Yellowstone - What to bring ? Experience feedback needed.

First, let me say to the nature photographers that are not interested or cannot go in Yellowstone Country easily that I am sorry to insist about this as an other thread is already running on a subject also related to Yellowstone.

<p>

But for those interested in going to the park in late September, that might be an interesting discussion anyway.

<p>

My question is: what should I bring to shoot in the park for early morning sessions and during the evening. I plan to rent a big and fast 300/f2.8 telephoto + TC (and use this before the trip). As this is a premiere for me, I am wondering if you could give me some advices based on former experience(s) such as:

<p>

- with a 300/f2.8 or 420/f5.6 whitch film do you use, or at

least what ASA setting is needed to shoot bull elk fighting

together (bull elk is an example, bisons, dear, wolves that

are moving will also be considered of course) in poor (but

beautifull) light. I was in Yellowstone during the winter

and is was not a big deal to shoot them at 300/f5.6 w/ Royal

Gold 25 since they were totally inactive, and even more

inactive during the morning. Particullarly, I love Fuji Velvia

and am wondering if by pushing them at ASA 100 I would do

fine or if I need to bring some Kodachrome 200 Slides or even

some Fuji Super G 800. I know some of you would say

"bring'em all" but I just want to be sure before filling up a

$X00 B&H order form.

<p>

- due to the fumarolles and other (great) warm geothermic

features of the parc, is it a real pain to (auto)focus on

animals that stayed in the clouds with low light ?

I mean: do you rely on autofocus in such conditions or do

you manual focus much of the time so that I have to

practice a lot before September since I am an autofocus adict

(glasses you know !) ?

<p>

Maybe these questions are much more related to something like "how to shoot animals in low light" so maybe every experienced photographer could respond easily... I don't know. I found the lighting conditions in Yellowstone to be sometimes really tricky (and fast changing) so that I am afraid to find myself trying to shoot moving wildlife at a 1/40s !

<p>

All advices welcome. Thanks. Vincent.

"Bring 'em all"

<p>

You have to pick the film for any situation just like you pick

the lens. I typically carry Velvia, Sensia 100 and Kodachrome 200.

Your choice of film (with or without pushing) is up to you, but

having ISO 50, 100 and 200 available is probably a must.

On a trip to Yellowstone (or any major trip) I'd throw in a few

rolls of Sensia 400 and Fujicolor 800 just for those times

when they might be be needed. Film is cheap compared to the cost of

equipment and travel. Nobody can tell you which film to use.

<p>

Ditto for MF vs AF. When AF fails, use MF. There are no rules here.

I was out there last week. What I brought:

<p>

Camera: Elan IIe (borrowed from the very kind Mr. Steve Raia, while I try to decide between the 1N and 5)

<p>

Lenses: 28-70 2.8L and 70-200 2.8L with hood (I only brought one, since both lenses come with dedicated hoods that are almost identical).

<p>

Film: Velvia and Sensia 100.

Tripod: Gitzo Mountaineer with Gitzo Magnesium Head

<p>

What I wish I'd brought, but don't have yet: A 24mm lens , a 2X TC, a circular polarizer, 81a, Kodachrome 200 (like Bob suggests), PEPPER SPRAY! (more on this later...), a quick release for my tripod, and finally, warmer clothes!

<p>

I saw at least one of everything: antelope, bear, bison, deer, elk, moose, and wolf.

<p>

You can get very close to the animals just off the road. A 200mm lens was almost adequate. Your idea of renting a 300 2.8 is probably enough length to get by, unless you're birding. Buy some pepper spray! I was attacked by a black bear! I didn't even try and piss him off--I just wandered into his territory.

<p>

Over half of the entire park was devastated by crippling fires in 1988. The landscape still looks like there was a thermonuclear attack! Half of the park is a charred ruin. It will probably take another 20 years for things to look normal again. It was also very cold (in mid-July!).

<p>

The most photogenic area in my opinion: there's a beautiful valley between Lake Yellowstone and Canyon Village (I forget the name...). It's a sweeping vista of rolling hills with the Yellowstone river running through it.

First, the fires didn't "cripple" Yellowstone. If you look at all those stands of dead lodgepole, you'll see a nice carpet of young lodgepole. This particular subspecies of lodgepole NEEDS fire to open the cones and disperse seeds - the resin holding the cones together only melts at high temperature. If no fire had occured, eventually all those lodgepoles would've died of old age without the regrowth you see.

<p>

Of course, it would've been nice if the fire had happened over the last 50 years, small sections of the Park at a time. Unfortunately, fire suppression and drought combined to create conditions where most of the Park burned at once.

<p>

Regarding film, be sure to bring, as Bob says, slow, medium and faster slide film. I've standardized on E100SW as my 100 speed film, I like the color palette better than Sensia/Provia and at the same time it's not nearly as cartoon-like as Velvia. Just last night I was sorting slides, and mountain bluebird males shot with E100SW showed nice irridescence without the total detail blowout you get with Velvia with such plumage. Nice!

<p>

Either it or Sensia 100 push very nicely to 200, so I don't bother carrying K200 anymore, though John Shaw makes a good point that it works well with mammals in snow, neutral, fast, and capable of holding highlights in the snow.

<p>

Suggestions regarding filters, etc are good, too. BRING WARM CLOTHES! I use polypro liner gloves with a second layer of thick, pile gloves myself. I can change film, etc with a liner on my hand without gettin g my hands stiff and cold as I would if I went bare.

No, you're right Don. "Cripple" is not the right word. But it DOES look like total devastation in the hardest hit areas (ie. South of the lake). Some undergrowth and a few trees have sprouted up and there is a carpet of grass underneath. But nothing is more that 2-3 feet tall yet.

<p>

But to look at it in the "Big Picture" it still looks devastation. I was shocked by how surreal it looked.

<b>Film:</b> I still like K200 for some reason. It's not just the speed

I'm sure - I've tried pushing Fujichrome. For some reason, when

I pick out my best shots - or analyze my "hit" ratio, slides

on K200 do very well (in my eyes). Pushing film also costs more at

most labs

(but then K200 is more expensive to start with, so it may be a bit

of a wash). You also need to use a lab that will push. I think

that rules out Kodalux and Fuji [Though Kodalux will do a 1 1/3 stop

push on Kodachome for about an extra $5 I think].

<p>

<b>Lenses:</b> While a 200mm could indeed get you great shots of Moose,

Elk, Bison and Bear, so could a P&S with a 105mm lens. Just because

the animals will allow you that close, doesn't mean it's a good

idea to <em>get</em> that close. The animals may be slightly

habituated to humans, but they are not "tame". They are wild and

unpredicable. A 300mm lens is a very good idea, and an even better

idea with TCs.

<p>

<b>Fire:</b> If you think it's bad now, you should have been there in '88

(I wasn't but I was there soon after). That's what's supposed to

happen to keep the ecosystem healthy. It doesn't mean it's not

photogenic. Here's an example from Mt. St. Helens

<p>

<center>

<p>

<img src = "http://bobatkins.photo.net/gallery/img0004.jpg" alt="Burned Trees" border=1>

<p>

</center>

Here's what I would bring to Yellowstone:

<p>

Film: Sensia II 100 - Truer colors than the old Sensia, Kodachrome 200 - for when you have to hand hold and ISO 100 is a bit too slow., Kodacolor Gold 400 (the new stuff)- for fast moving animals. Kodacolor Gold Max - for fast moving animals in low slight. The finest grain film is of no use if it won't let you stop subject motion.

<p>

Camera - You did not mention a second body but I would take one. I have been photographing for 20+ years and had my first body failure on a much anticipated and planned trip to New Mexico last year. You can be sure I am glad I had an extra body.

<p>

If you are worried about autofocus and steam give it a try when you hit the first geyser basin. Do this before that grizzly bear ignores you and starts chomping on that fish it just caught.

When I James' post saying that surreal is a better notion than "crippled", I immediately thought "Mt. St. Helens!", so it's funny that Bob posted a photo from there - nice shot, too, Bob.

<p>

I was thinking of something a bit different, though. Much of the timber blasted into the second coming has been salvaged. For surreal, try stumps rising a couple of feet out of ash with nuthin' else there! Gray stumps, grey ground (always wanted to spell that word both ways in one sentence), grey skies in much of the year...pretty surreal!

<p>

I'm a bit sensitive when people use words like "crippled" because this fire was used as an excuse by the timber industry and its friends to try to scuttle the USFS and NPS "let it burn" policies, which allow certain fires in well-defined conditions burn in order to shift the species mix back to one which includes more fire-dependent species. The fact that the fire was NOT a "let it burn" fire was ignored by these critics. Everything available was thrown at it, but unfortunately due to widespread drought and lightning the fire fighters were already involved in the equivalent of the German's Eastern (Russian) Front when Yellowstone got underway. The man in charge of putting it out was particularly pissed off at this misrepresentation.

<p>

Sorry for the politics...

Just a quick note for you on TC's. a 1.4 converter on a 300 2.8 will give you a 420 f4, not 5.6. and a 2x TC will give you a 600 5.6. personaly i would bring them both along with a 28-70 2.8 and a 70-200 2.8 with this range you could be covered for just about anything.

good luck Eric Blais

Vincent,

I was in Yellowstone/Grand Teton for 3 days last week. LOTS of people, but as others have said, its doesn't prevent you from making great shots. The weather was quite warm. September is best IMO. I was there in early October once and I had snow.

Re. your question about animal shots: I took an Olympus OM-4 with a Zuiko 500 f/8 reflex and a Bogen 3205 tripod with Canon Pro 1 Head. A somewhat radical choice, limiting flexibility, but I was there to show the park to someone else and decided to have fun testing the reflex. To compensate for the poor (fixed) aperture, I took Konica VX 400 negative film, a sharp new film derived from APS technology.

Thanx to the long focal length, I got some very interesting shots without trying much: superb rack of antlers on a big bull elk just from the road outside of Canyon, two blacks bears resting under a tree just before Tower, great moose shot on the way to Signal Hill, elks bathing in a pond near Norris and a few more...

I would have gotten any of these shots without the 500mm, so I would strongly urge you to rent a 1.4 teleconverter with the 300mm.

Re. autofocus on the fumaroles: I also had with me a Fuji GA645W, which has autofocus. I took quite a few shots of geysers and fumaroles at my favorite spot, the West Thumb geyser basin. I had no problem whatsoever, but then my autofocus is a hybrid active/passive system which is less prone to be fooled. If in doubt, shoot with manual focus, it's no big deal.

Re. the film: if you decide to shoot negs over slides, I would recommend the Konika Impresa 50. I like it better than Royal Gold 25. You get 1 stop more, and IMO better contrast, color saturation and exposure latitude.

Good luck

Just a note to support Don's comments on the Yellowstone fires and how the NPS handled them. I have two friends who happen to be the aunt and uncle of the Park Superintendent during the fire so I have pretty good second hand information. The fires started OUTSIDE the park and were fought tooth and nail. They spread into the park and were fought where practical. Keep in mind that fighting a fire like that one can literally cost millions of dollars per square mile. Is that the best use of NPS and Forest Service funds, especially when fire is a natural part of the environment? Wouldn't we be better off spending that money on something like removing the O"Shaunnesy dam from Yosemite and restoring the Hetch Hetchy Valley?? I think so.

<p>

I visited the park in 1992 and can assure you that there are still plenty of green areas with mature trees, flowing rivers and wildlife. The South East corner of the park seemed a lot less crowded with greater opportunity to avoid the touristas.

<p>

Free the Elwha!

<p>

Free the Elwha!

Responding to Eric Blais: the 300/f5.6 is an other lens that I was using on my previous trip. For sure a 300/f2.8 + 1.4X TC becomes a 420/f4 :-)

Thanks for all the responses.

Vincent.

I was in Yellowstone at the time of the fires - which lasted for weeks. I was forced to move to the Jackson Lake Campground. An extremely good friend of mine, who was in charge of all security for the Grand Teton area, was able to give me a great deal of inside information. It is my understanding that the fires that started (by lightning) were initially allowed to burn UNTIL the National Park Circus realized, too late, that the fires were growing too big and too fast. The weather was unseasonably hot, the moisture level dangerously low, and conditions ripe for a disasterous fire!

<p>

There was definitely a bureaucratic snaffu and delay while the Park Circus decided if they should break their own rules. This delay and indecision enabled the fires to get an enormous foothold. Fortunately, after a few weeks of burning, cooler weather and rain slowed the fires down enough to be controlled. The larger the government entity, the slower they move.

Steve

Biologically, the fires were one of the best thing to happen to Yellowstone Park. Just ignore the politics and emotions! Fires are a part of the natural process and big fires on this scale have happened in the past. The best result of this fire is that alot of rotten wood was burned.

<p>

Concerning photography, how about using large format cameras for shooting the park. I see alot of talk about 35mm cameras (which are nice for snapshots, but the puny negatives don't enlarge well. Think BIG negatives.