Well, as I was filing away my honeyeater photos, I came across some very old pics taken of a honeyeater nest with chicks in it.
These photos were taken way back in 2001, and the nest in question was also in that wall of ivy that the current nest is in.
Those days, I was using my very first digital camera, a Kodak DC290.
 |
| An antique by now |
That camera didn't come cheap. In fact, it cost more than my current dSLR body today.
Digital cameras were expensive in those days, though. I remember my sons were in uni then and one of them worked for a professional photographer setting up websites for him . That pro had a dSLR upwards of $12,000 then, and it would have been basic by today's standards.
 |
| 2 New Holland Honeyeater chicks in nest (2001) |
 |
| Proud parent with chicks (2001) |
Lovely photos, worth every cent of your expense on the camera! My first digital camera, a Sony, cost me more than $2000.
ReplyDeleteI got a lot of pleasure out of that camera, as I'm sure you did out of yours. That surely made it all worth while.
DeleteRead in the local papers that there are now more cases of swooping magpies attacks in NW Australia on cyclists and pedestrains, which reminded me of your post on this regarding their territorial instincts. Down here, we do read of very occasional attacks by the pesky black crows on pedestrains.
ReplyDeleteIn Perth, a month or so ago, a little 4 year old boy lost an eye to a magpie attack. Very sad.
DeleteThat's one awesome looking camera. Talking about antiques, you should see mine. :( Lovely bird - I don't think we have this type here - lots in my garden but none that is attractive in any way.
ReplyDeleteDigital cameras are so good. You can take lots of pictures without worrying about the cost of processing and printing. I'm very grateful they came along in time for me to enjoy in my retirement.
Delete