Hi Roy
I've no idea how old you are, but I'm 38 and loathe lugging the large whites around even now. On that you and I are in complete agreement.
However....
1) I see a massive amount of rubbish from bridge cameras masquerading as wildlife photography
1a) Most of this appears to be using fairly extreme zoom, or fairly extreme cropping
2) If your 300mm example held weight, then 1a) above would not be true as everyone would be able to get close and not need to use 1800mm etc
2b) For birds, focal length is key, and for the normal user with normal amounts of time (ie the vast majority of us), no amount of fieldraft is going to mean that you can get away with something as short as 300mm. It is just too short, especially in the UK.
3) I remember seeing your work with SLRs posted on BirdForum, and I liked it.
3b) I would bin all three of the images above as they just don't cut it.
4) As Kaz says, if it allows people to take something rather than nothing, then clearly that is a good thing and I have no problem with that. I can fully understand that enjoyment is key. However see point 1).
Regards
Jonathan
Jonathan,
For info I am 70 and lugging around a big white is not an option for me any more (I sold my 300/2.8 over a year ago and have also got rid of my 400/5.6). I have never been remotely interested in one of the 500/600 or 800 lenses as they do not suit my style which is walking long distances and getting my shots as and when opportunities occur. Sitting around in a hide would bore me to tears after 5 minutes
The users who use these little cams tend to fall into different groups, with the vast majority being people who have no experience whatsoever with DSLR's and , yes, most of what they post is utter garbage. They have not got a clue how to use a Camera and most just use the fully auto settings, mention Ev comp and they are totally flummoxed!! BUT at the end of the day as long as they enjoy it and are pleased with their results that is all that matters!
There are also an increasing number of experienced DSLR user's who also have a little superzoom as a lightweight walkabout when they do not want to take along the DSLR gear. I find it handy to take along when I am shooting macro or landscapes with my DSLR.
Another group who are finding these little cams very handy are birders who just want record shots, they are finding them a lot better/easier than digiscoping.
Another reason why I am liking this little cam is that you do not have to get near and disturb the birds - I shoot exclusively from public footpaths.
After years of shooting birds with a DSLR myself I now conclude that the in my experience the majority of 'bird photographers' these days seem to act very irresponsibly and will do almost anything to get the shot, I am very much in the birders camp these days!!!.
When I started bird photography about 10 years ago really nice bird shots were few and far between but nowadays with Digital and so many people having decent big lenses that really good shots are '10 a penny'.
I am under no illusion's as to what is a good bird shot and have said time and time again that these little cam's are certainly not up to a decent DSLR set-up. I have never claimed anything else but I am still very impressed with what you can get out of these sub £300 cameras (especially when shooting optical range only in RAW)
BTW
HERE is a sample of some of my DSLR work, all taken with a 300/2.8 (with converters) or the 400/5.6. I do not claim that they are anything more than average but I hope that they do show that I know a little about bird photography! I have always considered myself a walker who takes along a Camera.
I will resist making any comments on your birds images other than to say that all these things are subjective - 'one man's meat is another man's poison'. You have some cracking birds on there.
