Wildlife Photographer of the Year

[drmarkf]

This has been on a while and I only got round to seeing it a few days ago with my daughter, but I thought it worth raising a few points. It's been on at the Natural History Museum in Sth Kensington since October 2018, and runs until the end of June.

https://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit/exhibitions/wildlife-photographer-of-the-year.html

[Phill D]

Re: Wildlife Photographer of the Year

Interesting analysis Mark. I always did like my little Lumix TZ1 it performed superbly well above it's weight. Not been used for ages though, maybe it's time to dig it out. Perhaps we ought to have our own wildlife challenge, just using our old gear?

[drmarkf]

Re: Wildlife Photographer of the Year

I see literally thousands of pictures each year in competitions, many of them are as good as the ones in the WPOTY. It’s very rare that I get to know what camera took the image, but occasionally someone will tell me, especially if they have just changed to a new system or Olympus (knowing that I use Olympus kit)

The fact that there is nothing of the original sensor data on display in digital images and there is every likelihood that post processing has been used, I cannot help but wonder why the kit information is given such credibility and the post processing given none.

At least with film, especially slides, there is a direct link between the kit and the images produced and the information had more relevance.

Yes, that's correct Graham, although I started noting these details around 5 years ago and I find the information very useful as a reality check. This is not for the individual image, but most of us here live in a little mirrorless bubble and I find it useful to be reminded that way most of the reasonably serious photography world still uses DSLRs.

It also reminds me that all the on-going developments in camera and lens technology, and the vast sums people spend on them, and the huge weights of gear humped around the world, and the hours and hours spent obsessing over gear on fora such as dpreview, are largely peripheral fluff when measured against the abilities of any kit in good hands to deliver a winning image.

The other personal note I make at the Landscape Photographer of the World show is how many images were taken wider than around f5.6: usually none or just a tiny handful. So there's a huge weight and expense of f2.8 glass unnecessarily being hefted up and down the world's mountains! This is particularly so now Canon, Nikon and others are at last producing superb quality f4 zooms that are much smaller and lighter.

[Graham_of_Rainham]

Re: Wildlife Photographer of the Year

The other personal note I make at the Landscape Photographer of the World show is how many images were taken wider than around f5.6: usually none or just a tiny handful. So there's a huge weight and expense of f2.8 glass unnecessarily being hefted up and down the world's mountains! This is particularly so now Canon, Nikon and others are at last producing superb quality f4 zooms that are much smaller and lighter.

[drmarkf]

Just been to the latest edition of this at the Natural History Museum.

https://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit/wpy.html

Excellent as ever IMHO, and plenty of more ‘artistic’ images, and those illustrating interesting behaviour. Recommended to anyone with even a passing interest in wildlife photography.

My brief annual analysis of some of the gear used I see is missing from the thread above, but this time I roughly noted, of the 100 images:

More mirrorless shots this year - around a dozen taken with Sony A7 series (mostly RIII or RIV bodies), 4 DJI drone shots, 2 point-and-shoots, and exactly one m4/3 (a Panny G9 with Leica 12-60mm).

[Ian]

There really isn't any excuse for an Oly user not to break into this - M43 is absolutely ideal for trekking around the wilderness and capturing images of wildlife at quite long distances.

Ian

[drmarkf]

There really isn't any excuse for an Oly user not to break into this - M43 is absolutely ideal for trekking around the wilderness and capturing images of wildlife at quite long distances.

Ian

Yes, exactly.
There’s a lot of ‘drag’ in the market, with many pro wildlife photographers heavily invested in Canon and Nikon, of course, and they bring home the bacon and have proven toughness.

The rise of Sony shows the Full Frame Mafia’s marketing impact: but why anyone would risk an A7 body in wet and freezing remote environments beats me. The RIV has now got better water resistance, I suppose, but all earlier models are suspect.

Incidentally, the Canon 7D mkii featured quite often, so since the image quality, dynamic range, noise & high ISO performance and environmental toughness of that is beaten by the E-M1ii and the 1X (and probably by offerings from Panasonic), there’s certainly no reason to suppose m4/3 doesn’t have adequate image performance to do very well in the competition.

[Ian]

Yes, exactly.
There’s a lot of ‘drag’ in the market, with many pro wildlife photographers heavily invested in Canon and Nikon, of course, and they bring home the bacon and have proven toughness.

The rise of Sony shows the Full Frame Mafia’s marketing impact: but why anyone would risk an A7 body in wet and freezing remote environments beats me. The RIV has now got better water resistance, I suppose, but all earlier models are suspect.

Incidentally, the Canon 7D mkii featured quite often, so since the image quality, dynamic range, noise & high ISO performance and environmental toughness of that is beaten by the E-M1ii and the 1X (and probably by offerings from Panasonic), there’s certainly no reason to suppose m4/3 doesn’t have adequate image performance to do very well in the competition.

The Canon 7D range has always had exceptional AF, it has to be said. However full frame like the A7 is much more difficult to understand with their huge and heavy lenses.

Ian