|
This guy showed up at a local park while I was photographing birds yesterday. I don't recall ever seeing a River Otter before so it was a cool experience.  River Otter by beastofexmoor, on Flickr
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 15:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 05:11 |
|
|
There aren't enough squirrels on this page. DSC04733 by Kelly_Davis, on Flickr  DSC04741 by Kelly_Davis, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2012 07:31
|
|
|
If you have the chance to go to the San Diego Zoo, you'd be full-bore insane to turn it down. What a great goddamn place. I'll have some shots up tonight.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2012 16:49
|
|
|
Pronghorn being goofy. two-legged-pronghorn on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2012 20:47
|
|
|
So who are the pro you lot follow/get inspired by? The first guy I always end up reeling off is Andy Rouse, but as a  goon it's hard not to be familiar with that name. As well as being a top photographer, he's very got the gift of the gab, which helps his media profile. If you ever get a chance to attend on his talks, do.http://www.andyrouse.co.uk/ https://www.facebook.com/andyrousephoto
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2012 22:58
|
|
|
Ring-tailed lemur being gangster: Ring-tailed lemur attempting to peel a banana by Powercube, on Flickr Ring-tailed lemur continuing its awesomeness:  Ring-tailed lemur with a banana by Powercube, on Flickr E: All from the Singapore Zoo. Powercube fucked around with this message at 23:29 on Mar 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2012 23:20
|
|
|
I went to a reptile convention on Sunday.    I love how both lizards stare at you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 09:13
|
|
|
I've got a chance to go on a 4ish day safari in South Africa. My only big lens that I own is a 70-200 2.8 IS II. I'd like to rent something bigger but I'd like some advice. The safari will include both day and night trips into the wilds so I want a low f/. I'm thinking either a 400 or a 600, IS is probably a must. I just don't want to miss my one shot for an awesome shot of a South African animal and miss it with my 70-200. How much difference is there between the 400 and 600? are there options I'm not considering? What about a 400 with an extender? Or my 70-200 with an extender?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 14:57
|
|
|
While 400 or 600 would be great, be aware that you don't really need the range for daytime pictures as much as you might think. It would help, but the results will not be bad without it. My safari pictures earlier in this thread were all made with a 300 without IS at best. While I would definitely love to go back with IS and a higher zoom not all of them would have benefitted from the increased range. I don't think 200 will stop you from making beautiful pictures so don't worry if you lose your chance to get a better lens, but if you have the money I would go for it. I figure animals in South Africa might be a bit less shy since tourism has been going on longer there, so don't worry about range too much. For night shots you would need something better, as the leopard pictures show. I'm not sure if the IS would be enough, since I only had the camera for a few days and did everything on AUTO.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 15:16
|
|
|
The much cheaper option is an extender, correct? I may have this wrong but doesn't it basically 'double' the mm range, and double the fstop? I may have that totally wrong.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 15:19
|
|
|
When I spent some time in Kenya all I had was the 70-200/2.8L with a Canon 1.4x extender (on an APS-C camera, which gave me a little more reach). I was pretty happy with that setup, and the 1.4x only took me down to an f4, which was more than enough for the daylight I had. Today I own the 400mm f5.6L, which I think would have been good to have around, at least for shooting some of the birds and smaller mammals that I came across in Africa. The f5.6L is obscenely lightweight in comparison to the faster and longer options available, being only slightly longer and about the same weight as my 70-200. For traveling, especially by air, that's huge for me. The faster 400mm and 600mm are not only 10x the cost (not sure about rental), but also both nearly 3x the weight and considerably fatter/bigger. The 5.6L is also super sharp even with the 1.4x and because it's so lightweight, I don't miss the IS at all. If IS is a must, there is a 100-400/4.5-5.6L IS, though you've got the lower end of that range covered already, and it's not as sharp at 400 as the fixed 400.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 16:00
|
|
|
Elendil004 posted:I've got a chance to go on a 4ish day safari in South Africa. My only big lens that I own is a 70-200 2.8 IS II. I'd like to rent something bigger but I'd like some advice. The safari will include both day and night trips into the wilds so I want a low f/. I'm thinking either a 400 or a 600, IS is probably a must. I just don't want to miss my one shot for an awesome shot of a South African animal and miss it with my 70-200. Renting an extender is probably your best option if you do need more reach. I've seen some great pictures taken with a 70-200 with a 1.4 or 2x extender. A 600mm lens would be a significant burden if you're doing lots of traveling and the safari is just a side trip. It isn't something you can just toss in an existing camera bag, plus there is a technique to using it that takes some time to develop.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 16:00
|
|
|
Elendil004 posted:The much cheaper option is an extender, correct? I may have this wrong but doesn't it basically 'double' the mm range, and double the fstop? I may have that totally wrong. The Canon 1.4x turns your Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS Lens into a 98-280mm f/4 IS lens, while the 2x doubles the focal range (140-400). It also multiplies the flaws in your images so CA will be a little more pronounced and since it also introduces another piece of glass to your setup it will affect probably sharpness and contrast as well. Also, autofocus speed is fairly significantly reduced.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 16:39
|
|
|
Drewski posted:Also, autofocus speed is fairly significantly reduced. Also, with the 2x, only the center AF point is useable. B&H has decent compatibility charts for the various extenders, poke around at them before picking one to rent (the 1.4x's are much more forgiving).
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 17:03
|
|
|
Yeah, my 1.4x is great but it does really slow down focus.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 17:07
|
|
|
I assume the extender goes between the lens and camera, right? So taking it off in a 'hurry' or putting it on in one is not happening?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 17:14
|
|
|
Elendil004 posted:I assume the extender goes between the lens and camera, right? So taking it off in a 'hurry' or putting it on in one is not happening?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 17:30
|
|
|
Pinnipeds ahoy ! Crabeater seal:  Fur seal giving me the get the gently caress out look:  Weddell seal weddelin'  Sea Leopard:  VVV Panasonic FZ38 VVV CeeJee fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Mar 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 18:15
|
|
|
What did you take those with? edit: so if I rented Canon 2.0x III Extender, which is about a hundred bucks for the timeframe I need it, that will work with my 7d body and 70-200 IS L lens, and the only real downside is only main autofocus point, right? Elendil004 fucked around with this message at 22:04 on Mar 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 22:01
|
|
|
Elendil004 posted:edit: so if I rented Canon 2.0x III Extender, which is about a hundred bucks for the timeframe I need it, that will work with my 7d body and 70-200 IS L lens, and the only real downside is only main autofocus point, right?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 23:03
|
|
|
Spent my spring break covered in snow in the Sierras and saw some wildlife in Yosemite. blacktail deer by schmoopybee, on Flickr  was he eating a hemlock cone? by schmoopybee, on Flickr Bialosky fucked around with this message at 23:25 on Mar 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2012 23:20
|
|
|
Too many non-squirrels on this page:   
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2012 15:58
|
|
|
CeeJee posted:Pinnipeds ahoy ! Someday....
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2012 04:21
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Goddamit, I already really really really want to go to Antarctica. You're just making it worse! It is my dream trip, shortly followed by iceland I think. Why do I like the poles so much?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2012 02:08
|
|
|
Took my son to the Albuquerque Zoo.    
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2012 01:41
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 01:07
|
|
|
Whitezombi posted:Took my son to the Albuquerque Zoo. Here's mine from two weeks ago. San Diego Zoo.  San Diego Zoo, March 2012-044.jpg by theokaluza, on Flickr  San Diego Zoo, March 2012-059.jpg by theokaluza, on Flickr And here's a  San Diego Zoo, March 2012-023.jpg by theokaluza, on Flickr Sneeze Party fucked around with this message at 04:41 on Apr 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 02:07
|
|
|
n0n0 posted:And here's a Leopard 6 feet from my face. No cage. Kind of scary in retrospect, since he was looking right at me. Cheetah. If it was a leopard, you and everyone around you would probably be dead (or wish you were.) Cheetahs are fairly docile (yay, genetic bottlenecks!) and a lot of institutions have some degree of free contact with them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 02:10
|
|
|
Hey I know that zoo! And yeah, you guys weren't lying. It's loving beautiful and it's a shame I only got 3 hours there. I could easily have killed a whole day.  Untitled by PhotoBen27, on Flickr  Some kind of zebra horse tapir thing. by PhotoBen27, on Flickr Hornady, I think you said you work at/with a zoo of some sort. What in blue hell is this thing? I do not remember seeing a sign for it and it's like 4 different things mashed into one. All I remember is I think it was near an African exhibit.  Untitled by PhotoBen27, on Flickr  Untitled by PhotoBen27, on Flickr  Untitled by PhotoBen27, on Flickr I would have hung out in those aviaries alone for hours. Absolutely beautiful birds in there. DJExile fucked around with this message at 03:43 on Apr 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 03:41
|
|
|
It's an okapi. Closest living relative of the giraffe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 03:42
|
|
|
Well poo poo. I have learned something neat today. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 03:44
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 04:15
|
|
|
The expression on the monkey* owns. It made me chuckle right when I saw it. EDIT:*Or Francois langur as I know it to be now. Ferris Bueller fucked around with this message at 13:12 on Apr 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 12:31
|
|
|
William T. Hornaday fucked around with this message at 18:02 on Apr 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 15:38
|
|
|
William T. Hornaday posted:What are the weird vertical lines on the left in the BG? It's all I can see now 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 17:01
|
|
|
drat. It was a [corrugated concrete] wall in the background, and I was hoping that it wasn't noticeable. Shouldn't be too hard to fix, I suppose. EDIT: All fixed. William T. Hornaday fucked around with this message at 18:03 on Apr 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2012 17:18
|
|
|
William T. Hornaday, what exactly is that creature? Reminder; don't gently caress with squirrels, they won't hesitate to rip you apart  Screaming Squirrel by tylerhuestis, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2012 03:57
|
|
|
neckbeard posted:William T. Hornaday, what exactly is that creature?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2012 05:01
|
|
|
 _MG_5331.jpg by David Jachym, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2012 13:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 05:11 |
|
|
William T. Hornaday posted:Which one? I've posted a cotton-top tamarin, Francois langur, and snow leopard. Heh, should have been more specific, I guess that would be the snow leopard
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2012 13:35
|
|