sjhein

Ray,

In my opinion, this lens should be viewed as a flexible *handheld* telephoto that enables you to capture images in situations where tripod use is either impractical or impossible. If I have the time to setup and use a tripod, I will almost always use the 500 f/4 or 300 f/2.8 depending on the application. The 80-400 is lightweight (relatively speaking) and compact, and I can have it by my side ready to shoot in almost any situation. I can think of many instances where I have captured an image with the 80-400 that I would have missed otherwise. It was the perfect lens for a Galapagos trip that I took last year (see my Galapagos gallery at http://www.heinphoto.com for sample images - I shot all but the scenics with the 80-400).

If used properly it can most certainly produce both enlargeable and publication-quality images. Does the image quality compare with the 300 f/2.8? Nope, but then again, not many other lenses do either. The VR feature does work, and does indeed allow handholding at slower shutter speeds than an equivalent non-VR telephoto (subject movement will obviously impact your results at the slower shutter speeds).

For my use as a handheld telephoto that supplements my primes, I would most certainly purchase this lens again without a second thought. On the other hand, if I intended to use the lens primarily on a tripod, I would probably go with the 300 f/4 + TC-14E.

-Scott

Patrick,

>I guess what I'm saying is: if you have a full frame CCD or CMOS camera,(or film camera) and take a picture of, lets say a bird. You then take a D30 and do the same thing (same lens, distance, etc.). Because of the smaller sensor the D30 image is only of the birds head. If you want an 8x10 of only the birds head, you will have the same picture whether it's a crop from a full frame body or from the D30.<

Respectfully, this simply isn't true. Remember that the issue here is one of pixels and resolution. If you compare cameras with the same "real" resolution (say 6 megapixel), but one has a full-frame CCD and the other a smaller CCD, both cameras will produce images with exactly the same number of pixels (assuming no in-camera interpolation is going on). One camera will produce images with a narrower field of view than the other, but the resolution of both images is the same.

If you then have to crop the image from the full-frame CCD in order to make the bird's head the same size as the image from the smaller CCD, then it will *necessarily* have fewer pixels and thus will not be the same picture as the image produced by the smaller CCD: it will be a lower-resolution image of the bird's head.

-Scott

Not really an answer to your question, but I thought I would weigh in on Michio Hoshino...

On our first trip to Alaska many years ago, my wife and I were in Denali at the Eielsen Ranger Station. We had just stepped off the bus and noticed a big crowd of photographers on the back deck of the visitor center. The subject of their interest was a mother Grizzly with 2 cubs who were feeding very close by. Rather than try and elbow our way onto the deck, we walked back to the parking area and stood near a lone photographer who was shooting the bears from a different perspective than the others. We briefly exchanged pleasantries and then quietly enjoyed the spectacle. Later in the bookstore my wife was browsing through "Grizzly" by Michio Hoshino and made the connection between the author and the photographer with whom we had been enjoying our first close Grizzlies in Alaska. We immediately bought the book and he was gracious enough to autograph it for us. It is one of our cherished souveniers of that trip.

We were saddened to hear of his death a few years ago, but it caused us to pull out "Grizzly" and remember both Michio and our first Grizzlies in Alaska. He was both a talented and dedicated photographer.

-Scott

I have been using a "standard" (not slim) Heliopan polarizer on my 45mm XPan and have been reasonably happy so far. I have not yet tried stacking it on top of the center filter, partly due to vignetting concerns, but mostly because I don't want to lose all my light to the polarizer + ND filtering. Since I primarily use the XPan for landscapes, I am usually stopped down to f/8 or f/11 so the need for the center filter is reduced.

As another poster mentioned, the Heliopan filters have index numbers printed on the filter ring. This makes it easy to hold the filter to your eye, adjust the polarization and note the index number at the top of the ring, and then install the filter back onto the lens and rotate the filter back to the proper index location. In addition, since the XPan uses TTL metering, you don't have to dial in exposure compensation to deal with the filter factor.

One thing to keep in mind is that the degree of polarization is dependent on the viewing angle relative to the sun. This means that with a wide angle scene, the polarizing effect can vary noticably across the frame. This is most noticable with solid blue skies, and could be mistaken for vignetting.

Why don't you go ahead and try the slim polarizing filter both with and without the center filter and let us know how it works for you.

Good luck,

-Scott

Tevor,

>>I imagine it ought to be a simple software task as the scan simply needs to be carried on further than would be the case for a standard 35mm frame.<<

How simple this task is depends on the design of the scanner. For scanners like the HP PhotoSmart that move the film across a fixed detector array, a simple software modification may indeed work. For scanners like the Nikon LS-2000 in which the film stays in a fixed position and the CCD itself is moved, it may not be quite so straigtforward, since hardware modifications might be required.

With that said, it really isn't that difficult to scan XPan images in two pieces and then stitch them back together. If you don't want to try and figure out stitching in Photoshop, there are several third-party stitching tools that work just fine. I have been using Panavue Image Assembler, which is very simple to use and have been quite happy with the end result.

Good Luck,

-Scott

Richard,

I'm not sure how familiar you are with the M7, but one thing you should keep in mind is that the shutter is contained within each lens, not within the camera body. Consequently, a mishandled lens could have a damaged shutter in addition to any optical problems.

I agree completely with the suggestion that you should at least consider buying the equipment overseas. I bought my M7II from Robert White in the UK and saved significant dollars over what I would have had to pay here in the US. It was a completely painless transaction and the only downside is that I would have to have warranty repairs handled by Robert White.

-Scott

Vic,

Check out the following web site:

http://www.calphoto.com/wflower.htm

Regards,

-Scott

Pete,

I don't know if my Mamiya 7II is substantially different, but when I load the film, I simply crank the winder in small increments (not full "winds") until the arrow lines up perfectly with the start mark on the body. I then close the back and continue winding with full winds until the camera is ready to go at the first frame. Works fine for me.

Good Luck,

-Scott

Larry,

I spent a long day on shuttle buses in Denali last June, and have a couple of comments to add to the discussion.

Lens Selection: I took a 300/2.8 lens with both 1.4x and 2x TCs and found this range to be just about perfect. Many animals (Caribou and Moose in particular) were very close to the bus, and 300 or 420mm was more than adequate. The only time I wished I had access to my 500mm was for our Grizzly sightings - they were all long distance and even 600mm was inadequate (which probably means that my 500mm with TCs would have been inadequate as well). In addition, managing a 500mm lens in an even moderately-crowded bus would be difficult. All the other tourists on the bus will be vying for the same photo ops that you are, and you will all be trying to shoot out of the same set of windows on the same side of the bus when a wildlife "event" occurs.

Camera Support: Most of the time I was able to rest my lens on the bus window, and this worked just fine (our driver was good about shutting off the engine when we made a wildlife stop). A few times I used my monopod braced against the floor or a seat.

Hiking: Make sure you check the bus schedule for the section of road that you plan on hiking. The bus frequency varies depending on where you are, and you could end up waiting awhile if the buses are full. We had momentary visions of spending the night along the beaver ponds near Wonder Lake when the next-to-last bus of the day couldn't stop to pick us up because it was already full...

DUST: Be prepared for lots and lots and lots of dust. The road is only paved for the first little bit, and the rest of it is dusty gravel. Every time a vehicle passes you, the inside of your bus will fill with dust. Be particularly careful when you choose to change film/lenses. I kept my camera in a closed long-lens bag when I wasn't shooting to try and protect it.

Good luck and enjoy yourself - Alaska is awesome!

-Scott

Rakesh,

I forgot to include this in my last message. The following web site has a fall foliage hotsheet with info on California fall colors:

http://www.calphoto.com/fall.htm

-Scott

Rakesh,

You might consider a trip to the Eastern Sierra (4.5 to 6 hr drive from SF depending on where you go). I suspect the fall colors should be pretty nice this weekend or next...

Good Luck,

-Scott

Paul,

On an outgoing tide the mudflats around Doran Park (on the Southwest side of Bodega Bay), and near the road out to Bodega Head, are accessible and can be very good for shorebird photography. Just north of Bodega Bay is the town of Jenner. This is where the Russian River enters the Pacific and is a good place for harbor seals and gulls (if you are into that sort of thing) - there is a state (or county) park on the south side of the river that provides good access. If you have time and can continue North on 1, there are quite a few possibilities. The Point Arena harbor (which is quite far north from Bodega Bay) is worth checking: there has been a Laysan Albatross that has sometimes spent the winter around the cove there (although I don't think it showed up last year). Just north of Point Arena are the Garcia River Bottoms. There are often tundra Swans and other geese and ducks in that area, including an emperor goose a few years ago.

As the previous poster mentioned, Point Reyes National Seashore can also be very good. Bolinas Lagoon is located between Pt. Reyes and San Francisco on highway 1 and can be good for winter shorebirds and ducks - there are usually several eurasian wigeon and perhaps a tufted duck in the flocks of waterfowl.

Good Luck, and let me know if I can provide any more information.

FWIW, B&H sells the Imacon Flextight Photo scanner for $9995.95. This is probably outside the range that most individual photographers would be willing to pay for an MF scanner.

-Scott

Steve,

Bob is right on - if you want to project XPan slides fully, you need a 6x7 slide projector. The only 6x7 projector that is even relatively affordable new is the completely-manual ProCabin 67Z projector that is distributed by Mamiya, and it is still $1200 or so if you buy it in the US (much cheaper if you buy it overseas as is the case with most Mamiya products). Gepe makes a 6x7 glass slide mount formatted for the XPan. If you don't like messing with the Gepe glass mounts, the cardboard Bair mounts (http://www.tssphoto.com/sp/) will also work in the ProCabin projector. The Bair mounts are actually a little wider than the Gepe mounts (3.5" x 3.5" vs 3.3" x 3.3"), which prevents them from being used in the optional 6x7 carrier, which seems to be designed specifically for the Gepe-style mounts.

-Scott

Jon,

You might also consider Bair Mounts (http://www.tssphoto.com/sp/). They are cardboard mounts with an adhesive (actually a "cohesive" according to the web site) already applied to both halves of the mount. The adhesive is a little like contact cement in that it sticks to itself, but not to the transparency. You simply position your transparency over the opening, close the mount and it seals immediately. The mounts come in either white or black in a variety of sizes, including 6x6. I have been experimenting with them for 24x65 panorama slides taken with my Xpan camera, and find them *much* easier to deal with than the Gepe glass mounts for that format.

-Scott

David,

The first thing you might do is get a copy of "California Mammals" by Jameson and Peeters, published by the UC Press. It contains pretty decent range maps and distribution info for California Mammals.

Regarding Elk in California, the most common Elk is the small Tule Elk, which are fairly easy to find and photograph at Pt. Reyes National Seashore on the coast north of San Francisco (and amazingly enough, on the Concord Naval Weapons Station, which is 5 minutes from my suburban home). Another race of Elk, the Roosevelt Elk, can be found easily on the far north coast, the classic location being Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park. According to the range maps, the big Rocky Mountain Elk are only found in the extreme Northeast corner of the state (the Warner Mountains), although I think they may have been introduced into a few other locations. I don't think there are any Elk in the Sierra.

Bighorn Sheep (the Desert Bighorns) are mainly found in the Southern Sierra Nevada and some of the desert mountains in Southern California. At one time they could be found on the East side of Tioga Pass, just outside Yosemite National Park. However, on a recent trip to Yosemite, a friend who keeps track of such things thought that there may be only a few animals left in that herd. The range maps also show a population in the Warner Mountains.

Although big cats (i.e. Mountain Lions) are apparently increasing in numbers in California due to a fairly recent state law that prohibited hunting, I have yet to see one. As you probably know, mountain lions are extremely wary, and your chances of photographing them in the wild are pretty slim.

I guess the best suggestion for seeing and photographing big mammals is to go where they are protected and not hunted. In the central Sierra, this is primarily Yosemite National Park. The wilderness areas that border Yosemite on the north and south do allow hunting, generally during the fall. Unfortunately, during the summer Yosemite is crawling with humans. Fortunately, most of those humans sleep late and don't stray very far from their tour bus. So, if you get up early and get off the road (or go in the "off" season), you should be able to find some of the larger mammals - keep an eye out for the really beautiful cinnamon-phase Black Bears that you find there.

Good Luck!

-Scott

I returned last week from a 2-week Alaska trip that included both Denali and Kenai Fjords. If you can afford the time and the weather looks cooperative I highy recommed taking an all-day Kenai Fjords boat trip out of Seward. We took one of the Mariah small boat tours out to the Chiswell Islands and the Northwest Glacier and had outstanding photography opportunities. Since your interest is photography, it is important that you take one of the smaller boats - the Mariah boat that we were on held only 20 people max (there were 11 on our trip), but still was able to cruise at 18 knots (which is important since it's a 150-mile round trip). The larger tour boats have limited outside viewing spots and blast along at 30 knots! The Chiswell Islands are a major seabird rookery with Horned and Tufted Puffins, Parakeet Auklets, Black-legged Kittiwakes, Common and Thick-billed Murres, etc. I was also able to get great images of Sea Otters, Fin and Humpback Whales, and Stellers Sea Lions. The Northwest Glacier is a spectacular landscape subject, particularly on a sunny day, like the one we were blessed with. The skipper and the deck hand of the Mariah boat were both very knowledgeable about the wildlife (by far the best I have had on any boat trip), and did a good job setting the boat up for photography and viewing.

Regarding Denali, the bus trip through the park is definitely worthwhile, particularly for big mammals. Be aware, however, that a round trip out to Wonder Lake is 10-11 hours with only 20 minutes or so at the lake. You can always stay and pick up the next bus but that makes a long day even longer (particularly if the next bus is full). If you are really serious about photographing at Wonder Lake you should probably plan to camp or stay at one of the lodges near Kantishna. One of the frustrating things about the bus trip is that you have no control over where the bus stops. If it is very crowded, you may not even be able to get to a window that would allow you to shoot at a close caribou, moose, or Grizzly. Unless it has rained recently, the ride is also *very* dusty, so make sure you have protection for your camera gear. I also second the recommendation for a trip from Cantwell at least part way out the Denali Highway. There is great scenery, and the possibility for wildlife - we saw our only wolves of the trip on the Denali Highway.

We also visited the Pribilof Islands for three days and two nights, which was too short for serious photography, mostly because the weather didn't cooperate - the driving rain and wind made for less than optimum photographic conditions.

Good Luck and have a great trip

-Scott

John,

Late July and early August in Southeast AZ can present some outrageous birding (and photo) opportunities. If you are specifically interested in hummers, I would recommend a visit to one of the following locations:

1) Beatty's feeders in Miller Canyon near Sierra Vista (http://personal.riverusers.com/~beattybb/). We observed 11 species of hummingbirds there in 3 hours last July.

2) The Patton's Feeders in Patagonia. The Patton's property is adjacent to the Sonoita Creek Preserve and they are set up year-round with many hummingbird feeders and are very birder/photographer friendly. There is often a cooperative male Vermilion Flycacther hanging around as well.

Ramsey Canyon and Madera Canyon (The Santa Rita Lodge) are two additional possibilites for hummers and other birds at feeders. If the summer monsoon rains have started (which they should have), then there are a number of normally-furtive sparrows that will be perched at the top of shrubs/trees singing on territory. What else; Trogons in sycamores, Lizards in the desert, Spadefoot and Green Toads chorusing in ephemeral ponds, I'm getting carried away...

For general birding spots, you should pick up either Taylor's "A Birder's Guide to Southeastern Arizona", or Davis and Russell's "Finding Birds in Southeast Arizona". Both can purchased from American Birding Association Sales (http://www.americanbirding.org)

Good luck and enjoy...

-Scott

Francis,

I think you probably had run across Michael Reichmann's Luminous Landscape web site:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com

He is running a fall photography workshop out of Bishop. Unfortunately, I think it is full.

Tony,

Here is a link to a california wildflower "hot sheet":

http://www.calphoto.com/wflower.htm

Based on my own experience over the past month, this has not been a particularly good year on average for wildflowers in the Mojave Desert.

For general scenic photography, you might consider Anza-Borrego State Park in addition to Joshua Tree.

Good Luck,

-Scott

Allen,

I visited the east unit of the park a couple of weekends ago. There is a large one-way auto loop with many pullouts. The loop starts out winding through the desert scrub, then climbs a bit on the hillside before dropping back to the visitor's center/entrance. We stopped at a picnic area on the North end of the loop and took a nice walk out through the desert looking for birds, lizards, etc. There were plenty of Saguaros in various states that you could use to make comparative photos. In fact, one of my favorate images from the trip was taken there - a vertical of a Saguaro taken with my panoramic camera (Xpan) with my sister and her son standing next to it scratching the side of the cactus with a stick to see if they could produce an Elf Owl from one of the holes.

We also made a quick visit to the Tucson Mountain Park, which borders the West unit of Saguaro National Park, but didn't have time to actually go into the park. My suspicion is that the West unit is probably more crowded than the East unit due to the proximity of the Sonoran Desert Museum (I second the recommendation for a vist), Old Tucson, etc. From a landscape photography standpoint, I found the area around Tucson Mountain Park to be more intersting due to the profile of the mountains in the background. There is a loop road that runs out from Gilbert Ray Campground that seemed to have some nice opportunities for landscape photos. Unfortunately, we were late for our flight home, so I wasn't able to spend much time there.

Enjoy your trip, the Sonoran Desert is quite amazing...

-Scott

Andrew,

The 300 f4 plus a PN-11 Extension tube with or without the TC-14B teleconverter is one of my favorite combinations to use for amphibian and reptile close-up photography. I mount the PN-11 between the lens and the TC-14b to increase magnification. One of my favorite images of all time taken with this combination is a head-on shot of a very young (and small) Coast Horned Lizard that looks like a dinosaur on film. The working distance allowed me to stay far enough away that the lizard didn't spook, and I was able to get frame-filling shots of the little guy. I have also used this combination at times to provide an interesting perspective for wildflower photography.

This is certainly no replacement for a true macro/micro like the 200 f4, but it gives me quite a bit of flexibility when I don't want to carry bunch of lenses in the field.

David,

I have used this exact combination for a number of years as my lightweight bird rig. It's also a great combo for snakes and lizards, especially with a PN-11 extension tube added. I have also experienced a little bit of rotational play between the TC and the body, but it has never resulted in any noticable image degradation so I stopped worrying about it.

However, one other thing to watch out for is loosening of the small screws that hold the TC mounting plate to the body of the TC. I actually had those loosen while running around the Arizona desert last year. When this happenend I was actually able to "wiggle" the camera body back and forth while it was attached to the TC. Since this resulted in the film plane being changed slightly relative to the lens, it would likely have affected image quality to some extent. I was fortunate that I noticed it and was able to re-tighten the screws with a jeweler's screw driver set I happened to have along (before it fell to pieces on the desert floor <g>).

FYI, I just noticed this morning that Del's Camera in Santa Barbara, California has one of these listed in 9- condition:

200-400 f4.0 ED AIS very very rare (9-) $6450

(122x) Big and heavy but very sharp, fast, and flexible: works great with TC-14B and TC-301 converters; you can have 200-800 without removing the lens from the tripod.

http://www.delscam.com

Good Luck,

-Scott

Dan,

This is probably a question best answered by an employment, copyright, or intellectual property lawyer (gasp!), but I will give you my opinion anyway - it's probably worth what you are paying for it <g>. An individual's employment agreement will usually stipulate who owns any intellectual property generated by that employee while on the job and what the company considers to be it's intellectual property. Depending on the company, the definition of "IP" can range from very specific to very general. Signing such an agreement is usually a requirement of employment.

In the case of my own company, we require our employees to sign over rights to IP that relates directly to our business (development of scientific instrumentation, related software, documentation, and methodologies). If we would discover that an employee had written the great American novel, or created the worlds most amazing photographic images while on company time, it would be a *performance*, not an IP ownership issue for us. The place where it gets tricky is if as a result of the employees actions while on the job (e.g. taking a photograph), my company would somehow end up assuming liability for those actions (being sued by the subject of the photograph for example).

If I were going to take a "day job" with the intent of enhancing my portfolio while on the job, I would take a long close look at the employment agreement. Depending on the flexibility of the employer, I would probably even try to come to an agreement in advance as to the ownership of the images, rather than have a surprise after I had already created those images (easier said than done).

We actually had just such an agreement with an employee who wanted to be able to continue development of his own software package that we had no interest in pursuing or supporting. The agreement stated very specifically who owned what, who supported what, and how much time we were willing to let the employee spend on his "project" while on the job.

FWIW,

-Scott