Bokeh (from the Japanese blur or haze) refers to the aesthetic quality of the out-of-focus areas in a photograph. It’s not about how blurred the background is (that’s simply “shallow depth of field”) but rather how that blur looks — whether it’s smooth and pleasing or harsh and distracting.
Camera NewB just posted a video exploring this important photography concept in today’s world. I highly recommend checking it out.
One thing is what I think about my pictures, and another thing is what people think of them.
One of the things that inspires me about wildlife photography is that, no matter how many times you return to the same location, you never know what you’ll encounter. Even if you’re simply photographing the landscape, the same scene will never look exactly the same.
Click on the picture to truly appreciate the details of this landscape. It was a beautiful morning, and although I’ve captured this view many times before, none compare to this one, with the fog gently draping part of the scene.
The next picture is a vertical panorama. I walked into a scene that truly stunned me with its beauty. I had to step back to find the right spot for the composition I envisioned. Knowing my zoom lens—designed for wildlife—wouldn’t capture the entire view in a single frame, I decided to take several shots along the vertical axis to capture the full landscape.
Is not it beautiful?
Many assume that a photographer’s work ends the moment the shutter is released. While this may hold true in a studio setting—where conditions are carefully controlled, and images are often captured exactly as intended—in uncontrolled environments the situation is quite different. Once the shooting concludes, the extensive process of editing and post-production begins. If you think you can get a clean, noise-free, perfectly colored picture straight out of the camera, think again—especially at Karate events, which often take place in poorly lit venues rather than well-illuminated professional arenas.
Another important point to consider is that in this business, rushing is your greatest enemy.
I spent some time adjusting this picture of our grandson, taken at the USA Sport Karate, Mayan Challenge Competition in Clearwater, Florida.
Our grandsons don’t pose for me. Since they were born, they’ve been used to their paparazzo Abuelo running around with a camera. From time to time, they look at me—probably just to see what I’m doing—like in the picture above. The smile you see there is genuine; I couldn’t replicate it if I asked them, or any child, to pose and smile.
After finishing the editing, I still felt this picture had potential if the background were different. That’s when an AI tool helped me in my creative process.
Here is the end result.
There are many AI tools available online that can do this kind of editing work. Most of them offer a free trial; after that, you need to pay for a subscription based on a credit system, where credits are consumed, and you must purchase more once you reach your monthly quota.
I’ve read many articles and opinions about photographers using AI tools, with some even being labeled as “cheaters.” I don’t see it that way—unless the image is being created entirely from scratch. In this case, everything begins with a real boy, in a real setting, captured through a genuine photographic process. The editing, supported by AI, simply enhances the image to reflect the photographer’s artistic vision. To me, there is nothing “cheating” about this creative process.
It all started with your RAW image and ended with your image still.
P.S. If anyone is willing to fund a trip to a location in Japan for me to take a picture like this—including handling the numerous permits, fees and other paperwork required to shoot in a sacred location using flash—please let me know.
Every day you learn something new. Here’s a story I read on PetaPixel: A photographer is hired to shoot a wedding. She is paid before the wedding upon the signing of a contract, where both parties agree to this condition. In the contract, the photographer specifies that the turnaround time is three months, keep in mind that for weddings this amount of time is not unusual. She delivers a preview of about 100–200 photos and continues working on the final product. However, one month after the wedding, the bride files for divorce and asks the photographer for a refund on the basis that he no longer needs the final product.
I do not know if in the contract the photographer mentioned anything about refunds. I for example have these two points included:
- Do you require a deposit?
Yes. A non-refundable deposit is required to reserve your date and time. The remaining balance is due on or before the day of the shoot. Payments can be done via Zelle or PayPal.
-What if I’m not satisfied with my photos?
My goal is always your satisfaction. While refunds aren’t possible after a session, I will gladly work with you to make adjustments through editing—or even schedule a reshoot when appropriate.
But this scenario is different. It’s not that the bride is dissatisfied with the final product—which hasn’t even been delivered yet. Rather, it’s a case of someone saying they don’t want the final product at all.
What is my opinion in this case?
In this case, the bride is not entitled to a refund.
Here’s why, in neutral and straightforward terms:
The contract was fulfilled on the photographer’s side. The agreement stated payment upfront, a three-month turnaround, and the photographer had already worked the wedding day and delivered previews.
The product/service was provided. The photographer spent time, effort, and resources covering the event. The fact that the marriage ended shortly after does not undo the fact that the service was performed.
Client’s change of circumstances is not the photographer’s responsibility. A divorce (or simply not wanting the photos anymore) is unrelated to whether the photographer upheld her part of the agreement.
So unless the contract explicitly includes a clause for refunds in the event of a divorce or change of mind (which is highly unlikely), the photographer is within her rights to keep the payment.
I recently watched this video from April Clayton aka Camera Newb who was talking about her journey to became a Professional Photographer.
I thought that buying a full frame camera was the key to becoming a professional photographer, but I may have been wrong.
Unfortunately, photography today isn’t just about mastering your main tool—the camera—at least not anymore. As a profession, it has evolved into a field where roughly 60% of the work is marketing, 20% is post-editing, and only about 20% is actually taking pictures. And please, don’t confuse online exposure with “marketing.” From my own experience, you can gain plenty of exposure, but if it’s with the wrong audience, it won’t lead to being hired. Plain and simple. Photography is one of the toughest professions to market.
That's basically the Conclusion of this article recently published by FStoppers.
The camera industry thrives on spectacle. Every new launch has to sound revolutionary, and the easiest way to do that is with bigger numbers and shinier promises. But in practice, many of those hyped specs do little to improve photography, and some make it worse. Professionals know that what matters isn’t the number on the brochure. It’s the reliability of the tool in the field. At the end of the day, cameras should serve the photographer, not impress shareholders.
I used to shoot with a Sony camera that delivered 46 MP, and I experienced many of the problems described in this article. Now I’m shooting with a Canon R6, a 24 MP camera — and it works perfectly for me.
When I look at karate, I don’t just see a martial art. I see a place where friendships grow stronger than anywhere else.
In the dojo, I’ve watched people of all ages train together. At first, they’re strangers—unsure, maybe even a little nervous. But as the weeks pass, something special happens. The shared sweat, the discipline, the challenge of pushing past limits—those experiences bring people closer. Sparring partners become teammates, and teammates become friends.
What makes karate different is the respect it builds. Every bow, every handshake, every word of encouragement deepens trust. Even in sparring, where intensity is high, there’s no room for malice. Instead, there’s a bond—an understanding that we’re here to help each other grow.
I’ve seen friendships form in karate that last years. Kids who cheer for each other in tournaments, adults who encourage one another through tough times, families that come together around the dojo. These friendships aren’t casual—they’re forged through discipline, respect, and shared effort.
For me, karate is more than training or competition. It’s about the people, the friendships, and the sense of community that stays with you long after class is over. The punches and kicks may fade, but the friendships remain strong.
We got our grandsons some old Fujifilm cameras and they loved them!
Even the 5-year-old mastered the art of switching between shooting photos and videos, pretending to be vlogging—which was funny to watch.
I explained to the 8-year-old the concept of switching the camera’s orientation to better fit vertically oriented objects or figures. He quickly understood the reasoning behind it and immediately began applying the newly learned information.
 |
| Liam and Leo taking pictures of their parents! |
They quickly picked up how to half-press the shutter button to focus before taking a picture—something I honestly thought would be the hardest part for them to grasp. Of course, they were shooting in Auto Mode, but here’s the interesting part: many adults I know never switch their camera out of Auto, either!
The 10-year-old’s and the 8-year-old’s pictures were all in focus, and they quickly deleted any that were blurred or that they simply didn’t like. All three of them ran around looking for interesting things to photograph—and, of course, kept an eye on me to see what I was shooting, often taking pictures of the same subjects.
They’re kids, and of course the cameras felt like new toys to them, but I’m sure they’ll never forget the joy those old cameras gave them. I believe they’ll continue taking photos and videos for the rest of their lives.
One thing is certain: watching them capture moments by my side is a memory I will forever carry in my heart.
Pixel size refers to the physical dimensions of each light-sensitive pixel on a camera’s sensor, usually measured in micrometers (µm). Each pixel collects light (photons) and converts it into electrical signals that form your digital image.
Larger pixels = more surface area to capture light.
Smaller pixels = less light per pixel, but you can fit more of them onto the sensor (higher resolution).
Better Low-Light Performance – Larger pixels gather more light, producing cleaner images with less noise.
Higher Dynamic Range – They can capture more detail in highlights and shadows.
Improved Color Accuracy – Since more photons are collected, colors often look richer and truer.
This is why cameras with larger sensors and fewer megapixels (like full-frame cameras) often outperform small, high-megapixel smartphone sensors in challenging light.
Higher Resolution – More pixels = more detail, allowing for larger prints and tighter cropping.
Compact Sensors – Smartphones and small cameras fit more pixels into a tiny sensor to advertise “high megapixel counts.”
But the trade-off is that smaller pixels can get noisy in low light because each pixel gathers less light.
Pro Cameras (Full-frame, APS-C, Micro Four Thirds): Often strike a balance between pixel size and resolution.
Smartphones: Use very small pixels, but rely on AI/software processing to compensate.
Specialized Cameras: Some low-light cameras prioritize large pixels (lower resolution, but amazing performance in darkness).
👉 Rule of Thumb: Larger pixels are generally “better” for low-light and image quality, but more megapixels (smaller pixels) can be “better” if you need high detail and plan to crop or print big.
Check this video recently released by Simon D'Entremont and you will have a better understanding of everything above-mentioned.
In my opinion, the ideal resolution range for a camera is between 24 megapixels and 35 megapixels. While more megapixels may be beneficial in certain situations, they shouldn’t be the primary factor when choosing a camera.
Tom Northup, a fantastic photographer and influencer, is asking you to stop using the viewfinder and start using the rear screen.
I personally love the viewfinder. Like Tony explains, when you are shooting mostly wildlife or sometimes sports, it's hard to focus using the rear screen. But I see his points. I may give it a try.
It's not about Birds, a Portrait or a Landscape. My most popular photo according to Flickr is...
But why? The rich, vibrant red hues grab attention and evoke strong emotions like passion and warmth. The close-up reveals intricate textures of the petals, adding depth and interest. The tight framing focuses the viewer’s eye on the beauty of the flower without distractions. The contrast between the petals and the yellow stamens creates visual interest. Flowers inherently appeal to our sense of aesthetics due to their organic, symmetrical forms.
These elements combine to create a visually captivating image.
If you're one of those who believe DSLRs are better than mirrorless cameras, you might be making a mistake.
If you're buying today, and especially if you're shooting:
Then a mirrorless camera of the same professional tier will usually outperform a DSLR. The technology has matured — Canon R3, Nikon Z9, Sony A1, etc., are at least equal to, and often better than, their DSLR counterparts (like the 1D X Mark III or D6).
But if you're:
Then a DSLR is still a strong, reliable tool.
Mirrorless is the future — and the present — especially for high-level work. DSLRs were fantastic and still hold up in many scenarios, but the flexibility, AF performance, and video capabilities of mirrorless now tip the scale clearly in their favor.
Note for myself: I wonder how many hits this article will get just because of the tittle. ;-)
This is a good question.
I love Canon's color science — the colors straight out of the camera are natural, vibrant, and especially flattering for skin tones. Whether shooting landscapes, portraits, or wildlife, Canon’s color rendering consistently delivers pleasing and true-to-life results. No wonder why it's one of the reasons many photographers trust Canon for both professional and personal work.
Another point that I love is the ergonomic design — they just feel right in your hands. Whether you're holding an entry-level DSLR or a high-end mirrorless body, Canon has consistently prioritized comfort and usability. The grip is deep and well-contoured, allowing your fingers to wrap around it naturally, which is especially important during long shooting sessions or when using heavier lenses.
Buttons and dials are intuitively placed, so you can make quick adjustments without taking your eye off the viewfinder. The layout feels purposeful — not overcrowded, but with just enough control at your fingertips to stay in the flow of shooting. Even smaller models retain that same thoughtful design, making them easy to hold and operate with one hand.
This attention to tactile experience isn't just about convenience; it’s about confidence. When a camera feels solid, balanced, and easy to operate, you’re more likely to focus on creativity rather than fumbling with settings. For many photographers — beginners and pros alike — that’s part of what makes shooting with a Canon feel so natural.
If you’re shooting wildlife or using heavier lenses, Canon and Nikon generally offer a more comfortable grip. If you're after compactness or cutting-edge tech, Sony leads — but you may sacrifice a bit of tactile comfort.
 |
| Photo taken with a Canon R6. |
What I dislike? The lack of third-part lenses for RF Mount. I believe Canon is taking advantage of the lack of third-party options for the RF mount to keep prices high. But to be fair, Canon’s prices aren't wildly higher than Sony's or Nikon's first-party lenses.
Other than that, I love Canon. Keep in mind that I have used Nikon and I have used Sony. Nothing is wrong with these brands.
I was recently watching an interview on YouTube where the conversation began with the first-ever nature photo taken by a professional wildlife photographer. That made me think about which one was my own first. Let’s start by saying that the photo below was taken with a Canon PowerShot SD750 — a camera no one seriously interested in wildlife photography would consider buying. That was in 2008!
I had no idea what I was doing — no sense of composition, no understanding of photography at all. It wasn’t until 2015 that I revisited the idea of wildlife photography, this time using a Nikon Coolpix S9700. It was a better camera with a 30x zoom, which I thought would help — though it was still just a point-and-shoot. I still wasn’t editing my photos, and to be honest, I used to think post-processing was a form of cheating. I wasn’t thinking about how to improve the raw image coming out of the camera.
Of course, a point-and-shoot camera with a 30x zoom didn’t meet my expectations. These cameras are meant for travel and casual photography — and while they may be good for that, they’re not suited for wildlife photography. That’s how I ended up getting my first DSLR, the Nikon D5200, and began taking wildlife photography more seriously.
10 years, 4 cameras and more than 80000 pictures later, here is where I'm today.
It’s been a long and winding road — but a deeply rewarding one. Am I a good photographer? I’ll let you be the judge. As for me, I simply see myself as someone still walking that road, camera in hand, always learning, always looking for the light.
I ran an experiment with ChatGPT to check its logic picking lenses for my next trip. Here is what I asked:
From these lenses, which 2 would you pick to travel with: Canon EF70-200mm L, Canon EF28-80mm L or Tamron 28-300mm?
And here is the response:
For travel, I’d pick the Tamron 28-300mm and the Canon EF 70-200mm L — here's why:
Ideal for travel: One-lens solution covering wide to telephoto.
Lightweight and versatile: You can shoot landscapes, street, portraits, and even some wildlife without switching lenses.
Compact: Compared to carrying multiple L lenses, it’s easier to manage while walking or hiking.
Excellent optical quality: Razor-sharp images, fast focus, great for portraits and distant subjects.
Durability: Built like a tank, perfect for serious travel and challenging weather.
Pairs well with the Tamron: You can use the Tamron most of the time and switch to the 70-200mm when you want top-quality shots, especially for wildlife or compression shots.
Great image quality, but...
Too much overlap with the Tamron’s range.
Less useful on its own unless you're only doing general street and landscape photography — and even then, the Tamron can cover that plus more.
Only take the Tamron 28-300mm. It covers almost everything, and you’ll save space and effort.
If image quality and reliability are more important, and you're okay carrying two lenses:
Tamron 28-300mm + Canon 70-200mm L is a powerful combo.
End of the Response.
As you can see, it makes a lot of sense and the response is technically correct. The Tamron 28-300 while is not that sharp, it's a decent lens that I have used before in some occasions. Here is one of the pictures I took using this lens.
I think that I'll follow ChatGPT advise.
Photography allows you to track your progress by comparing photos taken in the past with more recent ones. For example, here’s a picture of a hummingbird I captured back in January 2021.
And here’s a recent photo I took of the same bird.
Back then, I was using a Sony a7R III with a Sigma 100-400mm Contemporary lens. Now I’m using a Canon R6 Mark I paired with a Canon EF 100-400mm L Mk II and a 1.4x extender. With the settings I had on the Sony a7R III, there was no way I could have captured a shot like the one I took with the R6. The shutter speed on the Sony was set to 1/500—fast enough to photograph the bird while it was perched. But if I could go back in time, I would have set the shutter speed to 1/5000, as I did with the R6, to increase the chances of getting a sharp image in case the bird decided to take flight.
Another key difference is the editing software. At the time, I was using CorelDRAW Photo-Paint, whereas now I rely on Adobe Lightroom Classic.
When comparing the two images, the hardware didn’t make as much of a difference as the editing tool—and my experience using it. I never quite mastered Photo-Paint to the point of achieving the results I get now with Lightroom Classic. On the other hand, I have to say that Lightroom Classic feels like the ideal editing tool, at least for me, specially when you use this took with DXO PureRaw for denoising the photo.
Clearly, just four years ago, I didn’t yet have the skills to achieve the level of quality I see in my photos today. It makes me wonder where I’ll be in another four years.
The EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II USM is my favorite lens for indoor events. Yes, it’s a heavy lens—but the image quality it delivers is excellent.
If you can’t afford the RF version, I highly recommend picking up this EF version. It’s still a fantastic performer, especially for the price you can find it at on the second-hand market.
You can find more about this lens in this video.
Wildlife photography—when taken seriously—is an expensive hobby. Even an entry-level camera paired with a decent lens can easily reach the $1,000 mark.
If you search on Amazon, you'll find a flood of inexpensive, often Chinese-made cameras marketed for kids. But let’s be honest: I haven’t come across a single one that delivers decent image quality—whether in still photos or video—despite their impressive claims about megapixels and 4K resolution.
So, what should you do if you have a child under 10 years old who’s starting to show a real interest in wildlife photography?
The answer lies in the second-hand market. If you're patient and avoid jumping on the first deal you see, you can find older bridge cameras for under $100.
I’ve been searching for a decent camera, with a good zoom and the shape and feel of a DSLR—something that’s really important when buying for a 10-year-old who’s constantly watching you use your gear and already has a sense of what a "real" camera looks like.
After some research, I’ve narrowed my options down to two Fujifilm models (Amazon links do not represent the best price for used cameras):
You can find more technical details about both cameras here.
I'm not claiming these are the best options out there—if you have any recommendations, feel free to leave a comment below.
Keep in mind that for a kid, a camera is, among other things, a toy—and toys tend to take a fair amount of abuse. That’s the main reason why, in your first attempt to introduce them to more serious photography, you probably don’t want to spend more than $100.
Depending on how long the camera lasts (and how interested they stay), you can always move up to a higher price range with better features and image quality later on.
