Wildlife & some sports photography - long term lens decisions

I *need* my house... to keep my lenses in.


I *need* my car... to get me to the stuff I want to photograph.


But then, I never claimed to be a real photographer...

Thanks John, I guess I can live with that [:D]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jon Ruyle

I *need* my house... to keep my lenses in.


I *need* my car... to get me to the stuff I want to photograph.


But then, I never claimed to be a real photographer...

---

Thanks for saying it yourself [;)]I just read your bio and I quote:



<h4 class="CommonContentBoxHeader"]"My Bio</h4>
<div class="CommonContentBoxContent"]


I like to take pictures."


Haha superb!That's the best definition of a true photographer I can think of![:D]


Jon, you're probably a very humble pro photographer whose photos overrule mine by a mile and a half no matter what [8-|] but I like that [Y] Also just a a hint if you want to grow ^^: you could also live and store your lenses in a tent and ride a bicycle instead of a car to go to the spots you want and spend the remaining cash on some more photography-equipment [A]
</div>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by djzuk

I wouldn't say that's a main goal for wildlife photography.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by djzuk

10mp is perfectly sufficient for a professional wildlife photographer.

---

The idea of "pixels per bird" is very important. Check Arthur Morris and Markus Jais, they'll second that. In wildlife photography you want the most detail per animal possible, and be able to crop and resize without worry. (Where's Daniel Browning to explain this when we need him!) And pixel density doesn't prevent you from using good composition or telling a story. But it does help, and megapixels DO matter a good amount.


Jordan, I don't think you're a jerk (of course) and this is a very controversial topic as far as photography goes. But I can say for myself (and pros believe the same) that cameras with higher MP counts can lay down more detail per animal and facilitate post-processing. In short, wildlife photographers need as many pixels per animal as they can get. Well, there is a limit to what's reasonable, but at the end of the day an 18mp camera like the Canon 7D has a big advantage over a 12mp camera like Nikon's D300s.


Moose Peterson may use 12mp, but I'm sure he'd agree that a camera with more pixel density can be helpful.


my 2&cent;


brendan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sheiky

I like to take pictures."


Haha superb!That's the best definition of a true photographer I can think of![img]/emoticons/emotion-2.gif[/img]

---

If that's the definition, then I'm a photographer. I love taking pictures. But unlike others on this forum, I'm not an artist or a professional.