"One thing I've discovered is that hummers do not like camera flash, at least the ones that visit our feeders don't. You may get one good shot with a flash, but they will bolt and not return for a while." Human eyes don't like camera flashes, the eyes (and brains) of unsuspecting, wild creatures probably don't like them either.

I live in Texas, and we do have a huge ant problem. Moats have not worked for me because I can't keep them full. Between wind shake and evaporation, they are usually empty even with close attention. I simply put a tiny bit of wheel bearing grease at the very top of the hanger, and they will not cross it. I have fire ants, carpenter ants, and other smaller types that I can't identify. They all stay off. My grease is not down where a hummer is likely to get into it, and I have never seen any evidence of it getting on any hummers. Texas gets pretty hot, but I have never seen the grease melted or running. On one feeder several years ago, I continued to have problems even with the spot of grease, so I soaked a piece of coarse cotton string in grease and wrapped it a few turns around the very top of the hanger. They never crossed it. I suggest one other thing. Put up more hangers than you have feeders and move each feeder that gets invaded. After a day or so, they will appear to have abandoned that spot, but they keep checking it occasionally for several days. Just leave that spot idle for as long as needed. Regardless what solution you use, somebody will call you an idiot. Be sensible, but know that most things we do can POSSIBLY harm something SOMETIME. I have seen just about every kind of aerial combat these birds engage in, and I have seen some predicaments they get themselves into while fighting, but we can't make the world entirely safe for them. I have seen them run into door screen, windows, feeders, and each other. Let's just be sensible and feed the birds.

I'm still exploring suet options: last Sunday was a good day at the latest version suet feeder. The Red-bellied Woodpecker is standing on a suet cage or maybe a branch, but eating out of the old pine cone which had suet/peanut butter mix. This is the first time I've seen the Red-belly on the suet feeder - usually it feeds on the hopper or the ground. The Downy Woodpecker is also standing on the upper suet cage, but eating out of that same cage which contains a C&S Almond Treat suet block. The Red-breasted Nuthatch likes the bottom cage, which I think has a C&S Nutty Treat, or something similar. I have another single hanging suet cage on the rose arch with C&S Insect Treat in it. Downies, wrens, titmice and chickadees like this one, maybe because it's well-hidden in the rose canes (which is why I don't have a good photo of it). I'm trying to avoid mixing up my own suet glop, particularly because I don't have a convenient source of rendered suet. The raw suet hasn't been more popular than the store-bought. Claire

It all depends on where the zoom range starts. If your old camera's shortest focal length was 40 mm (35mm filn equivalent), then it would be 400 mm at 10x zoom. But, 35 to 40 mm is not very much wide angle. Now suppose the new lens starts at 28 mm, 20x would be 560 mm and that is not twice 400 mm. I'm not familar with your model, but there is another 'gotcha' in digital cameras and that is an apparent extension of the zoom range digitally. At the end of the zoom range, the digital zoom comes into play by expanding the picture. Essentially, it is cropping the scene and stretching it to fill the frame. Definition falls because fewer pixels are present. Its the same as later, cropping a photo and then expanding it to fill the frame. This feature was used as an advertising gimmic. Lets say the camera has 10x optical zoom plus 2x digital zoom. The blurb on the box might say, "Up to 20x zoom" when in fact it had only 10x optical. I don't think Kodak was that deceptive and made a distinction between these two zoom effects. At present, the older deception has diminshed in the market place. But you should be aware of the difference when comparing cameras. Personally, I do not use the digital zoom. I can accomplish the same effect later with photo editing software, therefore, I record using the full pixel count. Those big zooms sounds great, but you should consider the practical side. Anytime you zoom beyond 2x, you'll need aids to keep the camera steady. Sure, I've sucessfully shot at 5x zoom with a fast shutter speed. The shots improved if the camera was on a strudy tripod. Look at the other specification on zoom lenes and that is lens opening AKA f-stop. e.g. f/5.8 is the focal length divided by 5.8 and is a measure of the light density at the focal plane or sensor. Lenses are not always marked with the / to indicate division, but will diaplay only the divisor. A typical set of marks might be 2.8; 3.5; 5.8; 8; 11; and 16. An aperture of f/8 lets in twice the light as f/16. On zoom lenses, the mazimun aperture occurs at the shortest focal length, for example: f/2.8 at 28mm. As the focal length is zoomed out, the maximum aperature falls. The amount of reduction is not the same for all lenses but is a function of its design. So, when a f/2.8 lens is zoomed out 10x, the maximum aperature might have fallen to f/8. This means that the shutter speed has to be slower to make an exposure. This effect works against making sharp images at long zoom. So, when comparing zoom lenses, also compare maximun aperature at full zoom. A great lens has larger aperatures at zoom lengths. I've noted lately, that amnufacturers are omiting full disclosure of lens markings and showing only the zoom range. This is a red flag. In general for constant exposure, the longer the zoom, the faster the shutter speed, or greater the aperture. Unfortunately, shutter speed and aperature size run counter to each other. As a lens is zoomed out, the maximum aperatue reduces and requies a longer exposure, just what you did not want.