Random Thoughts... [Photographic Edition]

But he was not finished. :p


Almost ordered about 300 EUR worth of stuff to continue suck more and longer on my summer adventures. The shopping basket includes Nikkor AF-S DX 35mm f/1.8G, Hoya NDx400, second battery and Lowepro Adventura 120 (a smaller bag thing for tourist use).

I'm pretty sure I'm getting those this time.
 
Yeah, we will see about that. :lol:

Especially when the delivery estimate is 2-4 weeks.
 
Getting better gear will never make you a worse photographer. It just won't nessesarily make you a better photographer.

:p
 
So I'm considering getting the EF 200mm f/2.8L so I can do some wildlife shots (along with a couple filter adapters so I can couple it with my 50mm f/1.8 for some super-macro photography :D). Buying everything from B&H would be over $250 cheaper than buying it locally, so I'll definitely be doing that, but then the question is when to make the purchase?

I could chop another $50 off the shipping by waiting to buy it until I'm in the US this fall, which would also mean not having to pack them in my luggage when going *to* the US (where I'll definitely want to use it due to there being a lot more wildlife to take photos of), but I'd have to wait until September to play around with the lens... :think:
 
Even on my D60 which crops, my 200mm is not long enough for wildlife shots. Even more, if you want to shoot birds than it's even more difficult. I might be rubbish at it or the lens might not be long enough. Either way, I wouldn't recommend you "just" a 200.
 
I wouldn't say that, there's a guy here who's made nature photography their life's work (lots of landscapes, granted, but he does A LOT of wildlife, birds and larger animals), and afaik, the longest lens he's got is his 70-200/2.8L on a 20D. But he isn't just good at it, he's a fucking expert. No pun intended, most people are not experts, and that includes myself to have that said.

You can do a lot with EFL 300mm (if you're strapping APS-C, if you're using a bigger sensor, like a 5D, I'm less optimistic), but it takes skill.
 
I remember a specific shot a small wild bird in NG. It was a close-up with a wide-angle lens, to show the bird within a landscape of its habitat. It was phenomenal and there was no doubt a great deal of expertise and setup involved.

If you are going to become an expert on wildlife, then, by all means, 200mm should be plenty. Otherwise, I'd look into something at least twice as long. Since you're looking at the 200/2.8, you should be able to use a 2X TC to make it a 400/5.6.
 
Yes, I know. People always look at my 50-200 in awe cause it's the size of twenty compacts, and they think I could have photographed Neil Armstrong giving the finger if I'd been around in 1969. And to be fair, it's EFL is 400mm, but even that isn't really long enough for serious birding. My point's just that you can photograph birds with just a 200mm, it's just a lot harder.
 
Yes, I know. People always look at my 50-200 in awe cause it's the size of twenty compacts, and they think I could have photographed Neil Armstrong giving the finger if I'd been around in 1969. And to be fair, it's EFL is 400mm, but even that isn't really long enough for serious birding. My point's just that you can photograph birds with just a 200mm, it's just a lot harder.
Which is exactly what I was trying to say. The guy you told us about was an expert as you've mentioned. A lot of experts can get nicely along with a 200mm in nature but that means 1. years of experience 2. dressing yourself like a bush.
 
You don't need to be an expert, you can get along just fine as long as you dedicate yourself. If you want to sit at your terrace snaping pictures of the birds, that's something else.
 
I remember a specific shot a small wild bird in NG. It was a close-up with a wide-angle lens, to show the bird within a landscape of its habitat. It was phenomenal and there was no doubt a great deal of expertise and setup involved.

If you are going to become an expert on wildlife, then, by all means, 200mm should be plenty. Otherwise, I'd look into something at least twice as long. Since you're looking at the 200/2.8, you should be able to use a 2X TC to make it a 400/5.6.

The 200/2.8 has the 10 electrical connectors required to use a 2x EF Extender (teleconvertor), and will focus on all EOS bodies as the only sub-requirement of using a teleconverter on the consumer level SLRs is that they can't focus with a miniumum aperture higher than f/5.6 (and as you said, it becomes a 400mm/f5.6 - plus if shooting crop factor that's the same FOV as a 640mm lens on a FF body.
 
Just keep in mind that sort of TC's generally distort IQ quite a lot, speaking of 2x TC's.
 
-------------------------------------

New topic... lesson learned about landscape / nature shooting yesterday: I need to start scouting more often so I can have a good location in mind. I was literally seconds too late for the bit of good light during a break in the rain clouds yesterday :( I waited another half-hour or so before I realized that there wasn't going to be another break before sunset (there wasn't).
My single most redeeming photos were from two church steeples I shot. I had spotted them two weeks earlier, then waited for the proper weather (storm clouds), then did a 45min drive in about 20 to get across town to take the photos. It's so fulfilling to properly scout a location and then get the perfect shot from it!
 
I have the 70-200 f4.0 and the 1.4x converter. I could give you some comparo shots if you want, won't be exactly what you're looking at but might give you an idea. I think there might also be a limit on the type of AF, no AI servo mode, but I'd have to check the manual. The only time I had an error with my camera was using that combo, had to take out the battery to reset.
 
Top