Are Digital cameras useless?

[Kenyatta1993]

For the last 4 years i have been very content with taking blurry pictures of wildlife from a distance as i could just use binoculars to get the best view, but i want to start to be able to take photography seriously, and i do not have a DSLR... i keep going on wonderful nature trails, but the only good pictures i can get are of trees & flowers (not saying this is bad most are lovely) but i would like to get more 'scope' to photography birds etc.
Is there anyone who could recommend a cheaper DSLR and if there is any other WABers who use digital cameras would like to know your thoughts.

[Jason Green]

I'll have to suggest my good-ol' faithful Fuji S5600 Zoom prosumer. I bought it for £112 back in Dec 2007, most likely cheaper now - and well-used each week ever since. I'm onto my 30,000+ photo...

[Kenyatta1993]

Originally Posted by Jason Green

I'll have to suggest my good-ol' faithful Fuji S5600 Zoom prosumer. I bought it for £112 back in Dec 2007, most likely cheaper now - and well-used each week ever since. I'm onto my 30,000+ photo...

is it possible you would be able to send me or paste a few pictures ?
and thanks for the quick reply, much appreciated

[Lancashire Lad]

Originally Posted by Kenyatta1993

...Is there anyone who could recommend a cheaper DSLR and if there is any other WABers who use digital cameras would like to know your thoughts.

Hi kenyatta1993,

I think your question might better have been "Are there any WABbers who aren't using digital cameras"

Have a look in WAB's galleries, and you will see hundreds of superb images, and by far the biggest percentage will have been taken with digital cameras. (There are probably a few scanned images from film & transparencies as well).

There is absolutely no doubt, digital cameras are enabling many more people to take fantastic photographs. - Wildlife, architecture, landscape, portrait, or whatever.

Have a read of these recent threads for just the tip of the iceberg relating to suitable digital cameras: -

What SLR for wildlife photography?
The Final Choice

I will repeat what I've said before, and will no doubt say many more times again.

Unless you are absolutely certain of your photographic future, get yourself a good "Bridge" camera. You will be able to learn all the necessary techniques of manual control, aperture, & shutter priority, etc. etc.

With a bridge camera you can get out there shooting great images with a stand alone unit, and such a camera will give you most of what a DSLR system can do at a fraction of the overall cost.

A DSLR will require substantial additional investment in the lenses that will also be needed, as without those lenses, your wildlife photography would be severely restricted.

Regards
Mike.

[Jason Green]

Originally Posted by Kenyatta1993

is it possible you would be able to send me or paste a few pictures ?
and thanks for the quick reply, much appreciated

Pleasure!

I take it you mean sample photos as opposed to views of the camera's body? Anyway, see my WAB Gallery...

Jason Green Gallery - Wildlife Photography

...but remember those taken during 2009 are made using a seperate lens attachment, so not a true replica of it's abilities! Most are taken beforehand, from late 2007-2008.

[Lancashire Lad]

Also have a look in these galleries: -

squishy Gallery - Wild About Britain Pics - squishy uses a Fuji S9600 bridge camera.

snake Gallery - Wild About Britain Pics - snake uses a Fuji S100FS bridge camera.

Regards
Mike.

[Jason Green]

Originally Posted by Lancashire Lad

Also have a look in these galleries: -

squishy Gallery - Wild About Britain Pics - squishy uses a Fuji S9600 bridge camera.

snake Gallery - Wild About Britain Pics - snake uses a Fuji S100FS bridge camera.

Regards
Mike.

Good thinking Mike

I don't know about Snake, but Adam (Squishy with the S9600) uses an add-on like me for his invertebrates... a Raynox DCR-250 since about January this year. I thought I'd better just add that bit in case, like I did, you think the camera is able to get in that close straight out-the-box...

[The Woodman]

I subscribe to this blog and have had some helpful advice re equipment choices etc.

Home | PhotographyBLOG

There's some good reviews and favourites listed.

[DZ]

I have seen amazing photos taken with a £70 digital camera and cr*p taken with a £4000 set up.

I was tought that you can always get the shot, you just have to think it out.

No long expensive lens? well build a hide and wait, get the birds used to you, then they will come sit in front of you. What a reward.

Replacing money with time is an old art we could all do with learning.

Dont ask what your camera can do for you, its what you can do for your camera

Think of all the famous photos of the past, the girl at hiroshima, twin towers maybe. They are all low quality by todays standards but thats not the point.

Blur can be a good thing, just learn how to use it. Dont go made with spending lots of money. start small and grow into the bigger stuff.

I make my living from photography but just love getting my canon a1 old film camera out and having good honest no bells or whistles .... fun .... it pushes me to think.

[nightshade]

I took photos for years with a Pentax Spotmatic film camera and a standard 50mm lense, (reversed for close-ups), best accessory? a tripod and a pair of feet to get you close
The bridge cameras used by people on this site produce excellent results and Canon and Nikon DSLR's change models so frequently there are good s/h models to be found, buy a body and a lens to suit what you want to do with it to your own budget