Photo Forum / Photo Technique / Nature Photography / November 2004
Nikon lens choice
|
|
Thread rating:  |
glb443 - 30 Oct 2004 03:14 GMT I have a Nikon D100, I shoot a lot of wildlife, and animals in general, in the wild, at sanctuaries and zoos. I'm looking at a Nikon 80-400VR or Sigma 50-500. I currently have a Sigma 170-500 and Nikon 28-200 but want something a little longer that's still hand holdable. Forget taking the sigma in with wolves. I would appreciate comments on both from experienced users. I like the VR aspect of the Nikon but hear it's slow focusing and shouldn't be used on a tripod. The Sigma is heavier, not VR and not as sharp, but very fast focusing and QUIET. That helps when you're around animals.
Comments?
Thanks
James B. Davis - 11 Nov 2004 08:54 GMT >I have a Nikon D100, I shoot a lot of wildlife, and animals in general, in >the wild, at sanctuaries and zoos. I'm looking at a Nikon 80-400VR or Sigma [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >tripod. The Sigma is heavier, not VR and not as sharp, but very fast >focusing and QUIET. That helps when you're around animals. If you won't be using a tripod then the choice is obvious.
If you don't have a lot of cash it's not so obvious :-)
-- Jim Davis, Nature Photography: http://jimdavis.oberro.com/ Motorcycle Relay Kits: http://www.easternbeaver.com/
danielhphoto - 11 Nov 2004 09:30 GMT A reference to consult.
http://www.photozone.de/bindex2.html
>>I have a Nikon D100, I shoot a lot of wildlife, and animals in general, in >>the wild, at sanctuaries and zoos. I'm looking at a Nikon 80-400VR or [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Motorcycle Relay Kits: > http://www.easternbeaver.com/ James B. Davis - 18 Nov 2004 08:59 GMT On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 17:54:58 +0900, I said:
>If you won't be using a tripod then the choice is obvious. Guess it isn't so obvious to everyone, someone Emailed me, so here goes.
Translation: If you won't be using a tripod, then Image Stabilization will be your best friend. Or Virtual Reality Nikon fans.
Try taking a photo in low light at 1/30th,f5.6 @ 400mm without IS or VR. Ha, can't be done.
Low light for me means the sun's not out. In the shade or on a hazy day you can knock off 5 stops or more from full sunshine exposure.
Therefore without IS or VR, one needs a tripod at all times. Or need to shoot in full sunlight.
Anyone who doesn't think IS can shoot at 1/30 @400mm just hasn't tried it or hasn't practised it. I do it all the time. My method of shooting birds is not to go out with heavy tripod, setup and wait. Not for me, thanks. I'm a stalker and if there's not picture happening, I'm moving on and ready at all times to shoot. I laugh at those guys sitting with the big pods. Remind me of fishermen. I laugh at the stuff they shoot too. Boring.
Course if you're going down to some place in Florida where you can setup and the action is right there, great, take the pod. I don't live in Florida, but that's so overdone and too easy for me. It's like shooting in the zoo, fun sometimes but limited.
But if you're like me and like to go for long hikes and find interesting and unique things to shoot, the choice is obvious. IS rocks.
BTW: Many newish Canon IS long teles can use their special IS on a pod. Guess you can turn off VR.
ducking and hiding...
-- Jim Davis, Nature Photography: http://jimdavis.oberro.com/ Motorcycle Relay Kits: http://www.easternbeaver.com/
Paul - 18 Nov 2004 12:00 GMT > On 11/18/04 3:59 AM, in article 0aoop0desq65c0p3bitidktipulq6b3bae@4ax.com,
> ducking and hiding... I certainly think you should be hiding after some of these comments.
> Or Virtual Reality Nikon fans. You do realize "VR" means, Vibration Reduction, right.
> My method of shooting > birds is not to go out with heavy tripod, setup and wait. Not for me, > thanks. I'm a stalker and if there's not picture happening, I'm moving > on and ready at all times to shoot. I laugh at those guys sitting with > the big pods. Remind me of fishermen. I laugh at the stuff they shoot > too. Boring. Boring! Are saying the images they capture are boring or waiting and waiting to shoot a "possible" super incredible image is boring. If it is the former than I hardily disagree. If it is the latter, then I agree sometimes it could get boring unless you are studying the subjects. So maybe you can foretell some great unique future behavior image. But when the boring wait does works out and I capture that one image of a Male Least Tern standing on the back of the female while feeding the female a fish, all those boring waits fall happily to the wayside. http://photostockfile.com/Favorites/source/030501-174243-th.pict.html
One way to get those fantastic images is to use a Super-Telephoto Lens, a tripod and wait. Many times it is the ONLY way. A great wildlife photographer has the ability to recognize possible unique situations and is willing to setup, wait, watch and be ready to get that one spectacular shot. That is what sets a Pro Wildlife Photographer apart from others. But with that said, remember your intelligence tests, many great Wildlife Photographs use tripods and wait long periods of time, but that does not mean all tripod users that wait long periods of time are great Wildlife Photographers.
If you can't stop sometimes and just wait, you will miss dramatic unique shots. Sure by moving on you might luck out and get one or two good images, but pros cannot depend only on luck like that. I always go out to make great images and I am always (OK, all right, usually) willing to sit and wait for that one ray of light, that one spectacular sunset in that one special location, that possible upcoming wildlife behavior, that, if captured will set that one image well above and beyond the average pro image.
> Course if you're going down to some place in Florida where you can > setup and the action is right there, great, take the pod. I don't live > in Florida, but that's so overdone and too easy for me. It's like > shooting in the zoo, fun sometimes but limited. It is to bad you don't live in Florida. By your comments you could be a real pro, if you did. It is so easy down here. That's why everybody in Florida with a camera and a tripod, can and does take great wildlife and nature photos, so much so that they are putting pro wildlife photographers out of business. Ha!
 Signature PWW (Paul Wayne Wilson) Over 1,000 Photographs Online at, http://PhotoStockFile.com
James B. Davis - 19 Nov 2004 08:40 GMT >Boring! Are saying the images they capture are boring or waiting and waiting >to shoot a "possible" super incredible image is boring. If it is the former [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >waits fall happily to the wayside. >http://photostockfile.com/Favorites/source/030501-174243-th.pict.html I'm glad it floats your boat.
I find it terribly boring sitting behind a tripod and waiting, yes. And I find most (but not al)l of those photos those types of photographers take boring too.
I just have a different style, I'm a hunter, you're a fisher. I find fishing boring. IS is made for me.
Not wanting to get into criticizing your fine image, but if you were sitting and waiting, you could have get better framing, no?
-- Jim Davis, Nature Photography: http://jimdavis.oberro.com/ Motorcycle Relay Kits: http://www.easternbeaver.com/
PWW - 19 Nov 2004 12:02 GMT > On 11/19/04 3:40 AM, in article r6crp0hee3rg6vj1mls00g9sotmmbbkjfo@4ax.com, > "James B. Davis" <jbdavis@hkg.odn.ne.jp> wrote:
> IS is made for me. Yes I love, VR too for many situations. But sometimes fast lens speed is more important. IS, VR helps prevent your movement but does nothing to prevent the subject being blurred by its own movement in lower light situations. That is where a faster lens and a tripod might have helped.
> I find it terribly boring sitting behind a tripod and waiting, yes. > And I find most (but not al)l of those photos those types of > photographers take boring too. I don't know how you can, by just looking at a photo, know that the photographer used a tripod and waited a long time to get that shot or not!
> I just have a different style, I'm a hunter, you're a fisher. I find > fishing boring. IS is made for me. That's OK, you go for the easy shots, I'll go for the hard to get, hunt, stalk, ambush and shoot the delicacies type of images.
I think here is the difference, if I am a spot where I can possibly get a good action shot, I am not just waiting around being bored. I am watching closely, looking for trip action that might make something happen and I am reevaluating my position relative to the subject to get maximum effect that I want. And if a subject does not seem to offer a possible spectacular image, in a, relative time ~ uniqueness of the image, calculation then I move on. The more possible uniqueness of the image the longer I am prepared to wait.
I think the least Tern Photo is a great example. Looking to shoot some shorebirds, I was on the beach when I spied these least terns flying back and forth to the beach. I stopped for a quite few minutes and watched and waited for them to return to the behavior they were doing before my presence interrupted them. I then noticed some of them were carrying a small fish back to the beach, and I waited and studied them to be able to recognize the pattern. Then after waiting and watching a bit longer I witnessed the "prolonged" mating behavior, but they were in a wrong area and the background was full of other shorebirds not making the best image. http://photostockfile.com/Favorites/source/030509-151335-th.pict.html So I waited and watched again. Of course while I was sitting and waiting I watched the other shorebirds present to study their behavior, and I took quite a few other action shots of them. But my main focus was always waiting on the least terns mating action. And after a few hits and misses I got a couple of them with a non-cluttered background and more to my liking. To an outside person or other photographer I could have looked like I was just sitting there for hours not shooting much. When in reality I was pretty busy the entire time. And I got great dramatic images that would never be possible to capture by one who does not have the patience, subject knowledge, and foresight to stop blend in and wait awhile.
I heartily disagree that this approach is; A. Boring; and B, static or nonproductive.
> Not wanting to get into criticizing your fine image, but if you were > sitting and waiting, you could have get better framing, no? Lets get this straight, I do not sit and wait. To the unknowledgeable, I might look like I am just sitting and waiting. But I am not. And these little guys don't follow my directions very well (kind of like my wife, oops). They constantly move around the beach, land in different spots, get chased around by larger shorebirds, fly off because of kids playing just down the beach. That is why I have to be in the best area and try and get the shots when and if I can. And sometimes I don't.
This image was framed that way for possible titles at top and features index or story text at side. The main action is slightly off the thirds rule. I do wish that I had left a little more room around the terns but I did not have control of where they would land and end up doing the mating dance and the end mating behavior. I had my 600 f4 on a big tripod and I could not move around much because the birds had gotten use to me being there. If I would have tried to move back a bit, every shorebird would have scattered and the terns stopped their mating and flown away again for a while. Sometimes it takes a while for the birds to get used to me in one location. Of course some people never get used to me at all.
I actually took many sequences of this behavior because I knew it was an extremely hard shot to happen upon. Here is a different image.
http://photostockfile.com/Favorites/source/030509-151335-th.pict.html
John Quincy Adams said; Patience and perseverance have a magical effect before which difficulties disappear and obstacles vanish...
 Signature PWW (Paul Wayne Wilson) Over 1,000 Photographs Online at, http://PhotoStockFile.com
Uranium Committee - 19 Nov 2004 02:50 GMT > On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 17:54:58 +0900, I said: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Try taking a photo in low light at 1/30th,f5.6 @ 400mm without IS or > VR. Ha, can't be done. I can do it, and have done it, with 1 560mm lens. 1/30th, tack sharp.
> Low light for me means the sun's not out. In the shade or on a hazy > day you can knock off 5 stops or more from full sunshine exposure. [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > ducking and hiding... James B. Davis - 19 Nov 2004 08:36 GMT >> Try taking a photo in low light at 1/30th,f5.6 @ 400mm without IS or >> VR. Ha, can't be done. > >I can do it, and have done it, with 1 560mm lens. 1/30th, tack sharp. I knew it! I knew somebody would say this!
Ok, now trying doing it consistantly.
Ya, right.
Admit it, you were leaning on a tree, right?
-- Jim Davis, Nature Photography: http://jimdavis.oberro.com/ Motorcycle Relay Kits: http://www.easternbeaver.com/
|
|
|