bob_royse

I had that lens years ago. I thought that it was excellent optically (I never tried it with a 2x), but was poorly constructed mechanically. I'd suggest carrying a small screwdriver. The screws on it would constantly jiggle loose (sorry - it has been a while and I can't remember exactly which ones and where). Check it regularly to make sure they're all tight. I hope that you have a decent mount for it. I found the adaptall mounts to be a nightmare with the Contax cameras I was using at the time. With that said, I have some slides from that lens that are among the sharpest bird photos I've ever taken, even though I've since used more expensive optics.

Having recently visited there, I'd definitely add NW North Dakota and NE Montana to my list. The "Souris Loop" National Wildlife Refuges in North Dakota (Lostwood, J.Clark Salyer, DesLacs) and Montana's Medicine Lake NWR offer tremendous opportunities to photograph a large variety of resident shorebirds, grebes, waterfowl, sparrows, etc.

I just returned from a couple weeks in North Dakota and it proved to be a great destination for me to burn a lot of film in great light of interesting subjects. I was able to see all the species mentioned above. I was also able to photograph them and much, much more (except Sprague's Pipit). NW NDakota/NE Montana is an ideal place for bird photographers to visit.

 

Without going into too much detail, here are what I found to be the best photo ops :

 

Lostwood NWR is THE sparrow place. Of the prairie sparrows, Baird's, especially, was easy to get good shots of. I could approach them quite closely while singing. When they popped into the grass, I would just sit down and wait a minute or two for them to pop back up and resume their territorial duties - no blinds necessary. I was lucky with Nelson's S.-T. and LeConte's there as well. That place must have the world's tamest Sedge Wrens too.

 

I visited the other Souris Loop refuges. Clark Salyer NWR is the largest in the area, but because of recent heavy rains, most of the roads were closed. On the one morning I was there, I burned a lot of film on Eared Grebes, Franklin's Gulls, and various other species on the county road that ran through the refuge. Des Lacs NWR (at the town of Kenmare, where I stayed) was excellent for Marsh Wrens, Yellow-Headed Blackbirds, Am. Bitterns, and the laundry list of resident passerines perching on fence wire.

 

Medicine Lake NWR, just accross the border in NE Montana, was also excellent. It has all the sparrows found in the ND refuges with the addition of Lark Buntings and Chestnut-Collared Longspurs in abundance. In addition to those 2 species, Western and Clark's Grebes, Am. White Pelicans, Marbled Godwits, Upland Sandpipers, Am.Avocets, Willets, Wilson's Phalaropes, and various waterfowl stand out as the best photographic opportunies there. Just outside the refuge on county roads, Long-Billed Curlews were common and easily approached. While visiting Medicine Lake, I stayed in Plentywood, but I'd recommend staying south of the refuge in Culbertson instead. Culbertson is on The Missouri River and just south of the river there is gorgeous badland-type scenery and a completely different variety of avifauna (Lark Sparrows, Lazuli Buntings, Spotted Towhees, etc.)

 

I then headed back into ND and explored the badlands there. It wasn't especially great for bird photography, but a cool place to explore with beautiful scenery. I used my 17-35 lens in there more than my 600mm. The Little Missouri National Grasslands cover a huge area. Before heading in there, a good map is essential. Detailed ones can be obtained at ranger headquarters in Watford City. The north and south units of the Theodore Roosevelt N.P. are surrounded by the national grasslands. The parks offer some good mammal and rock formation photo ops, but for me the Burrowing Owls at the prairie dog towns were the reason to visit those places.

 

I never missed any coplete days due to rain. Incredible storms passed through and left just as quickly. The biggest frustration for bird photography and general birding there was the wind. (I didn't even attempt to try my hand at the many prairie wildflowers there.)

 

If anyone plans to go there, I'll be happy to answer more detailed questions and supply a complete list of birds seen and where.

I agree with Don, you have probably the best equipment for your trip. You should do quite well with mostly using the 420 combo for mammals and have the extra f stop for the early morning light and the extra reach for birds at 600mm. If you're going to Namibia, I presume Etosha is on your itinerary. You really don't need a guide there. It's better just to rent a car and drive around on your own. Most places in Botswana aren't practical on your own, though. Definitely bring a beanbag, such as the large Kirk Hugger, for shooting from a car window. You can fill it when you get there.

I think that having an Image-Stabilization 600/f4 is very exciting

news! I currently use the 600/f4L mostly for photographing birds.

Having IS will definitely increase my number of keepers and enable me

to shoot under new situations :

 

<p>

 

Following moving subjects often excludes the opportunity to lock down

the ball head securely. IS will help get shots of birds momentarily

pausing where in the past I was struggling with the ball head.

 

<p>

 

Using a 2x at best is crap shoot without IS. It's difficult to attain

maximum sharpness even on sunny windless days. IS will make

photographing sparrows and other small passerines in open areas with

the 2x much more realistic.

 

<p>

 

Wind is a major factor contributing to unsharp photos with a long

lens, even on a tripod. IS will definitely help here too.

 

<p>

 

Shooting from a vehicle will be much more practical as well. For

quick grab shots, that might mean not having to set up a window mount

or bean bag. Using the 2x on a bean bag might also be possible for

the first time.

 

<p>

 

These are a few things that immediately come to mind. No, I wouldn't

hand hold the 600/f4, but I do think having IS will definitely help a

lot!

As everyone else has said, the least expensive way to get a quality 600/4 is a used manual Nikkor. If going to AF, I have to recommend Canon. I paid $6700 for my new, gray-market Canon 600/f4 last fall and I'm thrilled with it. I also feel that the 300/f4 image-stabilization lens is just way too important of a companion lens not to take into consideration when choosing a camera system.

I used to use Contax, and owned many of the lenses you mention, before switching to Canon because of their telephoto offerings. The 28/2.8 and 35/2.8 sure are great lenses, especially considering their price. For nature photography your zoom would probably do just as well since wide angles are usually stopped down. Primes would probably handle flare better. And the 28 and 35 are certainly better in that regard than the 21mm. The 35/2.8 is generally considered to be a better choice than the 35/1.4 if you don't need the speed.

 

If you're itching to put more money into the Contax system, the 100-300 zoom can't be beat. It's one terrific lens! The RTS3 would also be worthwhile owning because of the mirror lock. The 300/f4 doesn't get much respect, but it really isn't bad. It works very nicely with the Mutar3.

 

With that said, I really don't miss my Zeiss lenses. The Canon lenses I own are terrific. I do miss the Contax camera bodies, though.

One more note after reading Joe Boyd's reply-

 

The main purpose of the flash arm is to eliminate "red-eye" or "steel-eye" in your subjects. The direction of the shadow really is of minor concern, if any. If using fill-flash, hopefully there won't be any shadows at all.

I bought the Kirk flash arm a couple of months ago (for my Canon 600mm) and am very happy I did. The one screw (he'll also send a spare) mounts quickly and securely onto the Kirk plate. Given a choice, I would much rather do business with Kirk Enterprises. They will take credit card orders on the phone, and are always very friendly and helpful.

I think it's best to photograph hummers using at least 3 flash units. Two (or more) units should be aimed towards the bird and a third unit should be aimed at a background. Ideally it would be nice to only aim one unit at the bird to avoid multiple highlights in the eyes, but more than one are usually needed to get the throat feathers of males to reflect their colors. The background can be either naturally occuring vegetation or a sky-blue or dark green poster board. (Last time I did hummingbird photography I used blue poster board and draped some branches over it to look somewhat natural.) Use the flash as 100% of the light at your camera's fastest synch speed and you can use a slow film like Velvia without blurred wings. Place some flowers that they would feed on near a feeder that they frequent. You can also try to place a big trumpet vine flower over a feeder spout that usually has a plastic flower. I have found that sitting in a blind helps a lot, especially for males that are usually skittish. I used to use a 180mm lens + a 2x teleconverter for this. I'm anxious to try again this summer with a Canon 300/f4IS lens and 1.4x, which focuses down to 5 ft. and has AF (which will definitely increase my number of keepers!)

 

If you don't understand what I wrote, let me know and I can e-mail you some examples.

Thanks for all the comments here. I certainly do know when and where all the wildflowers first bloom and when and where the first warblers will show up in Ohio. I was only hoping to get some commentary flowing here that put the emphasis back on the wonders of spring and away from how to carry a 300/f4 lens, whether a 85mm or 105mm is best, or what to take on an expensive vacation to a faraway land.

 

Being a rabid birder and nature photographer with little free time in April and May, spring has so much to offer and I never have the time to do it right! If I had vacation time in April and May I'd just stay home and do day trips to the places I only can catch glimpses of when time and weather allows.

 

Putting the emphasis back on my last question, how do YOU enjoy spring?

Spring just happens too fast! My adrenaline just rushes every time I

head outside.

 

Living in Ohio, the forests in the southern part of this state are

overwhelming to me at this time of year with new birds arriving and

flowers are blooming and passing too rapidly. I can head down there

one day hoping to get some good flower shots, but the 118th Blue-Gray

Gnatcatcher and 56th Sycamore Warbler of the day, as well as the

first Ovenbird of the year could be around the next corner. I go back

a few days later when I have my next bit of free time and the 119th

Ovenbird and 57th Cerulean of the day and the first Kentucky Warbler

of the year could be around the next corner. A week or so later the

forests are a jungle and there is little light - all birding is done

by ear and the flowers are gone. I'm overwhelmed and I'm lucky to get

more than one or two good photos to show for it.

 

How do you enjoy spring in your area?

What does zoo photography have to do with nature photography? How can the study and understanding of the natural world be separated from nature photography? Someone above mentioned going to the Columbus Zoo. I live in Columbus and was forced to go in there for a gig about 10 years ago. It was pretty disgusting seeing those fat leopards! I'll never step foot in there again.

 

Sorry for the cynical response, but I don't feel that zoos accomplish anything whatsoever. People leave there as ignorant of the wildlife habitat that the condo they moved into destroyed as when they went in. I'll go as far as to say that zoos do far more harm than good. They display animals or birds confined in a humanly prescribed world rather than show that people exist in a whole world with many species besides itself. Fortunately I can drive in any direction outside of Columbus and enjoy observing and photographing a large variety of subjects and habitats.

My Studioball is about 8 years old I think. It still holds the tension perfectly well. The problem that has developed on it is that the panning base is wobbly, even when tightened as much as possible. This problem is also most noticable with a 600mm lens. I have planned on sending it for repair - does anyone know the address?

I hate to argue with Arthur Morris, but I used a Gitzo 341 for about 5 years with a 500/f4 and usually a 1.4x and found it to be ample enough for sharp photographs routinely. In fact, Arthur Morris at that time, was the one that said that the 341 would be a good tripod choice for me - and it was.

 

Mike Kirk makes a bracket for that lens and a TC300/301 and I'd strongly recommend it if you want to use a 2x. I called Kirk recently and they are planning on coming out with new redesigned brackets for this and many other lenses in the near future. These brackets would make me think twice about investing in RRS plates, since he offeres nothing similar.

The other responses here answered the technical questions you asked. A 300mm lens w/1.4x gives you a start in bird photography, but not much of one. To me 300mm is best as the long end for scenic photography. If you only want to spend a bit now, I'd suggest getting one of the aftermarket 400/f5.6 lenses and GOOD binoculars. From there you can decide for yourself if you want to pursue bird photography seriously enough to invest in big glass. Birding skills and photography skills can never be separated in bird photography. As has been said at these pages many times, the best long glass investment would be a used manual Nikkor such as the excellent 500/f4P + TC14B. Perhaps you should wait until you have the bucks for something like that and test the waters before spending now.

All I can add to this is that my 1548 has enabled me to switch from using a 500mm lens to a 600mm lens and really not notice a whole lot of difference in the weight I am carrying around. I also shedded 2 lbs., by switching from a Studioball to a B1. I think that the carbon fiber tripods are worth every penny.

You don't state what equipment you plan on using with the tripod. I personally think that there is a big advantage in having a center column when using long, heavy lenses (e.g. 500/600mm). I used to own a Gitzo 341 (the 340 with center column) for my 500mm lens. I now use a 1548 (no center column) with my 600mm lens. The center columns make it easier to carry around, giving you something to hold onto. Another big plus is that the center columns keep the legs from folding inwards, making quickly setting the rig in place much easier. I must say, though, I never once used the center column extended.

I'm planning my next big excursion for June. I went to Churchill last

June and would love to go back, but it's a bit expensive for me now.

I was instead thinking of exploring the prairies and marshes in

southern Manitoba (or northern North Dakota) instead. I'm primarily

interested in photographing birds. Target species would be Le

Conte's, Nelson's Sharp-Tailed, Baird's, Lark, and Clay-Colored

Sparrows, Chestnut-Collared Longspur, Lark Bunting, Sprague's Pipit,

Western and Eared Grebes, Upland Sandpiper, Marbled Godwit, Wilson's

Phalarope, Willet, and, if lucky, Burrowing Owl.

 

To me this seems like a fascinating area to explore, but I never hear

anything about it. There are several NWR's clustered in northwestern

North Dakota. T.Roosevelt National Park is also in that area. Has

anyone spent time up there? I own the "Birder's Guides" to both SE

and SW Manitoba, but I don't know anything about the photographic

opportunities or where to stay. Has anyone out there explored this

area with a camera?

I also used to own and use that lens for over 5 years. I used (and recommend) the Gitzo 341 (and a Studioball) with it. The 341 is a bit sturdier than the 320, but good enough. Today I would seriously consider getting a carbon fiber tripod (and Arca B1 head) for it, though. I like my Bogen 3221 for scenic and macro work when I can use a cable release, but I strongly believe that it is insufficient for a 500mm lens.

To answer your last question, yes it would be silly to get the 600/f4 if you already have a 400/2.8. I can't comment on the 400/2.8 with a 2x since I've never seen the results. I photograph mainly birds (with a Canon 600) and there might be a slight advantage in that to focus down to about 12 to 15 ft. I have to add an extension tube to my 840mm rig and that knocks off 2/3 stop of light. I've seen several serious bird photographers using the new Nikon 400/2.8S with a 2x since Nikon doesn't make AF extension tubes and that lens is relatively light.

I have heard others have the same problem that you mentioned, but my EOS3 has the most accurate meter of any camera I've ever owned. I've had a numerous cameras from Nikon and Contax over the years and the meters of none of them was the same and different meter patterns in the same camera often varied. I'm happy to say that my EOS3 is what I consider to dead-on with all metering patterns accross the board. My 1N, however, underexposes by 2/3 stop with the spot meter. I assume that this kind of thing is easy to adjust.

I agree with Don, get an EOS3 if you can. I like its ergonomics better than the 1N. The 1Nrs is even more expensive, isn't it? Yes, flying birds are much easier to phtograph with the EOS3, since the "sweet spot" is a lot bigger. The eye control focusing is useful for initially tracking a flying bird. For small songbirds I don't feel comfortable with the eye control though, since it doesn't always hit the exact spot you look at and the camera can start hunting through nearby twigs or grass. It might be useful for African mammals, though. Hopefully the price of the EOS3 will drop when the market eventually is saturated. I'd rather have 2 of them myself than have a 1N.

I just got a batch of film from the past week while I was photographing common woodland birds (much to the bewilderment of my birding friends). Since the sun was fading in and out I just kept 100 speed film in the camera and took my chances. I must say that I'm equally as pleased with the sharpness (sometimes amazing sharpness) from 1/100 sec. to 1/50th sec. as I am on the few shots at 1/125 and barely above. I was using a Canon 1N w/600/f4 + 1.4x + ext.tube on a Gitzo carbon fiber tripod with a Arca B1. I mention the equipment because keeping a steady platform is important. The shots that weren't sharp were because I didn't kep the rig steady or the bird moved. I fail to understand what the advantages of purchasing a fixed mirror camera would be. Losing 2/3 stops shutter speed would only aggrevate the problems of subject movement, winder vibrations, poor platforms, etc. Switching to E200, a nice film IMO, causes noticably more grain. The problem of mirror vibration between 1/50th and 1/125 sec. really is nil as far as I can tell.

I've gotten sharp shots with the 600/f4 + 1.4x down to about 1/50th or 1/30th second. I do notice if I fire off several shots in quick succession, the later shots are less sharp than the first. This leads me to think that the motor winder is actually causing more vibration and image degradation than the mirror itself between 1/30th and 1/125 sec.