david_huff1

<p>My red ribbon (2nd place) girl this last weekend. I have been advised she has now outgrown this pony. Great.</p><div></div>

<p>A girl and her pony. Blessed to be able to give her this freedom.</p><div></div>

<p>Very sorry for your experience in our country. I hope to be treated far better when I visit yours this coming July.</p>

<p>Our family of four (9 and 11) enjoyed this trip so much in 2009 that we did it again in 2010, but this time much better. In 2009, we stayed in Teton Village (Jackson) and drove up to the park. Huge mistake. Not only do you miss some great opportunity for morning photography (like the rainbow at upper falls every morning around 9:30), but the day is ridiculously long with the drive in and out. Try to see if there is any room at the Old Faithful Lodge - best place to locate in our view. Any other spartan park hotel is worth it for the convenience. I cannot recommend highly enough spending the majority of your time actually down in the Tetons. You can cover Yellowstone in 2-3 days (if you are starting from in the park) and the Tetons are simply magnificent for amazing landscapes, wildlife and easy hikes. I have posted our trip photos in my gallery if interested. <br>

Good luck - I think this is one of the best family destinations in America (and photography destinations as well).</p><div></div>

<p>My assistant on the bridge with me. Kid will get up at 4:00 a.m. to do this ... who knows what is in store ...</p><div></div>

<p>If RAW is a must, then the Canon S95. Great low-light camera and definately a pocket option. If RAW can be sacrificed, then the Leica V-Lux 20. Amazing versatility. </p>

<p>Nathan and David - great shots. Robin - wow. No shots this week, so here is one from last week in Yosemite. The park is two different experiences between 7 a.m. and after 11 a.m. </p><div></div>

<p>I also just returned from Yosemite. The waterfalls are gushing and will continue to do so through May. The spring flowers are late and you may just catch them. I was told the pass through Yosemite Valley to 395 will be closed for a while, perhaps until July. So, what I would do is from Santa Barbara go to Yosemite first, then continue traveling up 99 and cut over to see Lake Tahoe. Absolutely beautiful this time of year. From there you can then come across Northern California to SF, perhaps stopping in Napa Valley and not missing Carmel/Big Sur, and then return to Santa Barbara. I too would skip Death Valley as that is way to far to drive for the payoff given what else you can do with your time. Enjoy your stay in our State.</p>

<p>Went to Yosemite for the day on Saturday. Raining but, of course, majestic. </p><div></div>

<p>Yeah, Lodi - adjacent isn't so bad, even when raining and overcast.</p>

<p>Thanks everyone. I decided to take it up a notch - will be getting up VERY early and driving to Yosemite Valley. Why search around for a nugget when I have a wonder of the world in the full force of spring so close?</p>

<p>Dan, do you have some place in particular to recommend where I might find the impossibly green location? I am not very familiar with the area.</p>

<p>Mike, Eric and Frank - Super cool. Here is my offering for this week - in many ways a weak image but I absolutely loved capturing this perspective.</p><div></div>

<p>I think the key may be to follow the DFG planting schedule, with the obvious exception of Linda's suggestion re Huntington, anyone disagree?</p>

<p>I have just been informed that I am heading to Lodi, California to visit the in-laws this coming weekend. Lodi is about 40 minutes south of Sacramento. Any suggestions for nature/wildlife photography in the greater Lodi area would be warmly and enthusiastically appreciated. </p>

<p>I am looking for locations to shoot nature/wildlife photography in the Los Angeles area. El Dorado Park and the Bolsa Chica Wetlands have proven to be good spots, but I am looking for other areas where I can find interesting wildlife in action, anything really from hummingbirds to cormorants or osprey fishing. Any suggestions appreciated.</p>

<p>Peek-a-boo.</p><div></div>

<p>Buy the 16-35 II - I doubt you will ever sell it. The same, I am afraid, cannot be said for the other lenses under consideration here. Given you have the 70-200 II, after your purchase then wait for the inevitable 24-70 II and you will be set. In the interim, the suggestion of the 50 mm prime (either 1.4 or 1.8 (ridiculously cheap for what you get)) was a good one.</p>

<p>A 24-70 L IS with a 1Ds Mark IV is all I would ask for. (Am completely satisfied with the rest of the line-up.)</p>

<p>In Europe, you can never, never bring too wide. Sometimes, the old adage of "use your feet" doesn't work, especially for interior cathedral shots. </p>

<p>Linda,<br>

All of our colleagues here may be right, but I guess I am going to stand out in a lonesome minority. I simply didn't like the lens (and the push-pull aspect was not a factor for me). I thought it was very soft above the mid-300s and even though used on a tri-pod. When I compared my shots to those taken with the 70-200mm L f/2.8, I thought the 100-400 didn't match up. I admit that I never attempted to calibrate the lens and that could have made a difference; however, I have since moved to primes at long focal lengths and am tremendously happier with the result. So many Canon lenses are "great," and in my experience, this lens did not meet that relative standard.</p>

 

<p>Shot this at El Dorado Park in Long Beach last Sunday. 1D Mark IV, 500mm f/4.</p><div></div>

<p>I am not a Nikon shooter, so I cannot make any specific lens recommendations. I suggest, however, you find a way to bring a lens that is f/2 or faster for the many, many indoor opportunities for magic, as well as, a versatile telephoto zoom for the outdoor wonders. With that two lens kit you should be set. Have a great trip.</p>

<p>My little scouter isn't so little anymore. Sigh.</p><div></div>

<p>I second the post about trying the simple print and wood frame first. I did this with four frames in a very steamy bathroom five years ago and all is still well. When installing, I simply put enough backer behind the print to really squeeze the frame together. Seems to have worked.</p>