alex_smith13

If you are going to the rain forests they are generally very dark under the canopy and have very high contrast when the sun filters through. A flash possibly with a better beamer (if using 300 or larger lens) is a good idea to fill out some of the shadows. Get something that allows the flash to be used off camera. This will help with pictures of some of the tiny insects and frogs.

 

IMHO if you want to get pics of larger wildlife a longer lens like 300 is so handy that it is almost necessary. At least take your tamron. It will be better than no 300 especially if you use a larger flash.

 

As far as safety: I have not traveled in CR but in areas of So America (Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia). What I have found was basically pay attention to your surroundings and do not flaunt camera gear or wealth.

 

As far as rain: There are a few things to consider. But IMHO if your camera gear does not get wet and you are not staying for an extended time then the humidity should not cause a problem

1. You need some way to keep you gear dry if you are out and it rains. This can be as simple as a trash-compactor garbage bag that you have ready when it rains to put your stuff in and then stick in your pack. Stores like REI also now have drybags made out of coated nylon.

2. If you want something to dry the humidity out of your gear take a look at Drierite. It is a desiccant like the packets that come in new equipment. the advantage if Drierite is that the indicating version turns color when it is no longer effective and is reusable if you dry it out in an oven. If you get some get the largest size.

I am trying the make the same decision except I start at 24 right now.

 

As to restate the obvious

11-16 - get it if speed, or image quality is most important

12-24 - get it if range and not having a large gap is most important

 

In my thinking about my past use and sale of lenses, I have come to one realization. I am usually unhappy with a lens and sell it because of shortcomings in image quality and not because there is a gap in coverage. I find a gap in coverage more of an annoyance. Both are supposed to be great lenses.

Joseph - You hit the nail on the head. It was my 300/f4 that it did not work on. Do you have any information about the fix for these lenses? Is it something that you have to send your lens in to Nikon for? Is it a reliable fix? thanks in advance! - sorry to hijack the thread.

I like Michael have set of non-DG kenko af tubes. In looking at the tubes on ebay (assuming I am looking at the same auction seller = etefore) the only difference appears to be the "DG" written on the side. Both have the AF motor connection and the same number of electrical contacts.

 

My tubes work without a hitch on a d80 with a 50/1.8. Not that it matters too much for macro but afs lenses do not auto focus with the tubes. It may be important if you also wanted to bring in the close focus of longer lens. I do not know of an extension tube that supports afs, but someone might.

Take a look at ptlens. It does a good job especially for $15.

 

It is either standalone or plugin

 

http://epaperpress.com/ptlens/

I agree with Mark. Play with both of them and see which you like. Equally as important as you mention above you are buying into a system so look at the lenses and options. Both have great followings because they are great systems. If anyone tries to tell you one system is heads and tails above the other, don't buy it.

 

Take everything below with a grain of salt:

IMHO and what I like. Cannon has had better long glass. While Nikon has had better wide angle and flash. My major concern with Nikon is that they have recently eliminated AF motor from the lower model bodys. This means to have AF that you are limited to AFS lenses. I would hate to see this trend of no AF motor move its way up Nikon body line in the future. Who knows what will happen.