ligia_dovale

Richard,

 

The image of the spider is great! Please tell us a little bit more about the flash settings and if you were using one or two flash heads. If one, what type of flash bracket did you use? (I have the double bracket from Stroboframe.) Also, how do you avoid getting any shadows under the insect when using a flash?

 

I am attaching an image taken recently during a wildlife photo trip. As I could not find any bears on that day, I started shooting macro using the natural light, a tripod and the 105 mm f/2.8. It was very hard to follow the bee with a tripod. The aperture was f/4.<div></div>

Gordon, there is not too much difference in between painting with a camera or on a canvas, specially when it comes to composition. I agree with your friend, if you would like to learn more about composition itself, look into the fine art painting and drawing books instead. One book that I would recommend is, "Conversations in Paint, a note book of fundamentals" by Charles Dunn, it teaches you to see.

 

I have most of the photography books that you mention, those are a good addition. Perhaps you will be able to write one of these books yourself after you invest some time on learning from the painting/drawing books!

Blake, I have a friend who is a good wildlife/bird photographer, but made the mistake of investing on a Sigma 500 mm, f/4.5. He is always dissatisfied with the unsharp results. You get what you pay for. This lens is not comparable to a top of the line Canon or Nikon 500 mm, f/4.5 and f/4 respectively. I would buy the Sigma if it were not so expensive, just to give it a try. But 3000 bucks is quite a bit of money for getting under par results, I would rather wait and concentrate on other type of photography until I can afford the tool (in this case a lens) that would allow me to be on fair grounds with the rest. We are not comparing a Rolls Royce with a Volkswagen, they can both take us to the supermarket to get the same groceries. We are talking about lenses that require a lot of quality optics inside, which are strictly necessary for bringing home the best �apples.�

Hi Quinfang Shi,

 

I am sorry that I did not have the time to elaborate when I sent my previous post. What type of bird photography are you planning on accomplishing? If you would like to obtain professional results, the 100-400 f/5.6 is not going to do the job in most cases. This is an excellent lens, however, it is not the most appropriate for outstanding bird photography. Firstly, its focal lentgh is not long enough, as you already know. Secondly, if you add a 1.4x TC to this lens, you won't be able to isolate the subject, much less a small bird, unless that you have a clear blue background, as I mentioned earlier. When you are shooting at f/8, you are including a lot of background in focus, I seldom use this aperture for wildlife, not even when photographing moose.

 

I think that you would be better off getting the digital camera instead of adding a TC to this lens. The multiplication factor of the digital will certainly help, while still maintaining the f/stop at 4.5-5.6.

 

Please notice that in the picture I am attaching, the water is out of focus, this effect would not be possible to obtain with an f/8 aperture.

 

Good luck!<div></div>

f/8 for shooting birds? !!!!! Perhaps if it is an ostrich or the background is a blue, unobstructed sky.

I do not know what the problem is, but would like to find out. I am going on a photography trip next month and would like to know if the reason why I am NOT being searched when carrying over 50 LB of photo equipment is because I am organized and make it easy for the airport security to check the content of my carry-on or if it is because I am a woman. In regard to the latter, as far as photogarphy goes, I would like to be considered an "it." If anyone is interested, I will share the next airport scanning experience.

Antony,

 

Why should you be content with seeing others' pictures? It is fun to have our own, even when they are taken from the same old hot spot, there is always the possibility to get a different atmospheric situation or composition.

 

The hike to Delicate Arch is worth every second. Even if you just want to see it up-close without taking any pictures. Strenous when done in a hurry, like I did, but worth it. The light is best at sunset.<div></div>

Jack,

 

I would advise you not to check in the laptop. It is now required that all suitcases be left unlocked for random examination or for the airport security to check their content in case that they see unfamiliar objects in the scanners. All suitcases are being scanned, in most airports even before you check in. After that, you cannot touch them again until you get to your destination. No matter how well you pack the laptop, if your suitcase is selected for a thorough examination, there is the possibility that they won�t have the time to re-pack it properly. I would rather mail it in advance.

 

I carried the laptop with me during a recent trip, though. To add to the information about the current airport scanning that I have already given in the recent thread: �storage device� posted on August 4, 2003, let me be more specific about the photo equipment that I was carrying during my last month trip to Alaska: Nikon 500 mm f/4, 20-35 mm f/2.8, 35-70 f/2.8, 80-200 f/2.8, macro 105 mm f/2.8, 1.4TC, 2X TC, SB-28, several neutral grad and polarizing filters, extension rings, flash extender and one D-100 with the multifunction battery pack attached plus one F-5. Also, compact binoculars. That all went in my carry-on. I try not to mix any other objects with the photo equipment so that the content of the carry-on is totally clear when it passes through the airport scanners.

 

In a large handbag that I could hardly closed I carried my laptop, 8 CDs, one paperback, a large wallet, 70 rolls of film, microdrives, extra batteries, cosmetic bag, a manila folder with important papers like reservations, air tickets and the sort, sunglasses, earphones for my laptop and more small paraphernalia, I even carried water and an in-flight snack. I was also wearing my photo vest with a few small items in it because my suitcases were too full to pack it in.

 

I traveled by myself. Miraculously, they never opened or hand checked any of my bags or the carry-on. They are just asking to place the laptop in a basket to pass it through the scanners separately, which I knew beforehand, so I was ready for this tiny inconvenience: every time that I took the laptop out of the handbag, it seemed that there was no room to put it back.

 

Best of luck!

Andreas, in my experience, the light is very intense in Africa at dawn and dusk, you would not need a 400 ASA film. If it gets too dark, you would have to use the flash anyway.

 

As far as negative film. I would leave the advice to somebody else, I have not used it in years.

 

In any event, I would advise you, if you do not have a window mount, to make a bag and fill it with rice or any other type of grain when you get to your destination. This will provide you with a good support to shoot from the window or from the top of a vehicle.

Shun,

 

That is exactly what I have been doing. It has taken me a loooooong time to make two copies of the CDs from the recent trip to Alaska, I am about done. I am also thinking about getting an external 250 GB hard drive to store the second copies of the images, instead of two CDs. It should also be a lot faster to review the images from an extrenal hard drive, than from the CDs, the latter can be a extremely tedious process. If you have any more suggestions, please share them with us. Thanks!

I just came back from Alaska. As you probably know, the weather in Alaska changes constantly, so be prepared. I went from a record high in Anchorage: 84 degrees Fahrenheit, to a heavy snowfall in Denali NP. Generally speaking, in regard to the film, Velvia is an excellent choice for landscapes and many other subjects. however, due to its low ASA, it is quite restrictive. I would imagine that you are also carrying a tripod.

 

If it is not terribly cloudy, be ready to shoot during the magic light. In Alaska in July, this happens almost at midnight and at about 4:30 AM, it should happen at about the same time in August. You won't sleep much, I know, but it is worth it. I saw the most beautiful skies at midnight and the Alpen Glow at 4:30 AM.

 

For shooting from the shuttle in Denali NP, you must use a higher ASA film, as high as you can without jeopardizing the grain, because there is too much vibration in those buses. Even when they stop for wildlife, every body is moving around trying to get a picture. A high ASA film is also helpful for shooting from a boat. I would not like to discourage you, nonetheless, for shooting the wildlife at Denali NP, the use of very long lenses is usually required, perhaps doubling the focus range of what you are taking would be more adequate. I was using a 500 mm plus the 2X teleconverter and most of the time, it was not enough. There were a few occasions when the wildlife came to the road, though. I hope that you are lucky and find the animals right next to the road all the time!

 

As far as the so many types of film that you are taking for this trip, I do not find the need for it, buy hey! ... it is good to experiment. I would probably take just two kinds: Velvia and a fine grain 100 ASA film which I can always push one or two stops, as I have done in the past. The 50 ASA Velvia could also be pushed one stop (to 100) with excellent results. During my recent trip to Alaska, I was also carrying a digital SLR and found myself having to use it at the 800 ASA setting when photographing from the shuttle to be able to record a sharp event. If you have the time, the best is to get off the shuttle. You would have to walk back half a mile toward where the wildlife is because they do not allow the passengers to get off in front of the wildlife, however, there is a good opportunity to get a better picture this way.

 

All the best and have a great time!

John,

 

In regard to your question, I flew in. Was very lucky at the airports. In spite of carrying lots of photographic stuff, I went very fast through the scanners. In my carry-on, I had the photo equipment exclusively, digital and analog. And in a separate handbag, I carried the laptop and the regular film, some CD�s, a book, plus more personal items, I was loaded! They just asked me to place the laptop in one of their baskets to pass it through the scanners separately. Other than that, every thing went smoothly, it was the fastest airport-scanner-experience ever.

 

The trip was from New England to Alaska. Then, King Salmon, Katmai NP, Denali NP and back.

 

In regard to carrying the digital albums instead of checking them in, I would certainly do so. As of today, I have no news as to these items being prohibited in the cabin of the airplanes, at least in the continental flights.<div></div>

There are two devices that might suit your purpose: the e-Film Picture Pad from Delkin Devices and the Nixvue Digital Album. Their hard drives come in different sizes (20 GB, 30 GB, and so on) and their price goes accordingly. They are small and fit in your pocket. You should check B&H or Adorama for prices.

 

I have several friends photographers who own these devices and are satisfied. I cannot recommend one of these from personal experience because I, in fact, ordered the 60 GB Picture Pad two months ago from B&H and received a defective one (the connecting pins were bent.) Waited for the replacement for over ten days, had an upcoming trip and ended up getting the smallest laptop available instead: a 12-inch PowerBook G4. It was a good choice. The only thing that I did not like about the above mentioned devices is that their battery does not last long for downloading. If I am not mistaken, it takes downloading 1 GB of images to drain the battery. With the laptop, I was able to download lots of images for three consecutive nights in my tent before having to recharge it.

 

Best of luck.

Arun,

 

I would answer with a definitive YES to most of your questions. Chasing the light? Going back when the conditions are better? Of course!!!!! Visualizing the image before shooting? A definitive yes to this one! At least I do. I also carry the DOF chart with me at all times. I do not always bracket when shooting action because there is no time for it.

 

As far as using manual mode, I do it 90% of the time and the rest of the time, I use aperture priority. I do pay attention to the speed when photographing waterfalls or when panning, for example. However, one develops a certain sense when photographing animals in action. During these circumstances, I pay more attention to the DOF, rather than the speed. I know that if I am using the correct ASA, I can freeze the action when using apertures in between f/4 and f/7.1, so I do not even look at the speed.

 

I have been an artist all my life and I am now using the camera to try to paint with it. That is why I find it very important to pre-visualize the image. Either when shooting an animal portrait, a flower or a landscape, all the elements of composition apply. Even when shooting action, it is important to pre-visualize and be prepared. Set your camera in the right spot, with the right lens, etc., and then try your best to get what you want. With birds in flight is the same, I want the bird filling or entering the frame, not leaving it. And luck counts all the time, there it is when we can finally freeze that special moment in the right lighting situation and get the shot, the one we were aiming for.

Jeff,

 

You have already gotten quite a bit of good information. I agree that timing and good weather are important ... what is new? !!!!! A blue sky is a better background to photopgraph Puffins. Better to book the trip for several days and go when the weather is the best. I would just give my reservations up during a cloudy and foggy day and go at prime conditions.

I have based my comments on the original question: starting nature photography on a small budget. That is why I feel that this person would better enjoy the experience with a fast, medium range zoom. How many of you, the experienced nature photographers, go to the field with just a 50mm? And how many of you have the 50mm f/1.8 (not the macro) in your bag when you travel for nature photography? No doubt that a fast 85 or the 105mm macro are razor-sharp. Better yet, the 300mm, f/2.8, to me this one is the sharpest of all the Nikon lenses. However, these lenses are costly and have a definitive purpose, they are usually an addition to the equipment, not the only one lens to have for starting nature photography. It has been said that the only limitations to any lens is the person using it. Very right, but whoever said this did not consider boredom, it is like having just one brush to paint, the end result might be losing interest. I have a teenage daughter who is interested in nature photography (wonder why ... ), she would be quite upset if I just give her a 50mm to shoot with. Wishing Adam all the best, ---------------- Ligia

Adam, prime lenses are a thing of the past. Nowadays, there are some zoom lenses that are as good as the primes. If you invest your money in a 100 mm, that is fine, it is an excellent lens for portrait photography, plus you could use it with extension rings and do macro. However, the prime 24mm would be a waste. There are several zoom lenses that would give you that range and that are as good as a prime.

I totally agree with Kent, the issue here is the lens/lenses, not the camera. The 50 mm standard lens for a 35 mm camera is pretty useless for nature photography. I own one of those and it has been in storage ever since I started photographing nature and wildlife (www.ligiaphoto.com) If you have a small budget, the Nikon 24-120 mm, f/3.5-5.6 is a nice lens for landscape photography. I still use it even when I do own faster lenses, like the 17-35 f/2.8, mostly because the range is very convenient for being creative. All the landscape pictures in my galleries were taken with the 24-120,(except Delicate Arch, 80-200 f/2.8).

 

As for the camera, I cannot point to every camera feature, just general guidelines, otherwise, this message would be endless. So I would just say that the N80 would give you more professional features and it is easy to use. Keep in mind, though, that the Nikon lenses are always more expensive that their Canon counterparts. So if you are planning on building a system on a smaller budget, the Canon system would be the way to go. Hope that this helps a little with your decisions.

There is a wire fence that contains the Gannet colony and the Gannets are right next to it, you could practically touch them. In addition, these birds are huge, their wing span can get to 72 in., so a 300 mm is enough for head shots and for flying shots in the distance. I would take the 1.4 teleconverter for the 300 just in case, I always do. I would also recommend taking a wide angle for photographing the whole colony (a spectacular sight)! plus an 80-200 for full shots of the birds or for taking the parents with their chicks.

 

As far as other wildlife in the area, I did not see much, except for some pelagic birds, like black-legged kittiwakes and common murres near the docks and near the Perce Rock. I doubt it that you would be landlocked, though, Bonaventure island is just a jump from the coast of Perce. In any event, Perce is a beautiful and quaint town, its surroundings offer lots of possibilities for landscape photography.

 

Just make sure to take a comfortable backpack for the hike to the colony and I am sure that you will enjoy the visit a lot. Great shooting!

You might be able to get pretty decent pictures of Vultures with a 300 mm plus a 2X. However, unless that your 300 mm has the stabilization system and it is a fast lens, I would not bother to shoot birds, much less birds in flight, with this lens combination without a tripod, you would be disappointed with the unsharp results. To me, it would be a waste of film. It would be okay if the picture are intended for just the memories. Other than that, have a great trip!

Brad,

 

For landscape photography, I would definitely recommend Valdez. As you do not have too much time, perhaps you should take a ferry to or from Valdez and drive one time the road between Valdez and Anchorage. The views of the Wrangell-St. Elias and the Chugach mountain ranges are spectacular from this road. You will also see very tall waterfalls right next to the road near Valdez and you could also photograph the Matanushka glacier which practically touches the road. Valdez itself offers plenty of opportunities for landscape photography.

 

If it is just for photography, I would visit Homer during a different time of the year. The Kachemak Bay is very beautiful, but the Homer area and the spit are going to be extremely crowded in the summer time. Besides, the views from the Sterling highway cannot be compared with the views from the Richardson and Glenn highways, which are just breathtaking.

 

Have a great time!

When I do not have the opportunity to send the exposed film for developing right away, I wrap it first in Reynolds' Plastic Coated Freezer Paper, seal it with masking tape and then place it in a Hefty, freezer quality bag or in a plastic container. The plastic coated paper really helps in keeping the moisture away. I do not put it back in the freezer, just in the refrigerator. So far so good. I have had exposed film stored this way for over two months with excellent results.

 

In any event, it is recommended that the exposed film be develpoped as soon as possible. No matter the precautions that you take the results might not be predictable. Do not wait too many months to have your film developed.

I think that you are right, the picture at the top looks warmer and the one at the bottom looks crispier, but cooler. It could be a mistake probably caused during the page setting. Do not get confused though, this type of filters do have a definitive warming effect on the final outcome.

The pictures of the lunar eclipse shown above are fantastic. I have no experience whatsoever in eclipse photography, so I just tried some straight shots of the moon, here is one of them. And thanks for the information about how to do it, will try to be more creative the next time!

I have tried shooting from a kayak handholding a 300 mm, f/2.8 AF-S and it is not easy, this is not a lens to handhold for a long period of time. I have also tried this lens on a light weight Gitzo tripod for shooting from a canoe and this set up rendered very good results. I would favor a tripod over a monopod for this lens. Even if you use the tripod with its legs not fully opened, it would provide more stability. Another consideration is the size of the birds that you are planning on shooting with the 300 mm. You are right, this is a lens that performs wonderfully well with a 2X teleconverter and yet, it is not long enough for filling the frame with a small bird unless that you could be approx. within the 18-foot range. This is not always possible to accomplish, much less from a boat. Besides, adding a 2X teleconverter would make the 300/2.8 heavier and therefore more unstable, definitely a combination not suitable for handholding. Having said that, the 300/2,8 is my favorite lens due to its superb sharpness, and I use it for bird photography whenever I can get within the appropriate distance.