A lens for photographing lizards

Which lens for lizards?

 

Originally, I used to trek with a Nikon F/N70 in my backpack with a

slow consumer zoom lens (35-70mm).

 

Then I convinced myself that I ought to take my landscape photographs

properly, and swapped my trusty zoom for 24mm, 35mm and 50mm Nikon

prime lenses. My reasoning was that the results would be worth the

extra weight carried. So far, so good.

 

Then you lot convinced me I should carry a tripod most of the time.

More weight.

 

Now, I am getting into the lizards that cross my path whilst trekking

in Greece, and want to have a go at photographing them.

 

I'm thinking about the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR. This would complement

my three prime lenses, allowing me to focus on aspects of landscape -

but will this lens also be suitable to get the lizards (handheld with VR)?

 

Is it long enough? Is the minimum focus short enough?

 

The extra 1.5kg is a bit worrying, but since it may do both jobs

(landscapes and lizards), I can just about justify the extra weight. I

don't want to end up with a 70-200mm lens and a macro lens though (I

would just fall over under the weight).

 

What do you think?

How close can you get to them? Last lizard pic I took was from about 2" away with my 50mm macro lens, but I've seen other lizards dart for cover when I was 30' away.

Thanks for the reply - on average I guess I can get about 6 to 10 feet away. Although it would be good to get them a little further away for a few 'in the bank shots' before I risk getting too close (about 15 feet?). Although most of them scurry off before I even see them!

Calculate the magnfication you need. 36/(size of lizard + surroundings to be included). Then decide how far away you'll have to stand. Then calculate focal length needed to get desired magnification at that distance.

 

I ran through this exercise 25 years ago when planning to revisit a place in Costa Rica where I'd seen Rivulus isthmensis out of water. The answer was 1000 mm at 3m, the closest distance the fish had let me approach before flipping back into the water. So I bought a 1m lens that focused to 3m. Conditions had changed, not only were there no Rivulus out of water where I'd seen them before, along that 30 km stretch of highway we collected only one. Ouch!

In my experience, 200 mm is a minimum for free-living lizards, but if you use the VR lens

with a 1.4X teleconverter, extension tubes, or both, it could work nicely. Another option

(less versatile) is a good 2-element close-up lens. The Canon 500D works very well (and I

think will fit the Nikon 70-200 VR if the latter uses 77 mm filters), but it's heavy and

expensive. Nikon makes an equivalent that's also supposed to be excellent and may cost

a bit

less.

 

You could also try the 80-400 VR; again, extension tubes might help. I've used the 80

-400 (or the equivalent Canon 100-400) extensively for landscapes and both are

extremely

handy for that purpose.

Nikon 70-180 ED Micro is extremely convenient, lighter than 2.8 lenses and optically very good. Don't confuse this with zooms that claim to have some macro capability as option (usually with very low optical quality), this is a real macro lens.

A 180mm Nikkor has been my favorite lizard lens for many years. Good with 1.4X converters, wonderful with the PN-11 tube. I sold mine years ago because I needed a zoom. As good as the 80-200 is, it cannot compare to the 180 at closer focussing distances, where the lizard activity happens. It is modestly sized, not too heavy, and easy to handhold. As cheaply as they can be had on the used market these days, you might give it some thought. Good luck.

Hi Alex,

 

If the Nikon lens can compare to the Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS (and I don't see why it can't)

then I give it a big hands up, I'd strongly recommend a tube or two aswell. The little chap

below is about 4 inches long and is sitting on a coconut husk, I was testing my lenses

tubes and flashes this morning. It was shot with the Canon 1D and 70-200 f2.8 IS at

85mm manual exposure, 1/250, f 32, and flash at -1 2/3 and 200 iso, with 12 and 25

mm tubes on (I think, might only be 25mm) handheld.

 

I've found they can be approached quite closely, but even if you are doing big stuff, we

have some 2 foot + iguanas here aswell, a short

tube helps a lot with frame filling.

 

Take care, Scott.<div></div>

Before I got my 300D, I used to work with a G2 and a close up adapter. It was hard to get near lizards to say the least, but doable once you practiced how to approach them.

 

The Nikon 70-200 VS lens is a wonderful lens. Is it long enough for lizards? Depends. Some lizards are very jumpy (ground lizards come to mind). At 200mm if you are careful in how you approach the subject then yes, it is more than long enough. Remember, there are not many macro lenses longer than 180mm.

 

The 70-200 VR not focus close enough on its own to be of much good for lizards. Extension tubes are very useful for this, Kenko has a set on BH. You lose AF with an AF-S lens with these tubes, but autofocus is not a good idea for close up work anyways. Another option would be a Nikon close-up lens adapter. Not as good as a true macro lens, but it more than gets the job done.

 

PS: Extension tubes are not heavy ;-)

Come to think of it, the 700/8 Questar will focus to 1:4 and is as sharp on KM at that magnification as a 55/2.8 MicroNikkor is at 1:4 and f/8. It makes 1:4 at its close focus distance. 10 feet. Of course, with a Q700 you'll have to stand a good distance away from a large subject.

Thanks for all of your input. It's good to have folks out there for help.

 

I actually tried out the 70-200mm VR today in a shop. It's as good as you say - but heavy.

 

Do any of you actually pack this regulalry in your rucksack for a day's walking (alongside your bodies, wider angle lenses, film, water, clothes, food...)? Or is it a more a 'ok to walk a couple of miles' type of lens?

 

Perhaps I should stick to my slow 70-300 Nikon lens, and try to see if this can get the lizards? It only weighs 500g.

 

I guess what I want is somebody to say it is well worth 1.5kg, and once it is in your pack, you hardly notice it! And with the VR, it is easy to handhold 1.5kg (especially at f2.8)! I would be a fool not to buy this......

Hi Alex,

 

Now that is an all together different question. The truth is (I can only speak of Canon gear

but am sure there is a NIkon equivalent) it does take some commitment to take the big

zoom out when going hiking and especially when taking other gear aswell, the same lizard

results can be got from the 70-200 f4 L, the IS/VR technology is far more relevent to film

cameras than digital cameras, I shoot 50 and 100 iso slide film but the 1D basic setting is

200 and IS/VR is not relevent at all to manual exposure lizard pics when useing flash. I

have

used

both version lenses a fair amount and my money went on the f2.8 IS

version but don't take it all the time, if I had the f4 I probably would. But I wouldn't swap

the narrow DOF for portraits and the IS for film use so I am happy with my choice.

 

Take care, Scott.

I think the 70-200 should be the best lens for the job. You may also try the tubes for close shots. I haven't used diopters on this type of lenses but they are worth considering.

 

Anyway, the VR allows you to move and frame quickly yet get adequate depth of field.

Whatever the focal length... it has to be Canon L(for Lizard) series.