I used my old BEGINNER budget gear for Bird Photography...and got surprising results
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 07. 2024
- Gear matters less than what most people think.
Join me in this new adventure, where I bring my very first bird and wildlife photography set-up (a Canon 1300D and a Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5,6 IS STM lens) for a session in the park and I compare the results with photos taken with my current professional gear (Canon R5 and Canon RF 100-500mm lens).
I feel there's way too much emphasis put on gear, but it is possible to achieve good results with virtually any gear. It looks like people get obsessed about photography equipment and forget how important are the PEOPLE behind it - with their hands and especially their eyes.
Craft and skills can OVERCOME most of the limitations of pieces of equipment. But also we have to accept also all the other FACTORS that play a role in photography and that are not under our direct control.
So this is meant as an encouragement to every beginner out there and for all those of you who have a budget set-up!
🕔 Use the time-stamps to navigate to the part of the video more interesting to you ⬇️
00:00 Introduction
01:13 Vlog - on the field
08:18 Back home - Outline
09:15 Gear specifications
10:39 Photo quiz:1300D or R5?
20:22 Other beginner gear photo results
22:22 RAW file
23:51 Factors determining Bird Photo Results
27:54 What really made a difference for this session?
31:52 Concluding remarks
▬ Let's connect! ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
► Instagram: / chiaratalia. .
► Website: www.chiaratalia.com
► Subscribe to my Newsletter: www.chiaratalia.com/newslette...
Do you want to learn with me?
👉 Sign up for my 1:1 Wildlife Photography Coaching programs (OPEN until March 20): www.chiaratalia.com/coaching/
I shared 9 photos for the Photo Quiz part. You had to recognise which photo was taken with my beginner gear and which one with my pro one. How many did you guess correctly? I am curious! 😏 Also please share your thoughts on the factors you think REALLY MATTERS in bird photography. I read you!
Even having owned and enjoyed the beginner camera that you exampled, I was unable to do very well on the quiz. You made it tricky with the crops (on purpose i'm sure) as I was thinking that the difference in the sensor size would give it away if not for that. Thanks!
There’s a minimum level of gear. Firstly the lens makes a difference. I bought a Sigma 100-400mm f6.3 and my success has gone up considerably compared to the 55-250mm. Using this on a Canon 77D. This combo works reasonably well in good light but a dull overcast day will degrade the performance of the AF and detail is lost with high ISO.
Obviously if someone would ask me about gear to buy, I would never advice to start with this 250mm. I would definitely suggest to go for a second-hand but longer lens. But there are people out there who have that gear when starting out (as myself) and that perhaps can't upgrade for a variety of reasons. Again the point of the video is not that people should not upgrade gear - I think it is obvious that having more reach and a faster wider lens can help.
@@chiaratalia_wild I understand your point but my point is that a little more investment will keep the frustration away. It gets a little bit boring photographing coots, moorhens, seagulls and ducks all the time, which is the likely subject with the 55-250mm lens though I have successfully photographed cormorants sitting on a tree branch. The only other solution for the 55-250mm is to setup a disguised feeding station.
Hello Chiara this is a very interesting and thought provoking video. All I can say is that I started with a Canon 800D and a Canon 100 - 400 Mk 2. I moved on to mirrorless with a R6, 5 and then 7 using the RF 600 F11 as well as EF 100 - 400 plus teleconverters etc etc. So I’ve spent a lot of money. The other day , pretty much like you have done, I took my original configuration out for the first time in a couple of years. I took some very good bird photos with, arguably, old and inferior gear. But the thing is my technique, field craft and understanding along with experience has taken a huge leap in that time. My long winded point is….skill and technique count for as much as gear….but good gear makes it so much easier!
Thanks for the video!
Thanks for watching :)
Thanks for a useful comparison, to remind us of why we should avoid gear acquisition syndrome. A couple of years ago, I purchased the Canon EF-S 55-250 mm zoom for a once-in-a-lifetime trip to northern Manitoba, to see polar bears. Given our proximity to the large animals, I wanted to avoid the longer telephoto lenses I generally use for wildlife, which are a bit unwieldy. To my surprise, it turned out to be an astonishingly good lens, much better than I expected for its price. In fact, I think that Canon may have misjudged its market niche, as I think it out-performs most other "kit lenses" :). Although I prefer the RF 100-500 these days, I'm in no hurry to drop the EF-S 55-250 from my bag.
That's so cool! I started with the same camera in the T6 (US version) and have actually just recently traded it in for a 7D ii. That camera took great images when you kept it inside of it's limitations, but it has many limitations. Great video! Thanks!
thanks for your comment!
Great and interesting video Chiara! I completely agree with you, you don't need to update the equipment every time something new comes out. Greetings Karl-David
yes! there's just so much marketing involved...
Thanks for sharing the valuable information
My pleasure!
Very interesting, tnx!
thanks for watching :)
Excellent video Chiara 👏I started with a Canon 1000d now I use a R7. Cameras have really improved throughout the years 😊
they have! it is hard to keep up with all the releases 😆
Shutter sound is like an old friend. Take care
It is :D
Interesting. My first camera was a Canon 70d. It took very good photos. Now I have the R6 mark ii with the 100 to 500mm L because I love photographing birds in flight. But I still use my 70d along with my R6 when I do astrophotography of the Milky Way and I use two cameras
To Chiara Talia,
A great video.
I write in German, which seems to be easier to understand in translation than when I try to write in English.
I myself use Nikon D7500 and D5300 with SIGMA 100-400 5-6.3 and TAMRON 16-300 3.5-6.3 and other lenses.
I notice the difference in the speed in RAW, but especially in the ISO values and the noise.
And so today I use the D7500 more for birds and the D5300 for landscapes and slow-moving subjects.
You can already notice a difference.
In the quiz, I concentrated on the difference between the depth of field (APS-C and KB), and the classification according to APS-C and KB was given with a good hit rate.
Differences become clear, but this can be compensated for somewhat by the perspective and the distance to the background.
Yes, the equipment does make a difference, but personally I think it's how you (not MAN) use your equipment that makes a difference too.
If I could, I would get a Nikon Z9 and a 600 mm F-4, yes of course, but only for the technology and the better performance.
Does this make my photos better, DEFINITELY NOT.
I think this also depends on how much time you invest in the motifs. In image composition and image detail.
And, yes, in many of my photos the foreground is not tidy and I like that because it is realistic and natural. I had been trying to cut the lawn for a while on a hedgehog project until the thought occurred to me, "What am I doing here?"
In the end, I personally liked the photos better without clearing obstacles and putting them in a frame.
And being at the spot for 1-2 days to take a photo of a cormorant with a fish in its beak is worth it to me.
Ok, of course it can take longer.
Mallard ducks, geese, grebes, rails and swans also come by, or a kingfisher or barn swallow.
Sincerely, MJ
--
In Deutsch/German
-
An Chiara Talia,
Ein tolles Video.
Ich schreibe in Deutsch (german), das scheint besser verständlich in der Übersetzung zu sein, als wenn ich versuche in Englisch zu schreiben.
Ich nutze selbst Nikon D7500 und D5300 mit SIGMA 100-400 5-6,3 und TAMRON 16-300 3,5-6,3 und andere Objektive.
Ich merke einmal den Unterschied bei der Geschwindigkeit in RAW besonders aber bei den Iso-Werten und dem Rauschen.
Und so nutze ich die D7500 heute für Vögel mehr und die D5300 für Landschaften und Langsame Motive.
Da merkt man schon einen Unterschied.
Bei dem Quiz, nun ich habe mich auf die Schärfentiefe (APS-C zu KB) im Unterschied konzentriert, da war dann die Zuordnung nach APS-C und Kb mit einer guten Trefferquote gegeben.
Da machen sich Unterschiede deutlich, dies lässt sich aber durch die Perspektive und die Distanz zum Hintergrund etwas kompensieren.
Ja, die Ausrüstung macht schon einen Unterschied, aber ich persönlich finde, das wie man (Nicht MANN) seine Ausrüstung einsetzt, das dies ebenfalls einen Unterschied macht.
Würde ich mir wenn ich es könnte eine Nikon Z9 und ein 600 mm F-4 Zulegen, ja natürlich, aber nur der Technik wegen und der besseren Leistung.
Macht dies dann auch meine Fotos besser, DEFINITIV NICHT.
Das, so meine ich, hängt auch daran wieviel Zeit man in die Motive investiert. In Bildaufbau und Bildausschnitt.
Und,ja, auf vielen meiner Fotos ist der Vordergrund nicht aufgeräumt und ich finde das gut, den es ist realistisch und natürlich. Ich hatte eine Zeitlang versucht bei einem Projekt mit Igel den Rasen zuschneiden, bis mir der Gedanke kam "Was mache ich hier?".
Die Fotos ohne das Freiräumen von Hindernissen, das in einen Rahmen setzen, das hat mir am Ende persönlich besser gefallen.
Und für ein Foto eines Kormoran mit einem Fisch im Schnabel mal 1-2Tage am Spot zusein, das ist es mir Wert.
Ok, es kann natürlich auch länger dauern.
Da kommen ja noch Stockenten, Gänse, Haubentaucher, Rallen und Schwäne vorbei oder ein Eisvogel oder Rauchschwalben.
Hochachtungsvoll MJ
As with so many things in life: people will rather blame the gear rather than recognize the fact that they just don't know enough. And on top of that, many just don't want to put in the work. The expectation is "I buy more expensive stuff, I get better results." I never understood that. If I take home shitty pictures it is something I did, not the camera or the lens.
You can take great pictures with a 60 year old film camera. If you get bad results, it's almost always a YOU problem. Newer and better camera's and lenses make it easier to take home great photographs, but if you don't know what you are doing it will take home bad pictures just as well.
Thanks so much for your comment! I totally agree!
I see you use canon Efs 55-250 IS STM Lens and f5.6 seem to be your choice for most if not all photos. Did you use the same lens on both cams? I have the same lens, and it's very light and my walk around lens for wildlife. Recently, I replaced the mount so that it can fit a speedbooster, the aperture range changed from 4 to 5.6 to 2.8 to 4. Maybe it will perform better in low light situations, although the IQ might drop slightly. I'd suggest metabones speedbooster. Thanks
Hey - no as mentioned in the video I have used the RF 100-500 mm on the Canon R5.
With the 1300D and the 55-250mm lens I took most of the photos at f5.6 exactly because there was not enough light and I was already at max ISO - so that was the "only" option, although the lens is not really sharp there.
I am not familiar with speedboosters - on a general level I don't like to "add" any additional optical element between my camera and a lens. But I have no experience with those so I can't really tell :)
Your starter camera is my main camera with a Sigma 150-600, my biggest limitation is when I go to crop something that's already too far away. I find my srt up is good from 10m to 250m
Hey!! thanks for the comment! Maybe for the next video I could test this camera with my Tamron 150-600mm! It will be fun :)
The EFs 55-250 mm is a sharp and cheap lens. I used to have it and was satisfied with it, i took a lot of pics of squirrels and birds with it.
Was that squirrel in Brussels ? I think i recognise the spot!
Hey!! No it's not Brussels, but Antwerp ;)
One should see the HUGE difference when using each camera daily. I use both a cropped camera and FF camera daily. One can get a decent photo with a Point and Shoot camera with Large Birds. Try that with much smaller ones.
Again, in the video I highlight clearly and repeat many times that each piece of gear has LIMITATIONS. The limitations of a point-and-shoot are different from an entry-level DSLR and from a professional camera. And yes there are differences between a full frame or a crop sensors, and yes there are differences across all the thousands of camera models out there. My point is that exactly there is an OCEAN out there when it comes to gear and gear takes WAY too much space in photography conversations when in reality there is so much more. Wildlife photography for me is not about gear, it is about the experience.
@@chiaratalia_wild I have been loving the experience of Wildlife via Nature shows on TV for well over 50 years. Recently over the last few years, I have acutely watched that Wildlife behavior far more in person. Gear allows one to virtually capture that experience for almost forever. Without gear, that's just a fading memory one can easily forget the True Details. Fact is, there is way too little talk about the importance of gear.
@@natureredux1957 I think you're again misunderstanding my point. I am not demonising gear - I mean I am a photographer. I use gear literally everyday as a job - which I love. And I am grateful for all the technological advancements that made the activity easier. But I totally disagree about what you say regarding the" amount "of talk on gear. Just look around - there are literally thousands of video reviews for each single camera, lens and all the possible combinations. And the market is super ACTIVE with new models out continuously. On social media, the most frequent question I receive is "Which gear do you use?". So no - there's totally no little talk about gear in my opinion. Quite the opposite - people ask more about the gear than anything else as gear was the "secret" to photography itself. And this is why (I will be brutally honest) there's people who keep buying top gear but still take poor photos.
Nice video but I’m still buying the Nikon Z9 and 400 2.8 next month!! 😊
Have fun!
while you still need the skills to get quality images regardless of your gear, there are limitations with "beginner" gear like iso etc as you pointed out, which ultimately gets very frustrating..
I myself tried to go back to beginner gear after 6 years out of photography and it wasn't long before frustration kicked in and I ended up getting pro gear lol
Wanting to upgrade as we get better is part of the normal process not only for photography but literally for every activity people do. If I would start playing an instrument, surely I won't spend $$$$ at the beginning - but if I improve at a point it would make sense to change, still when going back to the cheap old instrument, if I really learnt the skills, I would be able to play it despite the obvious limitations :)
But with Wildlife photography being such a VISUAL thing, I think there is a much more general overestimation of the role of gear and people tend to upgrade very soon and very often - as if gear was the sole ingredient of photography!
I have 'entry-level' cameras. I am not a 'beginner'. It's in my price-range plus I prefer lighter-to-carry gear.
right distinction :) I apologise if I used the terms interchangeably!
@@chiaratalia_wild no need to apologise. I would rate myself as having "intermediate" photography knowledge & skills. Have never used the high spec gear myself but an ex-employer had a very expensive Hasselblad.
Ngl I’ve been picking 1300D more. I guess it looks more natural in an odd way
that's interesting :)
Nice video,thank you. Add some emphasis. When it comes to gears, lenses are more important than cameras. So if you have a limited budget, you can prioritize spending your money on buying better lenses.
True - although I think the lens and camera really go hand in hand. It doesn't make sense to pair a super beginner body with a great lens anyway. So the upgrade plan must be made with just some common sense. I would argue in some cases, if someone really wants to upgrade, it is better to wait more in order to have enough to get a reasonable combination (rather than going full in either for the body or the lens only)
Yes.The combination should be appropriate@@chiaratalia_wild
Huawei smart is best 😊
Answer is: both
But what matters most? 🤔
No doubt, the photographer, although gear matter too when it comes to some type of photography such as BIF.
@@chiaratalia_wild The gear matters most because without that one can't even take the photo.
@@natureredux1957 I mean this is bringing the argument to the extreme which is really not the point. But if you want to play this game and get philosophical, still gear is a TOOL in the hands of the PERSON. The PERSON is needed to use the equipment anyway. Even with the newer features like auto-capture there's still a person behind it.
Hi Chiara, I am very disappointed by the R5 results. All your shots with R5 are not sharp and look flat. I have the same camera R5 + RF 100-500mm and my pictures are so sharp that I have to reduce sharpness when editing. I suspect that the picture style used and your setup can be greatly improved. If I take an 80D and compare it to the R5, results would be huge. What is your shooting mode, picture style used, the AF Case used, the white balance used, Clarity = ?, lens correction profile used. If you send me your settings I can help you to obtain better results, if you want. Have a good day!
Hey Steve, I really appreciate your comment. I can ensure you the photos were all sharp and there are no technical issues with my set up.Perhaps worth it to keep in mind in a CZcams video, photos get inevitably compressed so the quality always appear lower versus looking at the photo itself - especially because here it was a screen recording of a presentation.
The photos look flat because the it was a dull and grey day - as I also explain in the video the environmental conditions greatly impact a photo result.
I did on these photos very minimal editing (as I also mentioned) because that wasn't the main point of the video - of course spending more time photos would have been better with both setups :)
In addition, the picture style used doesn't affect the image as these were RAW files anyway.
@@chiaratalia_wild Hi Chiara, when we convert an image it takes all modifications made to the image from the RAW images. If we configure the camera with the best available parameters very minimum corrections would be have to be done before conversion. Did you preset us the RAW images or JPG images ?
@@steveparent8788 Hello Steve, as just mentioned, I shoot in RAW and then I take care of the editing myself using a software. So the photos you see here were all shot in RAW, then really minimally edited (just the basic adjustments) and saved as JPEGs. I normally do more editing - but in this case it wasn't the main goal of the video. I understand shooting in JPEG is a huge time-saver, but personally I like to be in total control of the processing of the file. This is especially for wildlife photography in which often photos are taken in sub-optimal lighting conditions (at least for me as I do lots of sunrise/sunset/low light work). For as much as the parameters are set, I would have to throw away a large part of out-of-camera JPEGs, that on the other hand I can "save" if I have the RAW files. But if shooting in JPEG trusting your camera processing works for you, that's brilliant of course!
@@chiaratalia_wild Hi Chiara, I always shoot RAW and never JPG. I think you did not understood my comments. Have a good day.
Promo-SM