for certain types of action, you don't have to shoot quick bursts, but is
that a reflection of knowing the camera's limits and not trying to exceed
them, or because you simply aren't interested? i can imagine a picture
sequence of spawning salmon leaping a waterfall where you might want to
capture a leap and a failure from beginning to end. one picture in the
middle isn't the same impact as 10 or 15 in a row. think of WR's posted
sample of an adult bald eagle attacking and snatching a fish from a
juvenile. one image might catch the peak of the action, but a sequence can
be more powerful in telling a story.
Herb....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kenneth Waller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 9:49 AM
Subject: Re: SV: Any reason not to buy a *istD?
I shot similar moving sequences of caribou, moose, bear, beaver &
ptarmigan during my last trip to Denali in 04 and IIRC the buffer was only
a very few times an issue.
I may be more selective in what I shoot.
