I love nature photography.!! Its so enjoyable. It can lift my mood and make me feel good. Being outside in the fresh air and being surrounded by nature is another reason why I love nature photography.
Well, I am going to upgrade my camera. Please suggest me some digital cameras for nature photography.
Thanks in Advance.
Nature photography covers a lot of range. However, the camera body won't make a great deal of difference unless you're shooting a niche like say Big Horn Sheep locking horns, and even then pretty-much any body will work in skilled hands. If you like landscapes, then it can be a relatively cheap hobby- any camera, any kit lens and you're good. If you want to take dramatic shots when the weather isn't good, a camera rain cover can do wonders cheaply (I like the Fotosharp digital camo ones.)
However, if you're trying to shoot birds, predators or large animals that don't allow close approach, then you're looking at spending thousands of dollars on a good lens. Wildlife is most active at the start and finish of each day when the light is low, or under cover where the light is low, and good wildlife photos isolate the subject more often than not- so you're looking at 300, 400, 500 or 600mm primes for the ultimate shots- you can "cheap out" with a Sigma 50-500 (or one of the other Sigma n-400 or n-500's,) Nikon 80-400 or Canon 100-400 or 400/5.6, or anyone's 300/4 but they're only going to get you good shots in relatively bright light, and you're looking at ~900-1200 for any of those options new.
300mm is enough if you use a blind, bait, can stalk effectively or shoot where wildlife is used to close approach by humans. 500mm or 600mm make for better shots of small warblers and animals which don't like close approach, however I prefer a 400mm f/2.8 since I can shoot in half the light of the 500 and 600mm primes, or add a 1.4x TC and be only 40mm off a 600mm prime at the same aperture- I'm not a big fan of baiting or sitting around in hides all day.
If you have the glass for low-light shots, then you can get away with a higher resolution body and not give up some noise and have excellent crop options.
In Nikon, I'd probably go with a D300 and 400/2.8VR or 500/4P with a large Gitzo series 5 tripod and a Wimberly mark II head and Wimberly replacement foot and teleconverters TC-14EII and TC-17EII. In Canon, a 1DmkIII with the 400/2.8L, same tripod and head and their 1.4x TC. In either case, a LowePro LensTrekker 600AW is probably still the bag of choice. If you can't carry large loads, then Nikon's 200-400VR is a good alternative that gives up a stop of light, or Canon's 400/5.6 which gives up two stops.
Wildlife is one place where the "also ran" companies don't offer a lot of fast super-telephoto lens options and where the used lens market sucks if you're not shooting Nikon or Canon. A crop isn't magnification, and noise in low light is an issue, and you may eventually find that you like the option of a "Full frame" body for landscapes and "environmental portraits" of wildlife, again pretty-much confining your options to Canon or Nikon.
Canon tends to be cheaper than Nikon for super-telephoto lenses, and lens rental may be an option to start with.
My current field kit: Nikon D2x, Gitzo 1548, Wimberly II, Nikon 400mm f/2.8 AF-S II (second outer lens hood always left at home,) Wimberly replacement foot, Kirk leveling base (not really ideal, the 400 is obviously at the limit of its weight range,) Kirk L bracket, TC-14EII, TC-17EII, SB-800, LowePro LensTrekker 600AW, 35-70mm f/2.8 AF-D and either the Nikon 20-35mm f/2.8 AF-D or a Sigma 10-20mm, a small LightDisk, and a Fotosharp rain cover that fits the 400.
Another poster mentions a D3 with a 500- that would be a poor choice, you'd be better off with a higher-density APS-C sensor with a super-tele in terms of cropping options for usable results.
