It probably thinks you are a bird.."get out of my territory!!" That begs the question..do you look like a bird? Are you a bird? We know birds are very clever they can probably use cameras. I know a lot of photographers that can't use a camera but your not one of them.
Or perhaps its saying.. "You can see how cold it is give me a break give me some food!!

Seriously though, great shot we can never get enough of animals being animals, also meaning birds being birds.

Though I did wonder if it actually was a sparrow, but that might be getting too technical. You do have very big sparrows over there, no chance they are going to take over is there? If I were living there I might be worried?
Grant

Hi Mike,
Yes what you say is spot on in particular understanding the Zone System and being able to decide where you want to place an item in the Zone you want. I count myself fortunate to have grown up when black & white still had a dominant presents, in fact daily news papers were all black and white. Certainly most pros and serious photographers developed their own films and prints and knowledge of the Zone System was essential. It's a shame people who have grown up only knowing digital miss learning this stuff because it certainly makes you think it through before you click away and you are better able to know why a particular exposure did not work the way you expected. As someone mentioned Camera meters were always, and as far as I know still are, calibrated to 18% reflectance. That's why using the 'Grey Card' or something equivalent was giving the camera meter what it wanted, a point of reference if you like. To this day I still own and use a 'Grey Card' and yes do spot metering also. What this stuff really teaches you is to really really look at the scene, notice the highlights in particular and the deep shadow and the predominance of solid blacks and whites and how you need to deal with them. We are often fooled by the human eye but film or digital is so much more limiting. What we may see clearly in highlights and shadow is often outside the range that digital can record. In fact digital is rather like using old slide film, its actually not very tolerant of under or over exposure and we all know about blowing out the highlights particularly with JPEG. As someone mentioned I also often have my camera with a 1/3rd stop under exposure as that is what digital seems to like and probably is a better approximation of 18% reflectance. Today we are so fortunate to have other tools like using RAW, exposure bracketing, HDR and in particular instant Histograms in both B & W and Color but I would guess that probably less than 1% of people running around with serious digital cameras ever look at them. Like any 'body of knowledge' you will benefit greatly buy studying the history of your subject, the Zone System would be at the top of my list. Then you will better understand the limitations of the medium and do it once and get it right in the camera, as I for one don't want to be spending time in post processing fixing exposure. Of all the dynamics of getting a great photo exposure should be the easy one to deal with then you can put the effort into thinking more about composition and focus.

What an awesome photo of life in action and you capture it so well in great color saturation. We don't have snakes in New Zealand all the more reason why it is so captivating for me. They say timing is everything, you got it spot on.

Unfortunately guys the answer why we cant all have best quality 600 f4s etc for 2k comes down to simple economics. Even the best manufactuers cant build them and make a profit too some extent based on the low volumes. But the good news is some high quality glass is getting more affordable take the Nikon 200-500 as one example. Steve has brilliantly demonstrated 'subject isolation' something we are all challenged by to some extent even to get a worthy subject in front of us can take days of travel and countless hours in the field most times dealing with marginal weather and low light. I guess if it wasnt so hard to do as good as Steve has shown us it would not be such a buzz when we occasionally get something that good or close to it, but thats why we find it a great challenge..right?

If you have not already done so I suggest you have a look at UHH Topic "What one thing annoys you most in a photograph?" It seems there are a lot of strong views on the subject on UHH. However most of the comments are well intentioned to help people improve their basic technique and may are easy to fix.

Yes in many respects this is a great shot and shows good use of slow shutter speed just one thing level the horizon then it will not distract the eye..well done

Unless you really really need f2.8 you should also consider the Nikon 70-200 AF-S VR f4. It is in fact sharper than the 70-200 f2.8 across the entire range, except perhaps the latest 'E' version. I have owned it with my D7200 for a good few years and it is a delight to use and I enjoy the lightness for long periods of hand holding. it is a very nicely balanced combination. At the time when I purchased the 70-200 f4 I tested the 70-200 f2.8 but I decided quickly it was too heavy. Perhaps you need to hire one for a day to really know. I also have the 80-400 AF-S VR which is a little heavier than the 70-200 f2.8 and I don't use it hand held for more than a couple of hours. For a longer hiking trip the 70-200 f4 seems about half the size and weight and seldom would I take the 80-400 unless I had a particular purpose. One other thing I recently purchased a mint TC14EII and ith is a perfect match for the 70-200 f4. There is no noticeable loss in either sharpness or auto focus speed. Surprisingly from all I have read the Nikon 70-200 f2.8 does not go that well with TC's certainly not more than the 1.4 TC, the loss of quality is more noticeable when compared to a 400 f5.6. So if you do consider the Sigma also check what they are saying about use of TC's because it is always tempting to turn it into a 400 f5.6 with a 2 x TC.

Well like all these things it depends the type of macro work you want to do. I was quite keen on the idea of 200 f4 however after I studied a lot of reviews it seems the 200 is best used on a tripod and although it apparently does have a slight advantage in image quality I still decided on the Nikon 105 2.8 with VR as it provides a lot better options for hand holding and is very useful as an alternative portrait / landscape lens as well.
So far the reach on a cropped sensor body has not been an issue and I already had a Nikon TC14EII and it performs extremely well if I need more reach. The 200 is now a rather old lens and lacks Nano coating and VR and I would expect it will be updated at some point, definitely long overdue. In terms of working distance the 200 f4 will be better on FX than the 105 but other things considered I don't think there is one right or wrong answer both are at the top of their game.

Mr Feiestag is a very accomplished photographer he certainly knows the merits of both, this is baiting for discussion but it is very unfortunate when you target a group of users and very much suggest they dont know what they are doing or have made a bad decision. That is what I take exception to its just plain silly. After all the question was ..why would anyone buy a crop sensor..? Well one answer might be they are just smarter.. better IQ and have worked out cropped sensor is better for them.

Shame you appear to have missed the point of the discussion.

This whole discussion is rather pointless don't you think?. I could equally ask why do you have FF when you could have medium format or 10 x 8, now thats a real camera. If Ansel Adams were still alive he would probably be saying FF? its totally inadequate!! As someone said a sharp photo is a sharp photo. Ive even seen great photos from a Pin Hole camera in fact they were award winning photos. Its not about what its taken with its about do you like what you achieved is it what you wanted? Does it inspire people if that was your goal? Ive taken thousands of photos over the years that gave pleasure to other people including some of the most important days in the life of people weddings etc. They didnt care what it was taken with. Have you ever heard someone say 'Im not having that photo it wasn't taken with Full Frame?

I am frustrated it has taken so long to get useful articulated screens on high end cameras as I like shooting the occational high and more often low view but most times I have used a mono pod and delay timer usally works. Weather sealing has to be it as there can be so many situations you dont anticipate and wild weather is a particular interest of mine. Even pushing through brush or long grass days after rain to get to a good position suddenly you can have water drops all over the camera and lens. When you have invested $2k plus in a body and as much again in lens weather sealing is a no brainer.

WOW..they have got to be one of the most stunning birds on the planet the colour is mind blowing thanks for posting. Good job getting the eye detail in every shot.

Thom Hogan is one of the leading commentators on Nikon cameras, I personally have this D7200 ebook it is very detailed and in plain easy to read language. In general Thom's web site is one of the very best places you can get unbiased opinion on a wide range of photo equipment and he 'pulls no punches' in telling how Nikon & Canon and many other big players in the industry are performing, he has a direct and often entertaining style.

http://www.dslrbodies.com/books/bythom-complete-guides-/nikon-d7200-guide-2.html

Thanks Matt Granger it confirms what Kiwi's have been saying for years, Aussies are a bit different. We know you have problems with IQ over there. We will send you another shipment of Sheep next week they are the one's you cuddle up to when you get cold..Ok.