Readers’ wildlife photos

October 27, 2014 • 7:59 am

Okay, I’m back and there are no wildlife photos in the queue, so go ahead and inundate me.  But remember, I want good photos, not blurry pictures of some rodent in the distance.  Today we have an experiment in long-distance photography by reader John Scanlon:

it was an interesting experiment. The only camera I use these days is my iPhone, which I use to document fauna and habitat during fieldwork. There are obvious limitations, but it’s so convenient.

The other day, in the suburbs of Perth (Western Australia), I got a good look at this immature Black-shouldered Kite (Elanus axillaris) who was calling constantly, sometimes harassed by Australian Magpies (Cracticus tibicen) or a Nankeen Kestrel (Falco cenchroides) while waiting around for a parent that came back briefly from foraging a couple of times in an hour. The best the phone camera alone could do was barely adequate for identification (first picture), so (just before the battery ran out) I tried lining it up with the eyepiece of my Zeiß 8×30 binoculars. Fiddly to take a shot this way, but it could make the difference between an OK shot and nothing at all.

IMG_2603

IMG_2604

IMG_2604[1]

 

And here’s a photo of this magnificent bird, which I knew nothing about, from Wikipedia. Satanic red eyes!

1024px-Elanus_axillaris_-Royal_Botanic_Gardens,_Cranbourne,_Melbourne,_Victoria,_Australia-8

17 thoughts on “Readers’ wildlife photos”

  2. I saw one on a recent trip to Australia. They’re closely related to and almost identical in appearance and behavior to the white-tailed kite found in the U.S. There was a time in the mid-20th Century when they were lumped.

  3. “not blurry pictures of some rodent in the distance” ~~~ I wonder if I should send you a black squirrel picture I got in my neighbor hood. 🙂

  4. That is interesting that you can use binoculars as an impromptu telephoto lens. Students are always using their phones to take pictures through microscopes in teaching labs, and some of them are not bad!
    You can buy clip on lenses for the iphone, and i think that includes telephoto clip on lenses. They are not expensive, and I suppose would be worth looking into.

    1. I was going to suggest the same thing. Though it has to be said the there’s a country mile between carefully thought-out and implemented microphotography and the usual lash-up by eyepiece projection that I get asked to do at 03:00 on Sunday morning.
      But, it’s better than nothing.

    2. I did try a cheap clip-on telescopic lens a couple of years ago (rather, one that screws onto a hard plastic phone cover), but the optics were not impressive (with a very small central area of adequately non-aberrated image) and the case and lens housing both cracked during fieldwork before I got any results worth mentioning. I would spend just a little more next time, if I decide to go that route again.

  6. A good choice for documenting fieldwork would be one of the many “bridge” cameras that span the gap between point-and-shoots and DSLRs. They’re pretty much useless for birds in flight, but they have enormous zoom ranges, are very light, and not expensive. I have a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 that I don’t use much but sometimes it comes in handy.

    1. That means something different in EN_GB. “kecks” are, I think, “shorts” in EN_US.

      1. Didn’t know that. But people would really think you’re especially happy if you popped up with the Keck in your shorts. Talk about a stand-up salute!

        b&

  8. Mature goshawks have red eyes, too; very intense. A falconer friend used to call them the evil-eyed assassins of the dark forest,” which I think is a quote from a poem, but can’t locate it on the web…

  10. Cool bird and nice job with the photos, John! I-phone digiscoping is quite the rage now–been meaning to try it myself. I’d be thrilled with results like yours.

Comments are closed.