4 ms·
Bird photography. I was already into bird watching, filled out eBird checklists, etc. So getting a suitable camera & lens (Sony a7rIV and Sony 200-600mm f/5.6-6
by SAI_Peregrinus 5y ago
Bird photography. I was already into bird watching, filled out eBird checklists, etc. So getting a suitable camera & lens (Sony a7rIV and Sony 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS, not top-of-the-line but quite good enough that gear won't be the problem) was an easy step.
I'm still learning. I've got a handful of excellent pictures, a bunch of decent ones, and a whole pile of junk. My "hit rate" is steadily increasing as I get better at judging aperture & shutter speed. And I'm getting better at editing.
I typically go birding for 3-4 hours per week, taking 500-1000 shots in 100-200 bursts per outing, and spend 2-3x that to edit all the images. I'm holding off on re-editing some of the older images I know I could do better now for when I purchase a colorimeter and calibrate my monitors.
- etrautmann 5y agonot top of the line? that's still serious gear! Sure you can spend more but that's a fairly professional kit.
- SAI_Peregrinus 5y agoYes, it's certainly not cheap. But the whole setup including memory cards and other accessories was less than a Sony a1 body (no lens) by over $1000. It's basically right below the "knee" in the exponential price increases. The next steps up are the a1 and the 400mm f/2.8 lens (with 1.4x and 2x teleconverters), that lens is $12,000 and the teleconverters are $550 each. The 600mm f/4 lens is the top of the line, can also use the teleconverters, and is another $13,000. So cash wise I'm well below top-of-the-line. But in overall gear capabilities I'm honestly really close, the added speed of the big prime lenses also comes at a cost of reduced compositional versatility (and size/weight).