vandit

The prime will indeed be sharper, as you put it.

 

The 170-500 is a very good lens, however, and I doubt if it would be "destroyed" on normal size prints. Specs-wise, the 170-500 is supposed to be slightly better than the 50-500, and almost as good as the Canon 100-400. I DO own that last lens and I get superbly crisp 11x14s from it. And I know atleast 2 people that put out publication-quality photographs with this lens.

 

So quality-wise, the 170-500 is pretty damn good as well. If you are shooting wildlife and need the extra focal length, it is a no-brainer. But do keep in mind that the lack of IS and relatively small max aperture at 500mm means that you will have to use high shutter speeds - ie, faster film, most likely. So the 300/4 may be a more practical choice if you are going to be handholding.

 

Also look at it from the long-term perspective - a 300/4 is more likely to be part of a long-term system than the 170-500, which I consider a "filler" lens.

 

HTH.

There is a Canon Flash FAQ floating around (try Bob Atkin's website - a google search should find it easily enough), which answers this in a lot of detail.

 

The short answer is this: your photo consists of 2 elements: the subject and the background. Let's say, a person standing in front of a mountain.

 

In the auto modes and in the P mode, the camera sets the Aperture and Shutter settings to expose just the subject correctly, with an emphasis on getting a fast, handholdable shutter speed. It will adjust flash output accordingly as well. The resultant photo will result in a reasonably well-exposed subject, but darker backgrounds...

 

In the Av, Tv and M modes, the camera sets Aperture and Shutter values to expose the *background*, while the flash output is set to expose the subject. Since the flash does not affect the exposure of the background (unless it is a REALLY big flash :)), your aperture and shutter values are the same as the values you got with the flash off.

 

From this, it also follows that if you change the shutter value at this stage, you are affecting background exposure and not subject exposure - the flash outout occurs in such a short time that changing the shutter speed has no impact on the actual exposure.

 

The logic above holds for low-light shooting. In bright-light settings, the camera automatically adjusts flash output to provide some "fill-in".

 

HTH.

Ugh - misread your question. Sorry.

 

I imagine you should be able to use AI servo pretty much the same way as you would use it without a flash. When you take the photo, the camera will fire 2 flashes - the first is used to estimate exposure, the other to actually expose the film. That way, not only is the focus determined at the time of clicking, but so is the exposure itself.

 

Locking FEL is what would throw your exposure off, if the subject-to-camera distance changes.

 

HTH

What are you trying to do? If you want just well-exposed subjects, set the camera to "P" mode (NOT Av or Tv modes, where the camera tries to expose the background properly as well, resulting in much slower shutter speeds) and fire away. The flash will freeze motion to a significant extent.

In response to those who still persist in the fantasy that a metal mount is somehow stronger than a plastic mount: what do you guys think the metal mount is attached to in all non-1v bodies? Plastics (read: composites) have quite remarkable properties these days - ask NASA.

 

To the original poster - the mismatch has more to do with balance, as others have suggested here. Also, most people who invest in big lenses have some idea about exposure, metering etc. - for them, an entry level body with its limited choice of metering modes (evaluative, evaluative and more evaluative with some spot metering if you lock exposure) makes the body less useful.

 

The body will function fine and the lens mount wont come off.

The previous posts have made excellent points (ie, the features of the Ti will make your photo taking experience better, but not necessarily result in better photos).

 

You will get better photos if you spend money on a better zoom than the 28-80 or 28-90 POS that comes with the kit. Get a 50/1.8 prime (<$70 at B&H), the 28-105/3.5-4.5 zoom (NOT the 28-105/4-5.6) or the 28-135 IS zoom.

 

Another point: if you want to learn photography (ie, learn about exposure, metering, etc.) as opposed to simply putting the camera on automatic and firing, then you may want to consider the next-higher body -- the Elan 7, the Elan IIe or even the discontinued A2. All of these give you a lot more options in terms of metering modes (which allows for more precise metering in those occasional cases where the camera's metering algorithm is fooled) as well as a bunch of additional features and functionalities which make your life a lot easier.

 

HTH.

Forget about TCs with that lens. I owned the 75-300/4.5-5.6 IS, and while it gave me sharp 11x14s (at normal viewing distances), I dont think it would have given enlargement-quality prints with a TC.

 

The Sigma 170-500 is your best bet. Lacks full-time manual and is slow, but image quality is very good - published specs indicate that it is as good/slightly better than the Sigma 50-500, which is also supposed to be a very good performer (almost as good as the Canon 100-400). With Sigma, your biggest worry is that older lenses will not work with newer bodies -- Sigma does one rechip for free, that's it. Most likely, as your skills and interest evolves, you WILL end up with those big, long, lenses anyway.. until then, the Sigma is a very credible alternative.

 

I spent several days researching long teles a few months ago -- I ended up getting the 100-400 because of the IS, but came very close to picking up the 170-500 (I still may do so, actually).

 

HTH.

I've used Elitechrome Extracolor on a recent 3-month trip through Africa and have been quite happy with the results. It is very saturated and punchy, and its emphasis on reds/yellows makes the overall photo warmish (which I like).

 

One particular lion photo, for example, was taken at mid-day but everyone who sees the print from the slide assumes it was a golden light shot.

 

But I echo the earlier comment - in harsh light and high contrast, it is less than spectacular. My photos of a black rhino in Matusadonha were very unsatisfactory. However, I am not sure whether another brand of film would have helped.

 

HTH.

Might I recommend the Tokina 19-35 as an alternative to the Canon wide angle? It is supposed to be very good, and having bought one, I have to concur. Excellent little gem.

Cats dont appear to be bothered by flashes... and the story about the van breaking down reminds me of my close encounter with a lion.

 

Mike Scott, of Khangela Safaris had set up a blind by a riverside, to try to photograph rhinos under a full-moon, when they came to drink water. The hide was set against the riverbank and was basically a semi-circle of stones set against a cutting that led up the bank (our backdoor escape route). The rhinos were supposed to come later in the night, so we took a nap. At one point, I woke up - to see a lioness peering in, about petting distance from me. I sat up with a yell, she bolted... her friend, a male, tried to stalk the hide a couple of times. Soon, the cats realized that there were humans in there, and settled down nearby - proceeding to drink at the waterhole, which was 10m away. The lions then sat on the other side of the river bed for 3 hours, serenading us with their roars.

 

After 30 min, I really had to go take a leak (the adrenalin rush earlier was taking its toll). No choice - had to step out of the hide and go against the riverbank... in full view of 3 lions about 20m away. Talk about performance anxiety :)

 

I took a bunch of shots of the lions with a flash - didnt seem to bother them one bit (they didnt even look our way at that). A solitary bull elephant that came by to drink later was a little surprised by the light, but didnt appear too unduly bothered either (I would NOT try that with cow elephants, though). He gave us a brief look of "what the hell is THAT about" and went back to drinking water.

 

My most memorable night in Africa :)

 

Vandit

For starters, ignore that bit about getting a 24mm or a similar wide angle prime if you want to do wildlife photography. Also, renting a lens may be an option every so often, but the cost does add up and you still dont end up with a lens of your own.

 

If you can afford it, a 300/4 would give you better pictures and allow you to use a teleconverter with it, giving you a decent 420/5.6. Look at some reputed mail order places for a used model, if you need to. Slight downside: no zoom. With wildlife, you usually dont have the luxury of being able to zoom with your feed. A second body with a different lens will compensate, and besides, unless you are in Africa, you will rarely find a 300mm to be too long. So this is your #1 option.

 

Otherwise, a 75-300 or 100-300 should be a good starting point. The 100-300 is supposed to be a smidge better than the 75-300, but the 75-300 has an IS trim. This lens will give you pretty damn good 11x14s, so dont be put off by what some people have to say about it. Yes, you will likely need a longer lens, but that can come later.

 

As your skills and budget expand, you'll realize a few truisms:

- it will never be long enough

- you never have enough money to get the lens you REALLY need

:)

 

I have some poorly-scanned photos (inexpensive flatbed, the bane of photos) from a recent trip to Africa online:

www.pbase.com/vkalia/

Well, I agree with the saying that better lenses are preferable to a better body -t hat being said, better bodies have their uses as well.

 

The two-dial system of the Elan 7 makes changing aperture and shutter speeds a lot faster in manual mode. In aperture or shutter priority, this also makes it very easyto set exposure compensation.

 

The custom functions of the Elan 7 make the body much more customizable.

 

The 7 body also has a whole lot of nice extras - fast drive (4 fps) and mirror lock-up, to name another 2. A convenient DoF preview function.

 

The Ti is a nice enough body for beginner use, but if you plan to take up the hobby seriously, you may as well get the 7 now if you can. It'll last you a very long time.

The 300/4 is one good way to go about this - that will give you a 600/8.

 

Another option might be to see if you can get a used/excellent condition Canon 100-400/4.5-5.6 - this, with a 1.4X TC, would give you an image stabilized 560/8... close enough to 600.

 

A third option would be to look at the Sigma 170-500 or 50-500. Both of them have received enough good reviews and if you check out www.wading-birds.com, you will see a lot of photos taken with the 170-500. The 170-500 is very cheap, as an added bonus. The 50-500 is similar in quality, but adds full-time manual and HSM.

 

 

HTH.

I strongly recommend the Elan II for the following reason:

 

- the command dial: while it certainly is possible to adjust both shutter and aperture with a single dial, the two dial system makes it a lot easier. Exposure compensation can also be made on the fly, without any fuss whatsoever. I tend to shoot in Av mode with a heavy reliance on exposure compensation - to me, this system is a godsent.

 

- the Elan II is a more full-featured body - and if you plan to go beyond the basic "auto modes", they all come handy. More custom functions, faster rapid-fire and so on.

 

- the older meter isnt a problem. I have an Elan 7 with a 35 segment metering and the IIe with the 6-segment metering, and both are very good. More importantly, both are just as likely to be fooled by certain types of scenes: overall very dark/very light, strong differences in lighting between the subject and background, backlighting and so on).

 

- AF may be faster on the Ti (dont know), but to be honest, Canon's AF is so fast that you are not likely to be fussed one way or the other. Certainly, I dont notice any discernible loss of speed when I use the IIe instead of the 7.

 

IMO, if Canon had not introduced the Eos 7, the Elan II would still be holding its own as a mid-end serious amateur body. I own both of them, and while the EOS 7 is better, the II isnt that far behind.

 

For me - no contest. Elan II hands down.

I just finished spending 3 months in Africa shooting with this lens. On my 28-105 zoom, I can head the dust scraping about inside when I zoom it around. With this lens, no dust problems. However, I will point out that I did treat this lens with a lot more care than I did the 28-105 zoom :)

 

I too had some concerns about the ergonomics of a push-pull zoom, but I got used to it very quickly. For wildlife photography, I have seldom had problems zooming in or out to adjust for a quick-changing situation. The hand that supports the lens simply moves out and zooms the lens back or forth, as needed.

 

At one point, I got charged by an elephant and ended up knocking over my tripod - the push pull was a little stiff for a day or two afterwards, but after 2 days of regular use, is back to normal without any sticking.

 

Vandit

Hi Steven -

 

I just returned after spending 3 months in eastern and southern Africa.

 

A friend of mine who lives in Moshi put me in touch with a guide there - this guy, Temba, is very experienced and has worked for 10+ years as a guide in the northern Tanzanian parks. Recently, he has started to work for himself. I used him for a private tour in Tarangire and was very satisfied.

 

For a few dollars more than the generic $85-per-night-camping tour, you can have your own custom photographic safari, with bush camps at the best spots in the park.

 

If you'd like, drop me an email at vkalia00 at yahoo dot com, and i'll give you the contact info of my friend in Moshi. He can arrange the details for you. If you want to do a lodge safari, Temba can probably arrange a discounted deal at the lodges as well (though I cannot tell you how good the price will be).

 

For Kenya, if you are on a budget, the camping safaris arent the greatest for photography: you usually camp outside the park and generally miss the golden hour. Savuka - www.savuka.com - does arrange a relatively inexpensive lodge safari at $120 pp/p night (camping for $60 per person per night -- and a pretty good affair, considering the price).

 

Vandit