Comparing landscape and wildlife photography

I enjoy both nature/landscape photography and wildlife photography. I was thinking about this recently and it occurred to me that these can be quite different from an equipment, skills, and approach perspective.

Lake Jesup flood waters after Tropical Storm Fay
Landscape: Lake Jesup flood waters after Tropical Storm Fay

Great Blue Heron profileBirding: Great Blue Heron profile

Here are some of the things I think are different about the two:

Landscapes Birding / Wildlife
The quality of light is important (e.g. “Golden hour”). The amount of light isn’t too important: You can make long exposures from your tripod. The amount of light is important. You need lots of light to get your shutter speed up.
You need to know the location, and figure out sun timing and position.  May still be hit or miss depending on the weather. You need to know about the animal and its habits, and where you might find them.  May still be hit or miss depending on the animals (and maybe the weather).
1. Composition, 2. Exposure, 3. Focus 1. Focus, 2. Exposure, 3. Composition
Probably better by yourself:   Your location, your vision. Can be better in groups.  Many eyes can help spot things one person will miss.
Good tripod with good ball head.  Wide angle lens, small aperture for greater depth of field, long exposure.  Frame rate not too important. Very long lens, large aperture for a fast shutter speed. High frame rate body.  Maybe a tripod with a gimbal head.
Not as expensive Can be very expensive
HDR no HDR

Have I missed anything?  What else is different about these two types of photography?

Thanks for stopping by and reading my blog. Now – go make some photos!
©2011, Ed Rosack. All rights reserved

 

I'd love to hear from you, please leave a reply!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.