compared to kit lenses). So you have to balance size/weight vs portability.

Mirrorless is the future but there's nothing wrong with using a DSLR. I think it's better to learn one if you really want to master photography as a hobby. I also recommend buying used gear. You can get a lot more for your money this way. Plus if you decide you don't like the gear or you want to upgrade you can sell the gear without taking a huge hit. More than half of my gear I bought used.

All I can speak to is Canon because it is all I have used. Your $1500 budget kind of puts you in an odd spot for Canon gear as far as wildlife photography is concerned. $1500 can get you a very good mirrorless camera (R7) but won't leave anything left for lenses. For $5-600 more, you can get an R7 and an RF100-400 lens (which is a "decent" but a little slow, wildlife lens). But you will need at least one more lens for general more wide angle use. So I definitely do NOT recommend spending $2k+ just to figure out if you like wildlife photography or not. You can do that for much cheaper.

So really, I would look at getting a used Canon 80D (DSLR) for $500 or maybe a 90D if you can find one for around $800 or less (much more than this and you should start looking for a used Mirrorless R7 instead) then buying either a 1) Canon EF-S 55-250 IS STM ($150 "kit" lens, cheapest option to feel out wildlife photography on a budget), 2) Sigma 100-400 ($700) more of a dedicated wildlife lens but still budget friendly.

If you want a little more of a higher quality, dedicated wildlife lens you could opt for a 3) Canon EF 100-400 IS II ($1300 semi bulky/heavy but a very high quality lens for wildlife), or 4) Sigma 150-600 ($900 big/heavy but a decent lens). You definitely need to hold these lenses in person to get a feel for the size/weight before buying, they are big and heavy. (If going Nikon, a used 200-500mm would be a very nice wildlife lens and can be had for ~$800, which leaves you plenty of money for a nice camera). But remember, these lenses are big and heavy. If you plan on shooting large animals that let you get pretty close, you may not need lens longer than 300mm.

You will also need a more wide angle lens for general purpose use and landscapes. Most 18-55 kit lenses will get you started for this on the cheap. The Canon EF 50mm F1.8 STM is also a great lens for portraits and macro, it is less than $100 too.

Hopefully someone else will chime in. Do consider I am coming from a primary wildlife shooters perspective. There are definitely better lens choices for nature, landscape, and general use, than the larger wildlife lenses I listed. And again, I would not hesitate to buy Nikon or Sony either.

 

[mdees88]

One of the coolest animals to see at the Georgia Aquarium. The largest fish in the world....

 

[azurbanclucker]

Dove taking advantage of a large crown of fruit on a saguaro today.

 

[CombNWattles]

Noot!
(Red eft)

 

[fuzzi]

There's so many factors that go in to choosing the correct camera setup, it's always tough to give a good recommendation without you having a very specific use case and without knowing how dedicated you are going to be to photography in the future.

Nikon, Canon, and Sony are the 3 most common brands. All would be good choices. You just need physically hold them and go through the menus and see which you like best. I shoot canon but I feel like Nikon is a little better bang for your buck, money wise. The lens is the most important part of the camera. For wildlife (birds especially) you want a pretty long focal length. I would say 300mm minimum (on a crop body camera). 400 or longer is more ideal. Good lenses can cost even more than the camera and typically weigh a ton (compared to kit lenses). So you have to balance size/weight vs portability.

Mirrorless is the future but there's nothing wrong with using a DSLR. I think it's better to learn one if you really want to master photography as a hobby. I also recommend buying used gear. You can get a lot more for your money this way. Plus if you decide you don't like the gear or you want to upgrade you can sell the gear without taking a huge hit. More than half of my gear I bought used.

All I can speak to is Canon because it is all I have used. Your $1500 budget kind of puts you in an odd spot for Canon gear as far as wildlife photography is concerned. $1500 can get you a very good mirrorless camera (R7) but won't leave anything left for lenses. For $5-600 more, you can get an R7 and an RF100-400 lens (which is a "decent" but a little slow, wildlife lens). Now I definitely do NOT recommend spending $2k+ just to figure out if you like wildlife photography or not. You can do that for much cheaper.

So really, I would look at getting a used Canon 80D (DSLR) for $500 or maybe a 90D if you can find one for around $800 or less (much more than this and you should start looking for used Mirrorless R7 instead) then buying either a 1) Canon EF-S 55-250 IS STM ($150 "kit" lens, cheapest option to feel out wildlife photography on a budget), 2) Sigma 100-400 ($700) more of a dedicated wildlife lens but still budget friendly.

If you want a little more of a higher quality, dedicated wildlife lens you could opt for a 3) Canon EF 100-400 IS II ($1300 semi bulky/heavy but a very high quality lens for wildlife), or 4) Sigma 150-600 ($900 big/heavy but a decent lens). You definitely need to hold these lenses in person to get a feel for the size/weight before buying, they are big and heavy. (If going Nikon, a used 200-500mm would be a very nice wildlife lens and can be had for ~$800, which leaves you plenty of money for a nice camera).

You will also need a more wide angle lens for general purpose use and landscapes. Most 18-55 kit lenses will get you started for this on the cheap. The Canon EF 50mm F1.8 STM is also a great lens for portraits and macro, it is less than $100 too.

Hopefully someone else will chime in. Do consider I am coming from a primary wildlife shooters perspective. There are definitely better lens choices for nature, landscape, and general use, than the larger wildlife lenses I listed. And again, I would not hesitate to buy Nikon or Sony either.

Excellent advice.

I'm a casual but often passionate photographer. I used SLR film cameras for years, but I eventually went to a local camera store and purchased a used Sony a37 and a used 300 zoom lens. It was less than $1000, but probably 15 years ago so I am not sure exactly what it cost. They were very helpful in directing me to what camera fulfilled my needs.

The used camera only lasted about a year or so, but I loved how it caught birds in flight due to the mirrorless technology. I went back to the camera store and bought a brand new Sony a58. It's been about ten years, I still have it, love it.

I also have owned Ricoh CX5 cameras, all purchased used. They are the best for macro photography, but eventually get dust in the fixed lens which creates spots on the photos. They can be found for less than $100 used, and are easier to carry than a bigger camera with lenses.

Note: if you do get a lens larger than a 300 zoom you will do better photography with a tripod, as those lenses are heavy.

 

[azurbanclucker]

Noot!
(Red eft)
View attachment 3862551

 

[fuzzi]

(Android phone photos)