CMK10

Bird perched atop a cactus in the Desert Botanical Gardens in Phoenix, AZ.

beergut

Couple of Flies having more fun than me !

MSPGabe

A couple pictures from my Australia trip.





Beautiful dingos





Inquisitive wallaby

Mike Jacoubowsky

Trying to figure out if a "bridge" camera (SuperZoom like the new Canon SX60) has been used for anything here, or if there's no choice, got to lug the DSLR and hefty lenses.

I know... it's not the equipment, it's the photographer. But my experience is with bike racing, and a 70-200 is just fine for that on a crop (1.6) DSLR. Getting the feeling I'm going to need something quite a bit longer (and thus larger).

GadgetFreak

I shot about 5000 images in Zambia and South Africa. I'm guessing upwards of 4000, maybe even upwards of 4500 were at or near 400 mm. One I posted Upthread of an elephant was at 100 mm while on foot but frankly I was a bit, um, nervous for that one.

Mike Jacoubowsky

400mm equivalent or a 400mm lens on a cropped (1.6) sensor?

I could borrow my brother's 70-200 2.8L and 1.4 adapter and have a workable solution up to 450mm equivalent. But if you were shooting a 400mm lens on a 1.6 APS-C, then you're talking about a 640mm reach. I can't get there from here, without using a 2x adapter and losing more light & image quality than I'd want.

Thus the question about whether a $600 "bridge" 65x zoom camera might be useful. Obviously not the quality of the DSLRs I'm used to, but seems like they're made for use on a Safari. Obviously you can't get something for nothing; a whole camera that costs less than my cheapest lens? But perhaps when you build a complete system everything can work unexpectedly well.

Or not?

obiterdictum

Hi,

I took the majority of the animals shots with a Canon 7D body + 500mm f4 lens + a 1.4 teleconverter.

So that's 500mm x 1.6 (the 7d is a 1.6 crop sensor body) x 1.4 which effectively gives a view of 1120mm.

Any bridge camera that can offer that kind of length would not be able to match the above combination of imagine quality, autofocus speed and image stabilisation.

On the downside, that set up was far far heavier than a bridge camera and rather large in size! Lugging it around countries that have tropical climates and 30c+ at 90% humidity is a challenge but I wouldn't have it any other way.

Big gear is also a talking point, it's amazing how many people will come up to you and ask questions when they see you with this kind of gear.

Mike Jacoubowsky

Guess what I have to realize is that this isn't bike racing, where I'm hauling all my equipment on my back or on a rack, on a bicycle, up some 22 kilometer pass in the French Alps. Still, there are significant issues with the airlines regarding carry-on (Ethiopian has a 12kg cabin limit, and no mention of an exception for camera gear as most US airlines do).

1120mm. Yikes. At some point the body becomes an issue too; the T3i isn't great at higher ISO.

And finally, there's something that I've learned from photographing the Tour de France 11 of the past 12 years. You have to make a choice; you can either experience to event, or photograph it. I wonder if a Safari dominated by camera gear allows the former? Although I equally wonder if a once-in-a-lifetime trip to Africa that doesn't come back with "the shot" is one I'd be happy with.

Of course, my favorite pictures from the Tour de France were taken with an Olympus 3000, an early 3 megapixel camera with a narrow zoom range, and a couple years later, with an Olympus 5050, similar camera but 5 megapixels. Both with absolutely awesome glass, by the way.
Had an amazing opportunity. Great moment, but just barely usable after a lot of post-processing work to take a very small number of pixels and place a focus on the right thing. I would have killed for a longer lens. Except that I wasn't even thinking about that at the time, and the longer lens/proper equipment might have cast my thoughts elsewhere and I wouldn't have captured this moment at all.

So the point is, if I'd had "the right equipment" at the time, would I have even noticed what was going on, or would I have been, in a way, too highly focused, looking for something appropriate for the equipment and missing the moment?

That's why I'm wondering if a do-nothing-super-well but useful for anything Superzoom could make sense. Yet I realize I'd be kicking myself anytime something was within the useful range of a 70-200 x 1.6 crop factor plus 1.4 multiplier.

GadgetFreak

Mine were with a 400mm on a Canon 20D so a smaller sensor DSLR. You will be able to crop better with a larger sensor but I think you really need some reach with the lens for this application.

jhartley15

What an amazing photo! Just fantastic!

jhartley15

Your pictures are simply awesome. I feel great joy seeing these animals in your photos

I am off Kruger in March. Hopefully I can get some good shots.

Madone59

"Good morning"



More to come....

GadgetFreak

Wow! ^

Mike Jacoubowsky

I hate this place! Looking at the photos and trying to figure out whether I want my equipment to be the biggest elephant on the Safari, or use something like the SX60 superzoom. It's tough when you're used to really nice glass, but to get to 700mm... even with a 1.6 crop factor body...

But I know what happens if I leave the nice stuff at home. I come back after the trip and wonder, how would this shot have been? How much more would I have had to work with? How much better would the colors be?

Madone59

Sleep


Eagle Eye


Self Reflection


Friend?