louie

You might want consider one of the Photograph America newsletters about the Everglades.

 

http://www.photographamerica.com/

<p>I went with Quark Expeditions last July. I would have gone with Lindblad, but they had sold out the lower-priced berths. We saw a fair quantity of wildlife, including quite a number of polar bear sightings and a few good walrus sightings. My travel agent had recommended against the first departures in June because the ice can be thick and block some landings. In fact, I went first week of July and we couldn't do the full circumnavigation. The other advantage is that the later departures get the benefit of location information from earlier departures.</p>

<p>I liked going with Quark - I think they run a good organization for a better price than operators like Lindblad. However, I will say that Lindblad likely runs the premium expedition trips. Lindblad does tend towards older passengers, but they do seem to be better for photographers. The quality of photographic guiding on Lindblad is pretty good. Quark guides know their natural sciences and are excellent wildlife spotters, but when it comes to photographic guiding, I think Lindblad does it better.</p>

<p>I would definitely recommend you go with the smallest ship you can. I wouldn't do anything bigger than 100 passengers. Also, recommend you bring big glass. It's not like Antarctica or the Galapagos - the wildlife is pretty far away.</p>

<p>Here are my shots, if you're interested:</p>

<p>http://www.pbase.com/escog/svalbard</p>

<div></div>

<p>There's some sample variation with the 100-400's, so some people will have gotten some very good copies. It makes it hard to evaluate. In general, the 100-400 is pretty good - it's an L lens, after all - especially when stopped down. Wide open, it can be a bit soft.<br>

The greatest advantage of the 100-400 is its flexibility. It's a great safari lens, for example. If you're looking for image quality and expect to be at 400mm most of the time, then get a 400mm lens. You have to decide which is more important - image quality or flexibility.</p>

<p>More likely your batteries are done. I've got a bunch of generic batteries that do the same thing - I charge them up all the way, they look like they have a full charge, and I can even shoot with them for a while. And, then, they rapidly go dead. My official Canon 5D battery is much better, but even that one doesn't have the stamina it used to. (Do any of us?) Try testing the batteries. See how many shots you can get out of them over time.</p>

<p>You could always just rent a lens. I don't know whether there are rental places available in China, but in the US a mail-order rental of a Canon 100-400 lens is around $100 including insurance for 2 weeks. Another strategy is to buy a used lens and re-sell it when you get back.</p>

<p>The rule of thumb has been 1 over the focal length of your lens to get a shutter speed fast enough for hand holding. But, from a moving boat, you'll need something quite a bit faster. I generally shoot in aperture priority mode set wide open and just take whatever shutter speed I get. If there's a lot of motion on the boat, I know I'll have difficulty with the autofocus on my 5D. I can't stay on target well enough to ensure the subject will be in focus. What I'll do is shift the autofocus function to another button so that I can autofocus separately from the shutter. This way, I can first get the subject in focus, and then start shooting away without worrying about the focus point shifting.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>I can't speak to the IQ between the Tamron and the consumer Canon zooms, but I will say that Image Stabilization and fast glass are fairly important, especially when shooting from a zodiac. I had 1-2 sunny days during my 10-day trip to the peninsula and the rest were overcast. I suppose that nowadays it's easy enough to simply pump up the ISO, but still IS is really helpful when shooting from a bobbing zodiac.</p>

<p>I just got back from the Arctic (Svalbard Archipelago), and we had some really cloudy/foggy days where the IS helped a lot.</p>

<div></div>

<p>I was in Antarctica a number of years back, and found that I stayed mostly in the 100-300 range while shooting wildlife onshore, switching occasionally to 28-64 for landscapes. I had a 10D with 70-200 f/4 and 17-40 f/4.</p>

<p>You don't need a lot of reach. Antarctica is one of the few places where you can do wide angle wildlife photography. Changing lenses isnt that big a deal. At least on my trip with Quark Expeditions, on landings we were left to our own devices. They'll pick a landing site, and the guides would be available, but you're allowed to wander around and explore. So, I never felt rushed changing lenses. The difficulties you may face would be during zodiac cruises, but you could just stick with one lens.</p>

<p>Honestly, I think you ought to think about a second body instead of changing your lenses. If something goes wrong with your rebel, you're out of luck. I'd strongly suggest a back up body - just get something used for cheap. You could even mount a lens on each, and then you wouldn't have to worry about changing lenses.</p>

 

<p>For a number of places, I would agree that you're not getting much for your money. For example, I was at Katmai National Park when a Joseph Van Os group were there, and I don't think there was much value for paying the extra. We all had the same photo opportunities, and the situation was such that you didn't need much guidance on how to shoot.</p>

<p>On the other hand, I did a trip to the Galapagos with Lindblad, and it was a "photo-oriented" tour. There were pro photo guides who knew the islands and we would go out earlier than the others on the ship and stay later. We would skip certain spots in favor of staying at other locations longer - locations that were of more photographic interest. So, in places where your movements are restricted or requires specialized access, photo guides can really enhance your photographic opportunities.</p>

<p>Other times when a photo tour might be better are in those situations where your stuck with a group. For example, safaris in Southern Africa where you're put in a safari vehicle with other people at the lodge. You may not all share the same interests, so a photographer could find themselves frustrated. The alternative is to book private vehicles or pay more for specialized access, or to go with a group who's members all share the same interest in photography.</p>

<p>And, sometimes you pay for the learning opportunity. My friend took a photo tour down to Monterey with the late Galen Rowell, and he said the time spent with Galen and his feedback on my friend's photos were invaluable.</p>

<p>So, I think it's true that for many locations, the experienced photographer is better off going on their own. But for areas like the Galapagos, Antarctica, or even Africa, a specialized photo tour might be worth the money for the better photo opportunities such a tour provides. And, there are certain photographers whose advice can really improve your photography - even experienced photographers.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I would leave the 50mm and 100mm behind. The 50 is redundant with your other lenses and you don't really need the speed. Macro really isn't the focus of the Galapagos, and you won't have much time for it either. The problem is that you have to stay on the trails, and stay with your guide. You just can't wander off and do your own thing. You're also restricted on how long and when you can be on the islands - so no getting out before dawn or staying out after sunset. Macro photography takes time, and I can't see your group standing around while you get set up. A longer lens would be useful because, as noted, you're restricted to the trail.<br>

Bear in mind that the Galapagos is one of the view places you can do wide-angle wildlife photography, so I'd look for those opportunities. Bring a point-and-shoot for snapshots.</p>

<p>Where in Africa are you going? It makes a difference. In the East African parks (Kenya, Tanzania) you'll need more reach since you can't go off road. In South Africa, you can go off road, so you can get by with less focal length.</p>

<p>The 100-400 is probably the perfect safari lens on a full-frame camera. You can get by with the 70-200 f/2.8 with the 1.4 TC, but bear in mind you'll have the TC on the camera most of the time. These lenses weigh about the same and are about the same size, so no real difference here.</p>

<p>If this is a one time thing, consider renting a lens instead of purchasing.</p>

<p>As Craig noted, camoflage is not necessary. I'd go with darker, neutral colors simply because it's likely to be very dusty. I shot the Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 IS lens, which is heavier than your 400mm f/5.6. I shot mostly hand held, though tried to lean on the grab bars door frame when I could. I used my monopod for early morning and late evening.<br>

<br /> You'll want a flash for night drives. Here are my shots from South Africa:<br>

<br /> http://www.pbase.com/escog/southafrica<br>

<br /> I visited Exeter River Lodge in the Sabi Sands and Phinda Mountain Lodge.</p>

Nope - not enough room and a bit limiting in terms of maneuvering. Assuming the open vehicles they prefer in SA, a monopod is more useful. A beanbag can help if you're in the front passenger seat.

 

If you have an entire row on the vehicle to yourself and a big lens on a gimbal head, then I can see using a tripod strapped to the frame of the seat in front, but otherwise, I wouldn't bother.

Hmmm, I'm leaning towards skipping GSE. If I was in my own 4Runner with my attendant recovery equipment and camping gear, I might chance it, but I'll be in a rental and traveling light. Are there good photo locations near the paved roads that might be worthwhile?

Hello all,

 

Any tips on Grand Staircase-Escalante area in winter? I have 4 days during the beginning of January out of Vegas.

I was thinking of 2 nights in Springdale and 1 night at Bryce Canyon. However, I'm willing to change the mix if

the Grand Staircase area is worth exploring. I've never done the part between Bryce Canyon and Capitol Reef, so I

know I'm missing a lot, but I'm not sure if it's worth doing during winter. My understanding is that the dirt

roads are all impassable in winter, so I'm assuming that any shooting will have to be near the main highway.

Travels to the Edge with Art Wolfe is an excellent photography show.

 

http://www.travelstotheedge.com/

Nope. There were rumors of a 200-400 f/4 IS lens, but those have died out. Would likely have been >$5k anyway.

 

The 300mm f/4 IS with 1.4 extender is an option only if you wanted IS at 5.6 at a relatively cheap price.

 

The other option, of course, is the 100-400 f/4 - 5.6 IS. You get IS at 5.6 at the long end, but the IQ will be less than 400 f/5.6.

 

If all you really want is IS at 400mm, then you would get the 400mm f/4 DO IS lens - which is pretty expensive.

I own both, and have for a while. I'll agree that while there is an overlap in focal range, in practical usage, these don't overlap since I never take both lenses out at the same time. As others have noted, the 70-200 f/4.0 is light lens that is very portable, and I use it when I just need a medium range telephoto. If I know I'll be shooting wildlife or have a need to go long, I'll take the 100-400, and just put up with the weight.

 

If you're really worried about overlap, then keep the 70-200 f/4.0 and pick up a 300 f/4.0 or 400 f/5.6.

Bosque del Apache is a choice for bird photography in November in the U.S. - very popular time of the year to go. November is also a good time to go to Churchill for polar bears up in Canada.

 

If you're prepared to go further afield, you could look at the antipodal regions. There's always South Africa, and Botswana depending on the game reserve you choose. The season for Antarctica starts up in November, as well.

 

Equatorial locations are good year round - for example, the Galapagos or Ecuador.

The question of raw vs. jpeg is an important one. 5D files tend to come up looking soft because the camera does very little processing of the file. You definitely have to apply sharpening to a raw 5D file to get the most out of it. My understanding is that the files are deliberately unprocessed since they assumed that if you're working with a raw file, you want the rawest file to work from.

 

And, yes, it's also possible to get bad copies of either lens or body. But, getting 3 bad copies of Canon's best lenses is really, really bad luck.

As noted by the others, the most important thing is to keep the batteries warm. Extreme cold will cause them to drain quickly or become inoperative. Simply keep the camera in an inside pocket of your jacket. An extra battery would be a good idea, too - also kept warm.

 

Lastly, a dead simple backup - like a disposable film camera in a waterproof, plastic bag - is a good idea and very cheap.

 

Some pics from my trip:

 

http://www.pbase.com/escog/kilimanjaro&page=all<div></div>

He certainly liked the 1D Mark II N:

 

"The EOS-1D Mark II N has the finest autofocus system we've ever used. It's not perfect: it can be slow to focus in dim light and its predictive tracking algorithm is easily tripped up by a subject that's continually speeding up and slowing down. All in all, however, we don't know of another camera that can match its level of autofocus performance. Well, except for the EOS-1D Mark II and EOS-1Ds Mark II, which feature the same system (with minor algorithm changes in the latter model to account for its slower maximum frame rate)."

 

As for testing procedure, it looks like it's mainly his experience in real world conditions of sports photography. The linked article is quite detailed about how he has come to his conclusions, and I find it very persuasive.

Yup. Once you get past the craft of photography (taking well-exposed, sharp, well-composed pictures), the rest of nature photography is being in the right place at the right time.

 

There may very well be some digital darkroom manipulation going on, but not a lot. You can make a great picture a bit better, but it's very, very difficult to make something bad look good.

You could also try slower film (or, if digital, lower iso). A circular polarizer would also work, depending on the position of the sun, since it can act like a 2-stop neutral density filter, though it would have other affects on the water.

To get closer, you have to shoot from the bus, or if you're lucky enough to get a permit, from your own vehicle. As the others have noted, I wouldn't try to get any closer.

 

On one trip to Denali, I did end up getting closer while on a solo backpacking trip, but it was the bear that was running at me that violated the distance. He charged to within about 30 yards before stopping. They move awfully fast. I must admit that, at the time, taking photos was the last thing on my mind. We had a short conversation, which amounted to huffing on his part and showing me his profile, and some low volume mutterings on my part.

 

I duly reported the incident to the rangers afterward, but I don't think the bear got fined for violating the distance regulations - the scofflaw.