I have been taking pictures of birds from a distance, using a camera with high optical zoom. I’ve noticed that my photos don’t look great, it appears blurry and grainy, and yet I don’t think it’s either motion blur or high-ISO induced noise. For example, here is my picture of a kestrel: https://www…

[image] y_liu_math: The second photo looks a lot sharper. There’s lots of technical information for both photos, but which ones are the most important? Focal length of the lens likely contributes more than anything if your image is cropped. Looks like you’re using a point-and-shoot camera whi…

[image] swampster: Looks like you’re using a point-and-shoot camera which just can’t compete with the mirrorless interchangeable-lens camera used to take the other photo (even my DSLR can’t compete with a mirrorless). Thanks, do you mind elaborating on why that might be the case? What makes m…

[image] y_liu_math: If you look at the original size of both photos, the bird takes up about the same number of pixels, I’m not exactly sure what you mean here. Your image is 808 x 808 pixels. The other image is 2560 x 1707 pixels. [image] y_liu_math: Not sure what I can do about that si…

A lot of the answers to your questions will depend on the specific camera and settings you are using. I would recommend finding a target (stationary) that mimics the distance and conditions (handheld vs. tripod, light level, etc.) you normally shoot in, and then systematically varying your settings …

I know a number of birders who carry monopods. I tried using one a couple of years ago for dragonflies. I also have a hiking staff with a camera thread on top. It’s worth the effort especially if you use a quick-release attachment. I suppose you could even get a ballhead. Now, you can’t always use o…

[image] swampster: I’m not exactly sure what you mean here. Your image is 808 x 808 pixels. The other image is 2560 x 1707 pixels. Here I meant the bird takes about the same amount of pixels - especially if you just look at the head of the bird. The other image has more pixels but much of it …

[image] y_liu_math: grainy your camera has a relatively small 1/2.3in. sensor. that’s going to be your main limiting factor for getting really sharp images. (your comparison image comes from a camera that has a full-frame sensor, which has 30+ times the surface area as your sensor.) [ima…

What matters most is whether your photo is clear enough to distinguish your organism from similar species, for identification purposes. Some species can clearly be identified even from a slightly blurred photo, which seems to be the case with yours. It’s okay for iNat purposes to not have professio…

The reciprocal rule in photography suggests that to avoid camera shake and achieve a sharp photo when handholding a camera, the shutter speed should be at least the reciprocal of the effective focal length of the lens. This means if you’re using a lens (or a camera with a fixed lens) with a 35mm equ…

[image] alfamax: minimize the risk of blur from hand shake seems like hand shake would be influenced by all sorts of factors like stabilization and technique. there might be some blurriness from hand shake in the photo, but i’m guessing the blurriness issue the original poster probably cares …

How to take better photos at a distance

Nature Talk

Topic		Replies	Views
Bird photos with Panasonic FZ1000? Nature Talk photography	11	2202	April 7, 2024
How to get great shots? Nature Talk	62	4187	June 14, 2021
Any Suggestions for a New Camera? Nature Talk question , gear , photography	75	1764	June 8, 2026
Tips for photographing birds? Nature Talk	20	2419	December 6, 2021
Beginner-friendly camera for bird photography Nature Talk question , gear , photography	26	1552	November 23, 2025

How to take better photos at a distance

Related topics