Tools of the Trade : The Camera

So, you want to get into nature photography. What equipment, you ask, do I need to get started?

This isn't the easiest question to answer... mainly because there are so many elements to nature photography and most are specialized in terms of the equipment you need. Landscape photographers want wide angle, macro photographers need a close focusing distance, and wildlife photography always needs a longer lens than you currently own. But there are certain tools that bridge all the gaps... like, say, a camera, so let's start there.

Camera

The most essential tool, of course, is the camera. There are good cameras and there are bad cameras, but a good photographer will usually be able to take good pictures with a bad camera, just not as good as they'd have taken with better cameras. A bad photographer, on the other hand, will still be a bad photographer even with the best camera on the market. It's like any sort of art, really. Bad equipment limits you if your good. Good equipment doesn't help you if you're bad.

So, what cameras are good and what are bad? That's not an easy question either. Let's talk about the different types of cameras out there. I'm sticking with digital here, since that's probably what most folks will use. There's a good debate to be had in film vs digital, but I think I'll save that for another post.


Point and Shoot: It's becoming harder and harder for a DSLR shooter to scoff at little point and shoots. The point and shoot is becoming more and more powerful, with better lenses, better controls, and better quality. They're not as good as an DSLR, don't pretend that they are. But some are pretty damn close. In the end, there are lens limitations, sensor limitations, and control limitations that will prevent you from having fine tuned control over your shots. This isn't a problem when you're getting started and still learning how to compose a good shot, but if you're serious, you're eventually want more control over the details.

To me the weakest point now for P&S's is the lack of the viewfinder on most. Having to compose through the LCD means that not only are you removing a third point of contact with the camera (having it against your eye makes it more stable with less shake), but actually requires you hold the camera out away from your body with your arms outstretched in order to see the LCD. This means your in about the worst possible position for holding a camera steady.


SLR-Like Point and Shoots:  These are really a sub-category of P&S, but I think they deserve their own category. In some cases I've heard of people calling them fixed-lens SLRs. Generally they offer a great deal of flexibility and options you get with a DSLR, but still have a fixed lens on the camera. Typically you'll get cameras that offer manual controls of aperture and shutter speed. Most have viewfinders but also offer the option to use the LCD.

EVIL Cameras: No, I did not make up that acronym. EVIL stands for Electronic Viewfinders Interchangable Lens. No idea who thought that one up. Some people call them SLR-like cameras. Some people call them Mirrorless SLRs. Up to the introduction of the Sony NEX cameras which used an APS sized sensor, we generally refered to them as a Micro 4/3 cameras, since they were marketed by Panosonic and Olympus with the micro-4/3 lenses. With the newer models using different sensors and different lens mounts, the need for a new name arose. It's still working itself out, but so far EVIL seems to be winning.

The first EVIL cameras started with the micro-4/3 mount. They used the existing 4/3 sensor, but the mirror and pentaprism were removed, allowing the lenses and camera to be designed much smaller. The lack of a pentaprism and mirror mean that there is no through the lens view via the viewfinder, and the information from the lens is transmitted electronically, either to the rear LCD or through an electronic viewfinder (typically an attachment). The newcomer in this field is Sony, which boasts a larger APS sized sensor instead of 4/3. Sony, however, does NOT have any electronic viewfinder attachment. It has a 16mm optical viewfinder attachment, that is only compatible with the 16mm lens. If you want to see what your sensor is seeing, you need to use the LCD. As you might guess from comments I said earlier, I consider this a very bad handicap.

For the most part cameras offer nearly all the features of a full size DSLR in a compact package.

DSLR:  Digital Single Lens Reflex cameras are by far the king of cameras, and should be. In general, they offer better image quality, better controls, better auto focus, than any compact cameras. If you really want to learn photography, and not just take pictures, I'd say get a DSLR. If you want me to recommend a type of camera for you, this is it. If you're serious you'll either end up here or with the EVIL cameras mentioned above. Because honestly, your camera isn't half as important as your glass, and without the ability to switch lenses, your camera IS your glass and that's its own handicap.


There's a lot of different brands, lots of different sensors. Don't let anyone tell you one brand is better than the others. If someone tells you Nikon is the best and you only should shoot Nikon, ask them to tell you why. And if they can't give you physical specs of why Nikons are better than Canons or Sonys or Olympus, ignore them. If you want to argue about the value of a APS-C size sensor over a 4/3 sensor (or the reverse), that's a valid argument. If you want to argue about how one brands in camera processing does something you like or don't like that another brand doesn't do, that's valid too. Nikon vs Canon noise control is a BIG valid argument. But Canons are great because lots of people use them is a stupid argument and should really be ignored.

Nearly every brand offers something different. Nearly any of them will be acceptable after you learn to use it. But remember this is probably a long term investment. Once you buy Canon, and start buying lenses and accessories compatible with Canon, you're sort of locked in unless you really want to make a big investment.

If you buy one brand because its cheaper, there's nothing wrong with that (I started shooting Canon because I wanted to move from film to digital and Minolta's DSLRs were well out of my price range, so I bought a D-Rebel instead and made the switch to Canon). Just remember that this is your new long term brand.

Perhaps the most important thing to consider is sensors size, IMHO, so here's a quick run down...

4/3: The Four/Thirds sensor is the smallest sensor you'll find in a DSLR. It's used by brands like Panasonic, Sigma, and Olympus. One of the biggest advantages of 4/3 systems is that the lenses that 4/3 lenses (not micro 4/3 though) fit all 4/3 cameras, regardless of brand. The other advantages of the small sensor is the 2x crop factor (for an overly simplified explanation of crop factor, a lens that gives you 50mm field of view on a 35mm camera will give you a 100mm field of view on a 4/3 sensor), and the fact that the cameras tend to be lighter weight and smaller. Disadvantages are smaller picture resolution and quality, and smaller pixels on the sensor. Oh, and you have a 2x crop factor. I know, this was also an advantage... which it is if you're shooting long and want longer lenses. If you'd rather get some really wide angle shots, you're generally fairly limited.


APS: There are actually two sizes of APS sensors. Well, actually more since there's a difference in size between Canon APS-C and Pentax/Nikon/Sony APS-C. It's slight but the Canon APS-C is a bit smaller. The crop factor on an Canon with a APS-C sensor is 1.6. For the other brands, its 1.5. APS-H is larger and has a 1.3x crop factor. Basically same advantages and disadvantages apply. They have better resolution and larger pixels as the sensor gets larger. Crop factor goes down as the the sensor gets bigger.

Full Frame: A full frame sensor gives the same coverage as 35mm film. It's much larger and thus often has a lot more pixels and a lot more resolution. New full frame cameras have a ridiculous 22mp sensors. You can crop shots 50% without losing quality. There's no crop factor, so if you want to shoot wider these are better cameras. They're also the most expensive, so be prepared to surrender your wallet.

I can't really tell you what to get or whats a great nature photography camera. If you can, I recommend a DSLR or an EVIL over a P&S. You'll get more mileage out of one if you really want to be serious about shooting. If you're curious about sensor sizes, a crop sensor is probably going to work for you for wildlife, but if you can afford it, a full frame will serve you better for landscape.