Camera For Photographing Animals?

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 21:19:00 -0500, G.Adams wrote:

On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 02:01:48 GMT, Steve wrote:


On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 19:14:34 -0500, G.Adams wrote:

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 23:55:42 GMT, Steve wrote:


On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 15:33:37 -0500, G.Adams wrote:

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 08:55:08 -0700, C J Campbell
wrote:

On 2008-10-22 10:30:53 -0700, "(PeteCresswell)" said:

Can anybody recommend something for photographing animals?

The main problem seems tb that the animal will look this way and
that - faster than one can click the shutter.

I'm thinking burst mode...

Professional wildlife photographers use DSLRs, often in burst mode.

Not all of them do, and none of them that I know personally do. The ones I know
need to travel as light as possible to get into those remote areas where the
animals live. DSLRs are reserved for those who like to take snapshots at their
local zoo or when they step out of the car while on a canned tourist-trap
adventure. When together and challenging each other we often use the fact that
they had to use burst mode as a way to tease them for not being a very good
photographer. If you can't predict when to take that shot and get it in one
shot, you're a lowly amateur. At least amongst the pros that I shoot with. Your
pros must not be as experienced nor talented.

Now that's funny! Hilarious as a matter of fact.

Look, there's so much information out there, there's no reason for
anyone to ask the so-called experts with their own agendas on a
newsgroup. If you want to know what professional wildlife
photographers really use, just google "wildlife photographer". You'll
get the websites of a lot of good ones, from National Geographic pros
to guys with quite a few books published.

You'll find on many of their sites a page of what equipment they use.
You'll also find links to magazine interviews and/or books on wildlife
photography with suggestions on what kind of equipment to use.

Google is your friend.

Steve

Without their corporate sponsored agendas, right? The equipment sponsors and
publishing houses that keep food on their tables.

:-)

Exactly, without their corporate sponsored agendas. And even if there
was a corporate sponsored agenda, Canon or Nikon wouldn't mind them
pushing a P&S if that's what they actually used for their job instead
of an SLR.

Hell, if the pros that shoot wildlife photos for those books and
National Geographic really *did* use a P&S, you'd see that plastered
all over the equipment sponsor's advertising. The fact that you don't
tells a lot. Mostly it tells that you're FoS.

Steve

Wow, what convoluted thinking you have. Does it hurt trying to twist reality
around to fit in that small space between your ears?

DSLR gear is where they make their biggest money.

You're kidding, right? They make much more on P&S cameras selling
them to fools like you then on DSLR gear. They may make more per unit
on DSLR gear but that doesn't come anywhere near making up the volume
of P&S cameras. Especially when you consider that a good SLR lens
(where they make most of the money, very little on the cheaper
pro-sumer bodies) lasts years and years but P&S cameras are almost
disposable these days.

They're not fools, like you.

It's not about the photography with them, it's about the money. Are you
seriously this brain-dead?

Wow.

But it is about photography for the professional photographers who
shoot wildlife for NG and other books. And unlike the hacks you hang
out with, they use SLRs. They're not fools, like you.

Steve

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 20:50:29 -0700, SMS
wrote:

tony cooper wrote:

Where do these posters come from? A few days ago it was a Florida
panther photographed devouring a wild boar, and today its a fox, an
opossum, and a raccoon sharing a bowl.

Poster not posters. Don't use the plural! It's one clueless poster,
trolling under a multitude of identities.

I don't follow those name-changes. It's too confusing, and the name
at the top of the post really doesn't make any difference to me. It's
the content I pay attention to.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 03:58:42 GMT, Steve wrote:


On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 21:19:00 -0500, G.Adams wrote:

On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 02:01:48 GMT, Steve wrote:


On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 19:14:34 -0500, G.Adams wrote:

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 23:55:42 GMT, Steve wrote:


On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 15:33:37 -0500, G.Adams wrote:

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 08:55:08 -0700, C J Campbell
wrote:

On 2008-10-22 10:30:53 -0700, "(PeteCresswell)" said:

Can anybody recommend something for photographing animals?

The main problem seems tb that the animal will look this way and
that - faster than one can click the shutter.

I'm thinking burst mode...

Professional wildlife photographers use DSLRs, often in burst mode.

Not all of them do, and none of them that I know personally do. The ones I know
need to travel as light as possible to get into those remote areas where the
animals live. DSLRs are reserved for those who like to take snapshots at their
local zoo or when they step out of the car while on a canned tourist-trap
adventure. When together and challenging each other we often use the fact that
they had to use burst mode as a way to tease them for not being a very good
photographer. If you can't predict when to take that shot and get it in one
shot, you're a lowly amateur. At least amongst the pros that I shoot with. Your
pros must not be as experienced nor talented.

Now that's funny! Hilarious as a matter of fact.

Look, there's so much information out there, there's no reason for
anyone to ask the so-called experts with their own agendas on a
newsgroup. If you want to know what professional wildlife
photographers really use, just google "wildlife photographer". You'll
get the websites of a lot of good ones, from National Geographic pros
to guys with quite a few books published.

You'll find on many of their sites a page of what equipment they use.
You'll also find links to magazine interviews and/or books on wildlife
photography with suggestions on what kind of equipment to use.

Google is your friend.

Steve

Without their corporate sponsored agendas, right? The equipment sponsors and
publishing houses that keep food on their tables.

:-)

Exactly, without their corporate sponsored agendas. And even if there
was a corporate sponsored agenda, Canon or Nikon wouldn't mind them
pushing a P&S if that's what they actually used for their job instead
of an SLR.

Hell, if the pros that shoot wildlife photos for those books and
National Geographic really *did* use a P&S, you'd see that plastered
all over the equipment sponsor's advertising. The fact that you don't
tells a lot. Mostly it tells that you're FoS.

Steve

Wow, what convoluted thinking you have. Does it hurt trying to twist reality
around to fit in that small space between your ears?

DSLR gear is where they make their biggest money.

You're kidding, right? They make much more on P&S cameras selling
them to fools like you then on DSLR gear. They may make more per unit
on DSLR gear but that doesn't come anywhere near making up the volume
of P&S cameras. Especially when you consider that a good SLR lens
(where they make most of the money, very little on the cheaper
pro-sumer bodies) lasts years and years but P&S cameras are almost
disposable these days.

Of course they make more SALES in P&S cameras. Profits are marginal. They
consider P&S sales just a stepping stone to sucker them into DSLR sales, by
manipulating idiots like you into doing their work for them. It's why they try
to keep retail P&S costs so low. Then ... oh, if only, they can convince
everyone that the P&S camera they just bought is now a "lowly toy" and those
fools fall for it, instead of them finding out that it is an advanced tool that
outperforms in the hands of any truly experienced photographer. Convince them
that the reason their photography looks like crap is that they need to buy the
more expensive DSLR that leads them into a company's life-long lens dependency.
Albeit it's still just a useless camera to them in their untalented hands, but
they'll never know this, they'll keep blaming the camera and buy a more
expensive one next year, because of listening to idiot trolls online just like
you! C'mon, admit it, this is why you bought and buy yours, isn't it! You were
told your photography sucks when using cheaper cameras, so you needed a more
expensive camera! You thought you really COULD buy your talent! It can be the
only reason, otherwise you'd KNOW better.

THEN, oh boy! Now they not only sold a P&S camera to someone but they can sucker
them into a life-long company dependency into more expensive camera gear that
will do no better than that very first P&S camera that they already bought! AND
continually sell them outrageously overpriced lenses that they don't even need!
All the while impressing more status-seeking morons like you who don't have a
clue about photography to begin with! (You proved that by claiming that a DSLR
can take better images. You're still trying to buy your talent, and failing,
announced loud and clear from your words.)

What wonderful values, talent, and goals that you display by your moronic
comments.


They're not fools, like you.

It's not about the photography with them, it's about the money. Are you
seriously this brain-dead?

Wow.

But it is about photography for the professional photographers who
shoot wildlife for NG and other books. And unlike the hacks you hang
out with, they use SLRs. They're not fools, like you.

Steve

I could win another award tomorrow with a Brownie Box camera. And have in the
past. It's why I keep it on my shelf to remind me that it's NEVER about the cost
of the camera, nor its lenses. And I'd win another award with that camera LONG
before you'd even get praised by even one person from your having used a $20,000
camera and the most expensive glass in the world.

Don't you get it moron?

You reveal nothing but your lack of skill with any camera. That is all that
you've proved with your words.

Michelangelo could have painted the Sistine Chapel with the tail from a pig, and
you? ... Someone like you couldn't even legibly block-print your name with the
most expensive sable brushes on the planet, even if you were given stencils.


Tsk tsk, someone's stock in the DSLR lines of their favorite companies must be
slipping. Having someone tell the truth about the more adaptable, portable,
quieter, lower-cost, longer wider-aperture zoom lenses, and other important
features valuable to a real wildlife photographer; all coming from good P&S
cameras; above and beyond anything available from a manipulative companies' more
profitable and useless status-seeker DSLR cameras and WAY overprices lenses --
really must hurt, eh?

Boo hoo.

Now climb back under your bridge. Ponder why you think a more expensive camera
will make you a better photographer. While I mosey on and laugh over the comedy
of knowing that untalented fools like you still exist.

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 20:56:17 -0700, John McWilliams wrote:

SMS wrote:
tony cooper wrote:

Where do these posters come from? A few days ago it was a Florida
panther photographed devouring a wild boar, and today its a fox, an
opossum, and a raccoon sharing a bowl.

Poster not posters. Don't use the plural! It's one clueless poster,
trolling under a multitude of identities.

Clues! He's got a few clues, just doesn't put them together
convincingly, nor entertainingly, just repetitively.

Or perhaps he's just "differently clued"....

Have a ly day!

Oh look! The perpetual resident-troll brigade! They always come out from under
the rocks to mistakenly pat each other on the back, at having proven nothing,
again! And posting nothing but more off-topic comments just for their desperate
need for attention!

Way to go!

LOL

"JT's Keeper" wrote in message
...
Mark Thomas wrote:

'G.Adams' is of course another identity for Vern/anti-dslr-troll. Ask
him to name another photographer he knows, or just show an image, and
you will see his abilities.


I.K.E. used 5 different names today... manages to dodge every question
asked of him. Abusive replies are all anyone gets when I.K.E. perceives
them as being inferior to his imagined lofty achievements. Unless I'm
badly mistaken, he's called almost everyone that has replied to his
postings, a "resident-troll".

See other posts and take his advice with a suitable large dose of
emetic..

BTW I wonder why Vern removed his sample p&s wildlife image?? (O:


I wonder why he refuses to provide the name of this almighty P&S he's
using...

(I've got it cached if anyone wants a laugh.)


Laughter is a "good" thing. Note to I.K.E. the group isn't laughing with
you... but at you. LOL!


- JT
I.K.E = I Know Everything

--
See Header for Improving Usenet's Signal-To-Noise Ratio

"The pendulum of the mind oscillates between sense and nonsense,
not between right and wrong." - Carl Jung



I think you should all stop baiting or goading the pathetic soul. ( G
Adams, etc.)

It must be obvious to everyone here that there is something seriously wrong
with him.

He is need of specialised care, and all this provocation is obviously
driving him to become even more detached from reality than usual, ( his
usual).

In the name of common humanity please do not cause him any more damage,
please just let him rant on until he becomes bored with our silence, and
stops of his own accord.

Roy G

Roy G

On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 13:55:56 -0000, "Roy G" wrote:


"JT's Keeper" wrote in message
.. .
Mark Thomas wrote:

'G.Adams' is of course another identity for Vern/anti-dslr-troll. Ask
him to name another photographer he knows, or just show an image, and
you will see his abilities.


I.K.E. used 5 different names today... manages to dodge every question
asked of him. Abusive replies are all anyone gets when I.K.E. perceives
them as being inferior to his imagined lofty achievements. Unless I'm
badly mistaken, he's called almost everyone that has replied to his
postings, a "resident-troll".

See other posts and take his advice with a suitable large dose of
emetic..

BTW I wonder why Vern removed his sample p&s wildlife image?? (O:


I wonder why he refuses to provide the name of this almighty P&S he's
using...

(I've got it cached if anyone wants a laugh.)


Laughter is a "good" thing. Note to I.K.E. the group isn't laughing with
you... but at you. LOL!


- JT
I.K.E = I Know Everything

--
See Header for Improving Usenet's Signal-To-Noise Ratio

"The pendulum of the mind oscillates between sense and nonsense,
not between right and wrong." - Carl Jung



I think you should all stop baiting or goading the pathetic soul. ( G
Adams, etc.)

It must be obvious to everyone here that there is something seriously wrong
with him.

He is need of specialised care, and all this provocation is obviously
driving him to become even more detached from reality than usual, ( his
usual).

In the name of common humanity please do not cause him any more damage,
please just let him rant on until he becomes bored with our silence, and
stops of his own accord.

Roy G

Roy G


Yes, listen to his advice. Then every time I have to painfully and relentlessly
correct your blatant misinformation and net-parroted ignorance from all of you
moronic DSLR trolls, I'll finally have the last word on it!

It's so ****ing tedious having to explain, again and again and again and prove
over again and again why you are nothing but pathetic useless resident troll
morons.

On 2008-10-28 13:33:37 -0700, G.Adams said:

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 08:55:08 -0700, C J Campbell
wrote:

On 2008-10-22 10:30:53 -0700, "(PeteCresswell)" said:

Can anybody recommend something for photographing animals?

The main problem seems tb that the animal will look this way and
that - faster than one can click the shutter.

I'm thinking burst mode...

Professional wildlife photographers use DSLRs, often in burst mode.

Not all of them do, and none of them that I know personally do.

You don't know any professional wildlife photographers. No one cares
what you think. I defy you to name even one professional photographer
who makes his primary living shooting wildlife who uses a point and
shoot as his primary camera. Also, show me the major magazines that
publish photos mostly taken with point and shoots. In fact, show me the
major wildlife photography magazines that show even 5% of their photos
taken with point and shoots. Show me *any* photos published in National
Geographic, Currents, or even Outdoor Photography that were taken with
point and shoots. Show me even one photographer licensed to photograph
in Denali who primarily uses a point and shoot.

You have been challenged to do this before. You can't do it. You don't
know any professional photographers. You are not a professional
photographer.

As I said, check out what the pros really use. I recommend you start
with Joe McNally, Moose Peterson, and Thom Hogan. These are well-known
professionals who regularly publish in Life, National Geographic and
nature and outdoor photography magazines.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

On 2008-10-28 15:07:44 -0700, G.Adams said:

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 17:28:38 -0400, tony cooper
wrote:

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 15:33:37 -0500, G.Adams wrote:

How often people like me would have to share my photography and videos with
those biologists, to show as proof that they've been doing nothing but telling
others misinformation all their lives. Information that they learned
from books,
not from real life. Heh, funny, just last night I took an infrared photo of a
wild gray-fox, a wild opossum and one of her young, and a wild raccoon all
eating off the same small plate at the same time. Most any biologist in the
world is going to tell you that that wouldn't happen in nature. Species that
different are not going to ever dine together, and especially not one of them
with an immature young one like that. And yet, I have a photo to prove
it. Funny
that.

Where do these posters come from? A few days ago it was a Florida
panther photographed devouring a wild boar, and today its a fox, an
opossum, and a raccoon sharing a bowl.

Fantastic photographs, but no links to give credence to the claim. If
I could capture a Florida panther, even at a distance, on an SD card,
you can bet I'd post the link here. Fantastic imagination is more
like it.

How much money you got? I never post my important photography on the net, and
certainly not for free. Only amateurs do that. Those that are looking for an
uplift to their empty lives and trying to get praise from equally untalented
snapshot photographers and net trolls.

Fine. Tell us what publications have shown your photos. Give us dates
of publication so we can check your story. What galleries exhibit your
pictures?




--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

On 2008-10-28 17:14:34 -0700, G.Adams said:

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 23:55:42 GMT, Steve wrote:


On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 15:33:37 -0500, G.Adams wrote:

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 08:55:08 -0700, C J Campbell
wrote:

On 2008-10-22 10:30:53 -0700, "(PeteCresswell)" said:

Can anybody recommend something for photographing animals?

The main problem seems tb that the animal will look this way and
that - faster than one can click the shutter.

I'm thinking burst mode...

Professional wildlife photographers use DSLRs, often in burst mode.

Not all of them do, and none of them that I know personally do. The ones I know
need to travel as light as possible to get into those remote areas where the
animals live. DSLRs are reserved for those who like to take snapshots at their
local zoo or when they step out of the car while on a canned tourist-trap
adventure. When together and challenging each other we often use the fact that
they had to use burst mode as a way to tease them for not being a very good
photographer. If you can't predict when to take that shot and get it in one
shot, you're a lowly amateur. At least amongst the pros that I shoot with. Your
pros must not be as experienced nor talented.

Now that's funny! Hilarious as a matter of fact.

Look, there's so much information out there, there's no reason for
anyone to ask the so-called experts with their own agendas on a
newsgroup. If you want to know what professional wildlife
photographers really use, just google "wildlife photographer". You'll
get the websites of a lot of good ones, from National Geographic pros
to guys with quite a few books published.

You'll find on many of their sites a page of what equipment they use.
You'll also find links to magazine interviews and/or books on wildlife
photography with suggestions on what kind of equipment to use.

Google is your friend.

Steve

Without their corporate sponsored agendas, right? The equipment sponsors and
publishing houses that keep food on their tables.

:-)

Sigh ... more useless net morons whose only brush with reality is Googling for
it.

Bet you wish that you were good enough to get a sponsor.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 07:03:23 -0700, C J Campbell
wrote:

On 2008-10-28 13:33:37 -0700, G.Adams said:

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 08:55:08 -0700, C J Campbell
wrote:

On 2008-10-22 10:30:53 -0700, "(PeteCresswell)" said:

Can anybody recommend something for photographing animals?

The main problem seems tb that the animal will look this way and
that - faster than one can click the shutter.

I'm thinking burst mode...

Professional wildlife photographers use DSLRs, often in burst mode.

Not all of them do, and none of them that I know personally do.

You don't know any professional wildlife photographers. No one cares
what you think. I defy you to name even one professional photographer
who makes his primary living shooting wildlife who uses a point and
shoot as his primary camera. Also, show me the major magazines that
publish photos mostly taken with point and shoots. In fact, show me the
major wildlife photography magazines that show even 5% of their photos
taken with point and shoots. Show me *any* photos published in National
Geographic, Currents, or even Outdoor Photography that were taken with
point and shoots. Show me even one photographer licensed to photograph
in Denali who primarily uses a point and shoot.

You have been challenged to do this before. You can't do it. You don't
know any professional photographers. You are not a professional
photographer.

As I said, check out what the pros really use. I recommend you start
with Joe McNally, Moose Peterson, and Thom Hogan. These are well-known
professionals who regularly publish in Life, National Geographic and
nature and outdoor photography magazines.

What? And finally shut you up and stop you from revealing your ignorance?

Psssst. Here's a clue for you. Not all professional wildlife photographers
pander to the lowly magazine door-to-door-trade subscriptions. Some of us only
offer our works where they stand on their own in our own studios, and are hired
when the rest just can't cut it for important projects.

Is that the extent of your photography experience and exposure to the
photography trade? Magazines?? (I bet that's your only exposure to women too.)
Where images need to be printed no larger than 9"x14" (destroyed by the gutter)
on a 2-page spread in the larger format popularity-contest rags. More often only
7"x5" prints in your beloved NG rags. LOL!!! Those photographers would do better
posting their images on webpages as thumbnails.

Go ahead, reveal some more of your "experience" and who you base your
"excellence" on. RAG PHOTOGRAPHERS!! LOL!!!