The difference a lens makes.
As a photographer, I always have two thoughts that oppose each other. The first is a sense of pleasure and achievement for getting any photo in particular. The second follows on the heels of the first in short order; "I know I can do better." Given time, equipment, opportunity, and motivation, the second is an achievable goal.
Over the years (42 and counting) that I have photographed wildlife, I have found technology and expertise constantly improving. The need and opportunity to acquire better equipment has produced noticeable changes in the results I am getting. Comparing those results objectively is not easy but I found a subject that is satisfactory for the task. The belted kingfisher.
I adore kingfishers and always am titillated when I hear their cackling call. My attempts to photograph them have always been met with a familiar and predictable set of events. I hear one, find it, approach it, and it flits off to another perch which it can survey its realm. The aggravating part of this repeated vignette is that its internal proximity warning system is set to alarm levels when I am still fairly far away. I can exercise the greatest stealth and slow-motion encroachment behaviours with always the same results. There is an advantage to this though; it provides an excellent means of comparing the results from different lenses.
The four photographs, shown above on the left side of the main image, illustrate my point. The top image was photographed in 2007 with a Nikon D70 camera and a prime 300 mm lens without vibration mitigation technology. The hand-held photo in conjunction with lower camera resolution and no VR produced an image that evoked the aforementioned opposing thoughts.
The second image was shot in 2014 using a Nikon 7100 and a newly acquired 80-400 mm VR lens. The larger pixel count, increased magnification, and VR capability produced an improved rendering of my fish-eating nemesis. The same two thoughts persisting, another opportunity came along in 2020 with my Nikon D500 and Tamron 150-600 mm OS lens. Again, the greater magnification and improved pixel capturing technology presented a boon for image capture. I had finally managed to get a decent photograph of the bird. Could I do better?
Yesterday I was out enjoying the weather and heard the familiar cackling. This time I was packing my brand-new out-of-the-box Nikon 500 mm PF lens. I had heard its performance was superb; this would put it to the test. As usual, the kingfisher's internal alarm rang true and it bolted as I approached, but not before getting a couple of shots off. Back at home, I uploaded the results onto my desktop and eagerly opened the files. The results were amazing. Crisp definition and lack of distortions of any kind rendered the best quality shot I have managed to get so far.
There was something familiar in that thought. Let's see, a sense of pleasure and achievement? Check. Is it possible that I can do better? What do you think my conclusion on that one will be?
Thanks for reading. Ericspix Eric Svendsen
Over the years (42 and counting) that I have photographed wildlife, I have found technology and expertise constantly improving. The need and opportunity to acquire better equipment has produced noticeable changes in the results I am getting. Comparing those results objectively is not easy but I found a subject that is satisfactory for the task. The belted kingfisher.
I adore kingfishers and always am titillated when I hear their cackling call. My attempts to photograph them have always been met with a familiar and predictable set of events. I hear one, find it, approach it, and it flits off to another perch which it can survey its realm. The aggravating part of this repeated vignette is that its internal proximity warning system is set to alarm levels when I am still fairly far away. I can exercise the greatest stealth and slow-motion encroachment behaviours with always the same results. There is an advantage to this though; it provides an excellent means of comparing the results from different lenses.
The four photographs, shown above on the left side of the main image, illustrate my point. The top image was photographed in 2007 with a Nikon D70 camera and a prime 300 mm lens without vibration mitigation technology. The hand-held photo in conjunction with lower camera resolution and no VR produced an image that evoked the aforementioned opposing thoughts.
The second image was shot in 2014 using a Nikon 7100 and a newly acquired 80-400 mm VR lens. The larger pixel count, increased magnification, and VR capability produced an improved rendering of my fish-eating nemesis. The same two thoughts persisting, another opportunity came along in 2020 with my Nikon D500 and Tamron 150-600 mm OS lens. Again, the greater magnification and improved pixel capturing technology presented a boon for image capture. I had finally managed to get a decent photograph of the bird. Could I do better?
Yesterday I was out enjoying the weather and heard the familiar cackling. This time I was packing my brand-new out-of-the-box Nikon 500 mm PF lens. I had heard its performance was superb; this would put it to the test. As usual, the kingfisher's internal alarm rang true and it bolted as I approached, but not before getting a couple of shots off. Back at home, I uploaded the results onto my desktop and eagerly opened the files. The results were amazing. Crisp definition and lack of distortions of any kind rendered the best quality shot I have managed to get so far.
There was something familiar in that thought. Let's see, a sense of pleasure and achievement? Check. Is it possible that I can do better? What do you think my conclusion on that one will be?
Thanks for reading. Ericspix Eric Svendsen
Comments
Post a Comment