Nanakamado
Member
Well, I propose some loose and lighthearted discussion thread.
How important is the camera body in wildlife photography?
Many wildlife photographers are saying that You should always invest in lenses. But I feel it's not always true. Maybe if You already have a good, older body, and want to add wildlife to Your other photography genres. And there was of course great post by @Steve "does gear matter".
But I feel it is very misleading for people with entry-level cameras. I don't know how it is in richer countries like US, UK, or Canada but here in Poland prices of anything better than entry-level are absurd for someone just starting with photography (even though one may argue, that gear prices will always be absurd for non-photographers). Did You guys start with a higher trier body, or something entry-level?
I think it's quite absurd to buy lenses for 5000$ and attach them to D3XXX or even D5XXX. I think that would be absurd even for my Sigma 100-400 which is less than 1000$. Especially when one can buy a used D500 for less than 1000$ or a used D7200 for less than 500$.
And the difference is big. Before I bought my D500 I tested D810. First time with the new camera, bad weather, and seagulls in the white sky. And I managed to catch sharp pics. With the camera, I had the first time in my hands. And I thought that I really suck at panning and BIF. My red squirrel (from the critique section, and even more so a few more from Instagram) this photo would be impossible without D500.
Of course, a good photographer will get great photos with everything (like what @sdentrem showed lastly on his Instagram with M50 or Duade Paton with 40D in the last video) but the thing is when You for the first time think about new lenses or body for wildlife You are most probably not a good photographer yet. So you will lose many more good photos.
Lately, I went to scout some wildlife sanctuary near my house and made 350 photos, but all of them were bad. But I checked them and I learned what I did wrong in most cases. With my old D5300, I was never sure if it was me, the camera, or the lenses that were responsible for bad photos.
What do You think? Are lenses more important, or do You need at least an enthusiast level body for lenses to become more important?
How important is the camera body in wildlife photography?
Many wildlife photographers are saying that You should always invest in lenses. But I feel it's not always true. Maybe if You already have a good, older body, and want to add wildlife to Your other photography genres. And there was of course great post by @Steve "does gear matter".
But I feel it is very misleading for people with entry-level cameras. I don't know how it is in richer countries like US, UK, or Canada but here in Poland prices of anything better than entry-level are absurd for someone just starting with photography (even though one may argue, that gear prices will always be absurd for non-photographers). Did You guys start with a higher trier body, or something entry-level?
I think it's quite absurd to buy lenses for 5000$ and attach them to D3XXX or even D5XXX. I think that would be absurd even for my Sigma 100-400 which is less than 1000$. Especially when one can buy a used D500 for less than 1000$ or a used D7200 for less than 500$.
And the difference is big. Before I bought my D500 I tested D810. First time with the new camera, bad weather, and seagulls in the white sky. And I managed to catch sharp pics. With the camera, I had the first time in my hands. And I thought that I really suck at panning and BIF. My red squirrel (from the critique section, and even more so a few more from Instagram) this photo would be impossible without D500.
Of course, a good photographer will get great photos with everything (like what @sdentrem showed lastly on his Instagram with M50 or Duade Paton with 40D in the last video) but the thing is when You for the first time think about new lenses or body for wildlife You are most probably not a good photographer yet. So you will lose many more good photos.
Lately, I went to scout some wildlife sanctuary near my house and made 350 photos, but all of them were bad. But I checked them and I learned what I did wrong in most cases. With my old D5300, I was never sure if it was me, the camera, or the lenses that were responsible for bad photos.
What do You think? Are lenses more important, or do You need at least an enthusiast level body for lenses to become more important?