bob stewart jacksonville

Robert,

You can't put the child in the photo trekker, while it might fit, airline regulations don't allow it.

There are two wimberly heads, the wimberly head and the sidekick. The sidekick is designed to work with a ball head. If you already have a good ballhead the sidekick should be more than adequate for a 400 4.5, but if a 600 is on your wish list some day, you might want to go for the Wimberly head. Wimberly has a web site. Its a family owned business and Clay Wimberly is very nice and very helpful if you call with questions.

I looked for a Wimberly head used on an auction site for some time, found one but didn't win the bid. They appear to be pretty sturdy so I wouldn't be reluctant to buy one used, but there are so few of them it may be hard to find.

I'd echo the wimberly head comment. I have one, and properly set up I can do flight pictures with a 600mm f/4 on it, just about as easy as handholding a 300f/4. I don't think your Minolta will autofocus with a 7.2 maximum aperture (only camera I know that will is an EOS3 and then only on the center focal point, and perhaps a 1V) and it certainly won't autofocus well. Without autofocus, you have be awfully good with manual focus to do bird flight photography.

The lobby bar of the Ritz Carlton. It can be darn hot in Phoenix in May.

On a related tangent, which protective cover will give my couch a more natural appearence, pvc, or latex? The logic of putting a filter on your camera to protect the lens is about the same as putting a plastic cover on your sofa. If you plan to take the filter off when you use the lens, its no more than a lens cap. If you leave it on, it has to cost you image quality (exactly how much is open to debate.) It appears the practice of using skylight filters came about as a way for discount camera sellers to get some profit margin back when they sold you a lens at a very low price.

Nobby, this image was done with stacked teleconvetors(Canon not Nikon, however) 600 f/4, 2x tc, 1.4 tc and 87 mm of extension tube. With rock solid caera support its possible to get good images with stacked teleconvertors. I realize it's difficult to judge sharpmess on a jpeg at screen resolution, but if you look at the eye feathers, I think you can see this is pretty sharp.

I agree for the most part mode 2. However if the birds are flying toward you, you may want to turn off IS altogether. ( in that situation it tends to slow down the autofocus in locking on.

Works well as long as you are both the same denomination. Mixed marriages(canon v. Nikon) are doomed to a painful financially ruinous end.

Brett, whichever flash you buy, also buy the Better Beamer Flash extender. It will increase your flash coverage distance with long lenses, increase battery life, and decrease recycle time.

I have the 300 f/4 IS and would highly reccomend it. I think if I were you I might sell the 75-300IS, and use the proceeds toward a 70-200 2.8, instead of the 70-200 4.

as for used vs. new, I'm a strong believer in letting someone else pay for the depreciation off the lot. Best photo purchase I've made is a used 600mm EF f/4 L for $3700. Find used lenses where the white paint is scuffed, and the optics are clean. Cosmetics on the outside lower the price without effecting the photos.

If you're going to concentrate on birds get the 600. If birds are not the primary focus get the 500. I have the 600 f/4 (not IS) and it is big committment. Its' heavy, requires a bigger tripod, bigger head (preferably a wimberly) and a bigger bag. you're looking at $2,000 in a new tripod, new head, and new bag to feed the 600's demands.

By the way I took a seminar with Arthur Moris theis Feruary. Several times he siad I'm just going to use the 500 here, but each time he said it, he ended up pulling out the 600.

Canon G1 (now the G2). You can stick it in a pocket, and it does a remarkably good job. If you want to shoot film, since you already have Canon equipment, a rebel and a 28-135IS makes a pretty light rig that still covers a wide range, and works well without a tripod.

I would think hard about making a major investment in medium format now. If its something you need for professional work right now there are obviously still some advantages to medium format. However, digital slrs are rapidly improving, and a $5,000 investment in medium format equipment may be worth very little in a few years. I was looking at used medium format equipment in a camera store yesterday, and the owner said it is not selling at all because people are going digital. I think this trend will only accelerate. Unless there's a compelling reason you need the medium format equipment now, I'd wait a little while and see what shakes out. Even if you don't want to go digital, I'm betting there will be some cheap prices on used medium format equipment soon.

John,

I have this lens. There are three focus ranges 6m to inninity, 6m to 15m, and 15m to infinity. The second two are designed to limit the range the autofocus runs through to speed up autofocus. If you know your subject is going to be beyond 15m set it to 15m to infinity and it will focus faster, likewise if you know its between 6-15m set it in that range. If you can't get it to focus inside of 15m, or beyond 15m, remember to check this setting, you may have it in the wrong position. As a default I leave it in the full range 6m to infinity and only switch when a particular situation dictates.

A related feature is the preset button, which allows you to immediately return to a fixed focus distance. Focus on a point, hit the preset button. Now anytime (that the camera remains on) you twist the ring on the lens the focus returns to that preset distance. I haven't found this too useful for bird photography. Probably more useful doing sports where you can better predict the exact spot something is going to happen.

I bought mine used also, so I've been through your learning curve, email me if you have other questions.

As someone who regularly lugs around around a 600mm f/4, (with the required heavy tripod and tripod head) I can tell you there is something to be said for lighter.

If you're in the northern outerbanks, there's an audobon preserve between Duck and Corrolla. Just across from the Sanderling Hotel, there's a nature trail that leads back into the preserve. There are observation towers that offer a nice view over the sound. It's a lovely setting. In the summer I haven't had a lot of success with birds there, but its a nice place to be, and you may well see herons, egrets, ospreys, red winged black birds.

I tend to agree with the one comment above that shooting on the beach may be the most productive in June.

David, I also agree with Valerie's comments about used lens. You can find good optically sharp lenses with some cosmetic wear on Ebay, much cheaper than new. I got a Canon 600mm f/4 L lens on Ebay for $3700. Not cheap but less than half of a new 600 f/4 L IS

David,

If you want to take bird photos, 600 f/4 IS is the gold standard, but its heavy and expensive. For flight photos lots of people use the 100-400 zoom, but some people will tell you it is not as sharp as other Canon L lenses. If you can't afford a 500 f/4 or 600 f/4, I would reccommend the 300mm f/4 IS and the Canon 1.4 and 2x teleextenders. The 300mm f/4 I believe is sharper than either the 100-400, or the 400 f/5.6. Also it will give you more options to use with teleconverters. I would not use the 100-400 with a teleconverter for sharpness reasons. ( i'm enough of a tyro to believe teleconverters should ideally only be used on prime lenses). The 400 f/5.6 can work with the 1.4 (and even autofocus on the central sensor with the EOS 1 or EOS 3, but I think the 300mm with both the 1.4tc and the 2tc would give you more flexibility, as well as giving you the benefit of the faster f stop at 300mm.

I often use the 300 f/4 IS hand held for flight photos in IS mode 2, and it seems to work fairly well.

Is there a substantial advantage to the new series Canon EOS 2x

extender? I'm weighing buying the new one against getting one of the

old one used. I understand the new extender is better sealed against

weather, which is not a prticular concern to me unless it will effect

image quality.

Daren,

 

I would always use the Beamer when you are using the flash,even when you are within the coverage range of the flash without the Beamer. By increasing the efficiency of the flash, the Beamer decreases the drain on the batteries, and decreases recycle time. Regulate the amount of fill flash using flash exposure compensation, not by using or not using the beamer.

 

For flash as fill, I generally work around -1 stop compensation, and vary from there depending on the situation and the color of the subject.

At the risk of exposing my technical ignorance (no pun intended), I dont' understand this discussion on either a theoretical or experience level. Obviously the 1.4x will cost one stop of light, and the 2x two stops. However, the in camera ttl metering system is reading the light actually entering the camera and will account for the light loss. I've used the 1.4x on an A2 as well as an EOS 3 without dialing in any exposure compensation and have seen no difference in exposure.

for what it is worth, I just got back from a bird photography seminar in florida, and two out of twelve in the group were shooting with Nikon D1x's. The technology is there now. I think there are two main obstacles: 1) price; 2) acceptance by buyers. Both of these issues are evolving very quickly, and I think many professional, and serious amateurs will be digital in the near future.

Carlos,

 

I just got back from the Southwest Florida trip. I would echo Mike's comments. Even though we were not blessed with great light, it was a wonderful trip. The Venice rookery was incredible, and Ding Darling was very nice. Also, Arthur has a lot of local knowledge regarding where to shoot that resulted in photo opportunities that would be impossible to find on your own. (such as the pair of burrowing owls we shot on sunday afternoon.)

Arthur is passionate about bird photography, and about passing on his knowledge. If you are serious about bird photography, I believe that his seminars are a very valuable resourse.

Thanks everyone for all the help. I decided to get a Gitzo 1500, sacrificing my back instead of my wallet ($488 at B&H). Like everything in photography its a trade off.