Choosing a Camera...

[5pointer]

Hi all,

Just a quick question for any of you that occasionally like to substitute a rifle for a camera when you’re out after deer.

I’m thinking of purchasing a camera for the sole purpose of deer/wildlife photography. I’m not terrible at taking a decent picture, (I feel, anyway!), but I’m a long way from being anything close to professional and certainly can’t say that I know my way around some of the seriously advanced pieces of kit that are out there.

I’m just curious what some of you may use yourselves, the pros and cons in your experience and any recommendations that you might have. I’ve had a bit of good fortune lately so I have some flexibility regarding the cost of things but but would rather just make sure I end up with the best thing for the job.

Something that can take really good quality photos, that’s quiet to use and that has/can be fitted with a lens suitable for subjects both fairly close and further away.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

5pointer

P.S - I hope I’ve put this in the right section!

 

[J&S]

Just spotted this....
I shoot a lot of deer, not hundreds, but it's part of my job to keep the roe and red population here in check.
I photograph a lot of deer, pheasants, grouse, dogs and anything else fieldsports related on a professional level (i.e commissioned by either clients or magazines), but don't do the two at the same time. Concentrate on either shooting with the rifle or with the camera simply because what you are looking for through the scope is a mile away from what you are looking for through the camera lens.
If you can't get your head round the above statement then by all means carry a pocket camera, or better still a modern phone camera and take as many journalistic shots as you can. I do this constantly and find it gives me ideas for new angles and such for when I'm out with the camera.
If you're after a DSLR then the choice out there is plenty but for a serious beginner I'd recommend one that can be used in manual mode (using the various landscape, action, portrait modes is basically letting the camera do all the work and you learning very little) In manual mode you will make mistakes, but you will learn quickly where you went wrong and will be less prone to making the same ones again.
A decent entry level DSLR will cost about £4-500. For a beginner I'd suggest a 70-300mm long zoom lens and a 20-50mm standard zoom lens, cost of them will be about £3-400 and £150-200. Get to grips with the capabilities of both the lenses and camera and when you start getting better you will realise that the lenses will have limitations and you'll probably want to upgrade to either something longer or maybe something wider. As far as modern DSLR cameras are concerned the image quality they deliver is outstanding and even a low end one should last you many years before you will even think about upgrading it.

If I can be of any further help just PM me and I'll try my best

Cheers
John

 

[Rob-E]

Depends on your budget.

I used to do a lot of photography, 10+ years ago both 35mm film that i developed and printed myself as well as digital.

Digital wise you can't go wrong with a Canon EOS the latest model in the hundred series will cost circa £400 but a 400D should cost a fraction of that. Lenses are readily available and you can pick up a sigma 70-300mm lense for under £150 new.

That's the set up I was using back in 2008 when I was in Namibia and I got some stunning shots.
The camera may only be 10.1mp which was a lot back then. But it's more to do with the size of the sensor they're mounted on that how many they've crammed in.

 

[Peter Eaton]

Sony NEX 7 is what I went for. Bought one secondhand for £250, most go for slightly more, I think they were around £1200 when they first came out. Superb images from it. I use the camera for taking images of my knives after I have made them and the images are stunning. i was recommended it by a pal who is really into photography and although he has cameras costing thousands he said if he had to choose one it would be the NEX 7 over all of them.

 

[jthyttin]

Something that can take really good quality photos, that’s quiet to use and that has/can be fitted with a lens suitable for subjects both fairly close and further away.

Depending on what you mean with "silent", nothing with mirror and/or shutter fits the bill.

DSLR is noisier than mirrorless. Low end DSLR is noisier than high end. Depending on your needs consider also so-called bridge cameras. No need to buy lenses and no dust etc. getting between the lens and cell.

Also consider beforehand if you want to take video also. Usually you'd want external microphone jack for video. And maybe a tilting display or some other means to see the display from the front of camera. E.g. Canon EOS Wifi smartphone connection does not work taking video.

 

[caorach]

Be aware that Canon are very clear, including putting up posters in their offices, that they will not allow any of their glass etc. to be used in what is referred to as "sport optics" which means rifle sights. Clearly buying Canon demonstrates to them that this works as a marketing ploy and encourages others to follow them.

On a positive note Sony are now considered to be 5 years ahead of the competition in sensor technology and I believe that Nikon source their sensors from Sony plus Panasonic and some others also buy them. Sony also fit Zeiss glass to some of their cameras, and of course Zeiss are not working to undermine your sport. So, in terms of technology there is no excuse to buy Canon and support their anti-shooting stance.

When picking a camera the bottom line is that the best camera for any photo is the one you have with you and in that respect something small but good quality simply makes the best sense. However you have to decide if you are going to take photos while you are out stalking or if you are going to go out with the sole intention of taking photos. Clearly if your only objective is to take photos then you can consider something larger, and you can put a big bit of glass on the front. If you want a camera to take with you when doing other things then you need to try and achieve a size/quality balance as you will simply never carry a larger camera, you might imagine you will but it will only be a few trips before the camera gets left behind. It is also the case that you don't get something for nothing and so if you want big long lenses to photograph something a considerable distance away then, if you maintain quality, it will be physically large and heavy and unless you are very dedicated it will not be long before you are leaving the big lens in the house as it is too much of a pain to carry.

In my view if you want a good, high quality, general purpose and pockatable camera then there is currently nothing to beat the Sony RX100 range. They are available in a number of models with improvements as you go up the range, prices to suit most budgets, and they are not inexpensive but the quality is excellent and they have Zeiss glass out the front. What they don't have, however, is a long zoom though their zoom range is good for general purpose applications. Something like that will give you a lot of long term general use and you will always have it in your pocket when you need it. The RX100 will work in fully auto "point and shoot" mode but can also be used manually and it has a decent ND filter plus an f1.8 lens at the wide end should you like doing the limited depth of field stuff. It will shoot good RAW files and also 4k video. Some people complain about the complexity of the menus but if the camera has a lot of functionality then it needs the menus to support this and the RX100 is probably the closest thing to a full DSLR in your pocket, I personally find the menus easy to use and logical. Apart from that the only downside is that you can shoot a lot of images fast with it and so need decent sized memory cards plus it can get through batteries quickly so a spare is useful, also as you go up the model range the price gets a bit eye watering for a pocket camera but all I can say is that if I killed mine I'd buy another one.