I am so far unconvinced about the existence of Bigfoot; I do think it would be nice if they are real. But, I've been thinking about an argument I've seen a lot online, which says there should be better photographic evidence given that everyone is always carrying a camera around. As a photographer, I can speak to that.

Yes, everyone has a camera on them these days, in the form of a phone. That's actually the problem. Phone lenses, with some recent exceptions, are wide angles — exactly the worst type of lens to try to shoot Bigfoot with. Phone cameras just get better and better, but they are still mostly wide-angle lenses outputting onto tiny sensors, and there's just a limit of how large you can blow those up and pick out minute detail.

For skittish wildlife, you need a long telephoto lens on a proper camera. I have one, a 200-500 zoom that would shoot right up Bigfoot's nose. The only problem is it's huge, as long as my forearm, and weighs five pounds. It's unpleasant to lug around for long periods of time, especially for treks into the back country. Even longer lenses are available, but they are expensive, large and heavy.

So, the dilemma is that the best type of lens for capturing Bigfoot is the very type of lens that's not likely to be carried into the woods on the off chance you might spot the world's most famous cryptid. We are likely to be stuck with cell phone shots.

(I do think it's odd that no trail cam has picked up Bigfoot, but I don't know how many of these things are out there and where they are, so have no real thoughts on that.)

But if you're a squatcher out there carrying an 800mm telephoto deep in the woods, great! Carry on and I hope you spot one and it pays off.