Of long shots and backlighting

,

I REALLY need to refrain from taking shots of objects/subjects a mile away with my relatively short lens... This Black-thighed Falconet was sitting on a dead branch so far away, I should have known better than to waste time shooting it. It's not as if I was desperate for a shot! Saja mengada-ngada.

 This yellow vented bulbul was sitting on a stick in clear view. But it was the middle of the day and the lighting was not THAT great. Le sigh. Try again next time...

Another futile attempt. The bird was sitting on top of the apartment roof. Should just wait for it to come down!

Sometimes, just SOMETIMES, images are fixable. But they're still blurry and grainy. Obviously I need a 600mm lens to do this job right. A 300mm is good enough for birds at close range, but if your eagle is a mile up in the air, just forget about it. 

Hmm... bila la pakcik tu nak let go of his 600mm zoom lens. Kalau setakat amek gambar KLCC, tak payah ler beli lens mahal mahal. Sedekah la kat orang2 yg memerlukan macam saya ni. 

But sometimes, it does help with ID. Operating as a scientist who is more keen to identify various flora and fauna, photos don't need to be at NatGeo level all the time. Sometimes even silhouettes and grainy photos can help. Case in point, my swallow photos.

Obviously, trying to shoot speeding swallows in flight in very low light is a dumb idea. But thanks to the terrible photos, I realised why the swallows looked bigger and different. Because they ARE different. The photo on top showed a forked tail - typical of barn swallows, Hirundo rustica. While the bottom is quite obviously the more common Pacific swallow (Hirundo tahitica) at rest. You can always get creative and colour them or something. If you really have nothing better to do. Heh.