Lens choice for Churchill (Polar bears)

[louis_greene]

Hi,

 

I am going to Churchill in Nov. The trip was planned by someone else and is not pure photographic. However

apparently a higher fee was paid by all on this trip so that it will not be filled to capacity. Hopefully that will allow

enough access to do some shooting.

 

Anyway, with weight (and size of carry on bags) being an issue for the airlines these days I am torn between lens

choices (Body will be a Canon 1Ds mark3). Specifically between a Canon 300mm f2.8 non IS lens or a 300mm f4 IS

lens. Don't think I want to take both. PArt of me says spped, the other part says lighter with IS in case it is really

windy, people are moving a lot, or there is just no room for the tripod. We will be on a Tundra Buggy.

 

I have no idea what to expect up there. What would you take? Anyone who's been there have other input or

thoughts?

[ShunCheung]

I have photographed polar bears but not at Churchill. Since you will be photographing from those buggies, you will be shooting from a high angle but perhaps from not that far. Since you don't need to carry your equipment around, weight should be a minor issue.

 

I would bring the 300mm/f2.8 plus teleconverters for the occasions when the bears are farther away. Having f2.8 gives you a lot more flexability such as higher shutter speeds.

[louis_greene]

So you think the IS is not the bigger of the wants? ITrue, I can get one stop of speed (which can usually be done bumping ISO on the digital body) using the f2.8 lens. However, I can get handheld shots if need be with the IS. Just playing devils advocate here.

 

Other lenses I'll bring definately are the 24-105mm IS F4, 70-200mm IS F4, and a 1.4X tele.

 

Weight on the Tundra buggy is not the issue. Really it si the space and weight on the airlines. Additionally I think I need to take a puddle jumper (small plane) form the main city I land in to Churchill. I am sure weight and space will be a concern for them.

 

I'm on the fence. Just need a few more shoves to shift to one side..... thanks : )

[nick_davis]

Are there any "main" cities in northern Manitoba?

I agree with Shun, if it were me going (and I wish it was), I'd take the 300mm f2.8. Bright colored subjects like Polar Bears and snow require under exposure to keep the details so I would not worry too much about needing IS since your shutter speeds could be fairly high.

[steve_dawson1]

I have photographed polar bears at Churchill and was surprised at how short a lens I used for most of my photos. I agree with Shun about the 300mm plus converters for bears which are quite a distance away, but those shots are very difficult to get sharp. You're on a platform which moves because people are moving back and forth and sometimes there is engine vibration. On one of my trips the light was dreadful adding to the problems. Most of my photos were of bears very close to the buggy. Even a 70-200mm was often uncomfortably long. Based on my (limited) experience I would expect to use a mid range like a 70-200mm most and have a longer and a shorter lens available. If you're lucky you get to see bears interacting with each other, sorting out the dominant males and stuff, in which case they're moving and a wide aperture is more use than IS.

[cwphoto]

"Bright colored subjects like Polar Bears and snow require under exposure to keep the details so I would not worry too much about needing IS since your shutter speeds could be fairly high."

 

Always OVEREXPOSE for snow & other white subjects. Try 1-2 stops of overexposure.

[nick_davis]

I should have been more specific. I meant underexposed compared to the Sunny 16 rule, not underexposed based on the camera's meter.

[ShunCheung]

The 300mm/f2.8 is not that big a lens. Flying with it should not be an issue at all, especially in North America.

I regularly travel with my 500mm/f4 and carry that into all sorts of flights. A 600mm/f4 can be a problem, however.

 

You'll need to keep your shutter speed fairly high anyway to freeze any motion from the bears unless you are shooting for the motion. Can use you a monopod inside the buggy? That should solve some of the weight issue as far as support goes.

 

I had a trip to shoot polar bears in Svalbard in Arctic Norway. I mainly used a 500mm/f4 on a tripod on a ship. That was a very different setting.

[louis_greene]

Steve, thanks for sharing your experience. Maybe I'll bring my 50mm F1.4 too.

 

Shun - monopod - excellent idea for the buggy. Yeah, it's not the 300 f2.8's size, but rather having to deal with all the gear. I want to "carry on" all the photo gear if possible so I need to fit it into a back pack.

 

Still up in the air about what to bring. IS would be nice for all the vibrationa nd people moving stuff. If it's that bad though maybe I'll just be handholding. I am thinking the IS will be more of a benefit. I can always bump up ISO one stop to make up for the F4. I just took some moose images at ISO 1600 and was quite impressed.

 

Dang, maybe I should bring my smaller travel tripod rather than the monster one I was going to bring.<div></div>

[timesharevon]

I am also going to Churchill this fall (11/1-11/6) and consider myself more a point n shoot amatuer photographer, than anything. I use an Olympus Evolt 500 DSLR and have learned to use it for manual photography such as shooting the northern lights . . . so I'm capable of learning.

 

My question is similar to these above only I'm a bit out of my league when you're talking about under/over exposures, "IS" (not sure what that is), and how to compensate for a slower telephoto lens.

 

I recently purchased a 70-300mm, f/4.0-5.6, so I expect that is going to be beastly slow and I've been told to expect somewhat challenging autofocus. I bought it, however, because the kit lens was only up to 150mm and I figured I would need more.

 

Based on what I've read, I'm assuming it is best that I keep the ISO off auto and use something like 400 or 800 and let the auto take over on the exposure time and focusing. I'd be interested in your thoughts here? Or should I work with auto ISO letting the camera do what it's supposed to? Maybe I need to only work with the ISO based on the sun/day light I've got to work with.

 

Darn I hate not really knowing much about the options and settings.

 

Thanks,

Yvonne

[timesharevon]

Since I've returned from Churchill, I thought I should post a follow-up. My trip was wonderful, both from a bear viewing and photographing point of view. With the slow lens and the clouds (and blizzard) conditions, a tripod was essential! I shot everything with the camera set on AUTO so that I didn't have to mess with settings, etc.

 

I was very happy with the photos I was able to capture from this once in a lifetime trip:

 

http://www2.snapfish.com/thumbnailshare/AlbumID=254903831/a=152493536_152493536/t_=152493536

 

Von

[timesharevon]

Here's one of the photos, I've place in my portfolio here: http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/8235602-md.jpg<div></div>