Camera question
 

I am planning a safari to Tanzania in early 2008 - as part of my camera equipment I plan to bring a large telephoto lens (500mm f4 +EOS1 DMkIII) - how is it best to balance this in the safari vehicle ? do you need a tripod ? if so which is recomended ? which head should you use ? is a bean bag sufficient ? are there other items in addition to bean bags that could be used to ensure stable shooting ? can window mounts be used successfully ?

Hi

In a safari situation and shooting from a vehicle a bean bag is about the best option. Check oout my safari pics at http://www.abidally.com/mp/home almost 98% of the shots in the Africa Gallery are with a bean bag.

There are two types of bean bags you could use. The kinesis flat pillow type bag is ok when shooting from a vehicle roof top but from a window it will be better to have something like the molar bean bag which is much more versatile in differnt situations.

http://www.vertexphoto.com/BeanBag.aspx


If in an open jeep like in Botswana you could consider a clamp system

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/top...2086/0#3796022

Hope you have a great trip

Regards
Mohammed
(Sri Lanka)

Aboutime2008-

I am a big fan of the Kinesis Safari Sack. You can purchase them empty or with buckwheat, which doesn't weigh that much. I have a ton of these sacks sitting all around my vehicles, ready to go up and have camera gear rested on them.

www.kgear.com

Highly recommended.

I second the Kinesis Safari Sack. I even found they worked well in the Botswana open vehicles, providing you are willing to scouch down a bit, I used two full bags, one on top of another. In Tanzania, I often prefer to shoot out of the open side window because I like the line of sight perspective bettern than the down sight typical from the roof top position. The bags will bend or fold nicely for that application. I have seen the Molar bag but never used one. Looks like it would do a good job though. One word of caution though, don't let anyone convince you to expect the safari outfitter to supply a bean bag suitable for your "very nice" rig. Every outfitter supplied bean bag was too small for a 500mm f4 with a Series 1 body. You can bring the buckwheat as Andy suggests or bring an empty Safari Sack and fill it with rice or beans when you get there. We will also be in Tanzania early in 2008, please don't use up all the good shots.
Cheers-Chuck

I am doing some math out loud here. I fill up 15 Safari Sacks with about 40 to 50 kilos worth of red beans. The current cost per kilo is around 1,000 shillings or so, depending on how far away from Arusha you are. Since 1 kilo is 2.2 pounds, and each bag has around 3 kilos inside, you now know about how much to purchase.

After each of my safaris, I give all of my guides the beans, which keeps the family fed with beans until I get back to Tanzania!! Everybody wins.

Thanks for the suggestions, looks like the kinesis will do the job - will also keep the weight down - to put my mind at rest you wouldn't recommend a tripod for the trip if mainly wildlife and less landscapes - also which bags are you using for your gear, I am looking at the kinesis L511 for this kit however would like one case if possible for all of the kit (2 other bodies and 3 other lenses largest a 70-200 2.8) ? Lowepro.

I am sure there will be enough for all to go around Chuck - what is your planned itinerary ? with who ?

Andy - thanks for the mental math, agree a win win for all

Aboutime2008,
As far as bags go, I like the Think Tank line. I do have Lowepro but use it for non airline hauls (automobile). The Think Tank Accelerator fits my kit nicely. I leave the 300mm 2.8 LIS with 1.4 Teleconverter and the hood in shooting position on one body and a 100-400mm L IS on the other. Still have enough room for a short lens and a bunch of other stuff. The Airport Accelerator is legal on all the airlines and small planes (Sefofane) in Botswana. I think for the 500mm you might want to look at the one they call the Think Tank "Glass Taxi". I think it has more substantial padding then does the Kinesis. Both are high quality so you really can't go wrong. I think Lowepro recently came out with a new line similar to the Think Tank Airports, however, I have not seen or heard from anyone who has tried it.
As far a tripods go I wouldn't bother. Actually it was information on Andy's website that first warned me off of a tripod for Africa. He was right, although I do own a light, carbon fiber Gitzo and a Really Right Stuff Ballhead, I don't bother taking them. I have taken a carbon fiber monopod, equipped as suggested on the Really Right Stuff website. The monopod was useful in Botswana, however, I can't see much use for it in Tanzania. You are not going to hand hold the 500mm and for the occasional opportunity outside the vehicle or at camp, the monopod might be worthwhile. If you do take a monopod, be sure to get a clamp from Really Right Stuff, it makes the whole rig much easier to handle in a confined space. For landscapes, I often put a ban bag on the hood of the 4 X 4 and it works out O.K.. I would suggest a second body with a zoom telephoto, even in Tanzania, some of your opportunities will probably be too close for the 500mm.

We will be in Tanzanina from February 26th through March 12th. Our in country ground operator is KIBO. We have used them before and were quite pleased. Our U.S. Agent is African Portfolio and we use them all the time, a pleasure to deal with. Our itinerary puts us at Gibbs Farm, Serengeti Serena, Ndutu, Kusini, and Swala. Except for Ndutu, all are new camps or lodges for us.

We use bean bags for smaller lenses up to say 100-400 or 400 f/5.6 but for the 500 f/4 we prefer a T-mount that spans the corners of the roof and has a tripod head screw so we can use the Wimberley pivot head. This is about as stable as a tripod if no one moves in the jeep and I think this is more stable than a bean bag (let the flame wars begin) :)

We ride around with this on the roof so you can shoot quickly, especially helpful with birds. But it won't work on many roof configurations, so we have to be careful which safari company we use.

Some details here: http://www.hiltonphotography.net/afr...l.htm#vehicles and scroll down a page or so.

<b>do you need a tripod ?</b>

You don't &quot;need&quot; one but we always carry one, sometimes two, and a few times each trip it comes in handy, for example for long-exposure night shots or shooting birds on a hike near Olmoti or at the picnic areas in Ngorongoro. You can get out of the jeep and shoot landscapes too in most of Tanzania. Usually we take only one but will be at Nakuru shooting flamingos this year and will bring two.

Bill

Safarichuck - We use African Portfolio too. (Did we already go through this discussion?)

My question is: What types of vehicles will we be in as compared to the fully open jeeps we experienced in Botwana and South Africa?

Are the bean bags and clamps the best way to go instead of a monopod in the East Africa vehicles?

Our lenses are not that big. Maybe a 400 DO or a 70-200IS w/1.4x

Thanks.

I wouldn't bother bringing a tripod, as you will be in your vehicle most of the time. I think there have only been 2 situations when I have used a tripod: group shots where I want to be in the photograph, and stitched panoramas taken from the top of Ngorongoro Crater. Other than that, I have never used a tripod in east Africa.

Bill, I have seen the Todd Podd in action, but unfortunately it doesn't work with that many vehicles. It is too bad, because it is a nice invention. I still prefer a bean bag, as for me I think I am more nimble to move from side to side more quickly. Just a preference.

Regarding camera bags, I have been frustrated with what has been on the market so far. So I decided to start manufacturing my own camera bag. It goes into production in a few weeks, and I cannot wait to start using my bag myself out on safari. Yippee!! Expect the product out on the market in early 2008.

Andy,
Looking forward to your Bag in 2008 and meeting you soon, gosh really soon, in Tanzania.

Keri

See you down in the crater, Keri! It if is anything like last September and October, I expect some serious dust down there. Especially if it is windy. yikes!

I forgot to mention that you can see my last prototype of my bag, as it will be with me for some last rounds of testing.

:-)

Bill-H,
From your post I would guess that you are really focused (no pun intended) on birds. Dealing with the 500mm for birds might be a job best suited for a Wimberly but for all-around general safari photography I think the mobility to react quickly and to change your line of sight makes the bean bag just right. I am going to take a Wimberly on a Manfrotto head along with me to Botswana next summer.

Cheweyhead:
Hi Keri, I think we already discovered that we both use Yvette De Vries at African Portfolio. She has always come through for us and does a very professional job. As far as the vehicles in East Africa, they are enclosed and so entriely different. Shooting from the roof is easy because you can stabilize with a bean bag and you can get a good 360 degrees of visability. African Portfolio's ground operator, KIBO, has in the past not had poptops with the sun cover that extends overhead. I hope they haven't changed because I hate the interference and limitation the braces on the pop tops cause. Try shooting out a side window, much better than shooting down onto the backs of large close subjects. We will be only the two of us in the vehicle so very much mobility. The most we have ever safaried with are four plus the driver/guide. One thing to keep in mind that in Tanzania, unlike Botswana, the vehicles are not allowed off road (at least in the parks). That puts a focal length burden on the photographer. I'm not sure waht your longest lens is but you might want to bring a 1.4X Teleconverter along? Keri, think about a pillowcase (dust), I suggest that to everyone and most people love the result. If you have any particular questions, please feel free to email them to me, Yvette has my address.

Andy,
I recall you mentioned the bag last year. I couln't wait so I bought the Think Tank Airport Accelerator. I'm at the point now where I have to sneak new bags into the house. Perhaps arrange with the UPS man to pick up my packages at the corner gas station. Tell me, what will be the capacity of your new bag or bags (i.e., in mm of lenses that it will carry)? Off topic a bit but what are your most recent thoughts on the Canon Mark III. I followed your early history with that body and held off buying. Now I'm trying to decide wetween the 1D Mark III and the 1Ds Mark III. Do you think the 5 frame per second frame rate on the Ds is sufficient? Will the 21 MPIX of the Ds give a better image on a full frame body than 10 MPIX on a 1.3 crop body??

Regards-Chuck

Keri,
I should have also said that Yvette has my telephone number as well so, call if you are short on time.
Cheers-Chuck

Chuck-

My bag will be 9x14x20, and can accommodate a very long lens plus much much more. If you send me an email to andybiggs at gmail dot com, I will show you some photos of the bag. The bag weighs less than 4 pounds, yet has a very comfortable harness system that retracts back into the bag and out of view. This makes the bag much easier to use when shooting from a vehicle, as you place your bag on a seat beside you. If you have all of the straps going every which way, it makes it more difficult. Think of the bag as a cross between a Moose Peterson MP-1 (lightweight but poorly made) and a Lowepro Pro Trekker AWII (comforable to wear, but heavy). So I have a comfortable, well-padded back that is under 4 pounds.

This is what I carried in the bag to Africa in July:

Canon 1DsMkII
Canon 1DMkII (rental for a customer)
Canon 1DMkIII
Canon Rebel XTi (converted to infrared)
Canon 20D (rental for a customer)
500mm f/4
100-400mm
24-105mm
1.4x
2x
Edirol R-09 audio recorder
Epson P5000 storage device

Not bad, eh?

Regarding the 1DMk3 versus 1DsMk3, I have to say that I really do like larger file sizes, even if it means I need longer lenses to compensate for the field of view difference for the full frame camera. Even though the 1DsMk3 isn't out yet, I think the biggest limitation of the camera is the small-ish buffer, and not the frames per second. I was looking at my Lightroom database the other day, and realized that most of my favorite shots have been captured with my old 1DMk2 and my 100-400mm lens. I use my 1DMk3 now, but I always put my fastest camera on my 100-400mm, as I use that combo for blurred panning shots. I am not a birder, but do occasionally grab some bird shots. A 1DsMk3 is going to make that more challenging to fill the frame up with your subject.

In the end, the 10mp 1DMk3 is a wonderful camera. Some weirdo autofocus issues still need to be addressed, and I hope that the 1DsMk3 doesn't exhibit the same issues. I will be a $12,500 guinea pig if that is the case, and I won't be happy about it. The new interface is wonderful, the battery life astounding, and I have no reasons why I cannot come home with images that I am happy with.

<b>Bill-H,
From your post I would guess that you are really focused (no pun intended) on birds.</b>

Hi Chuck, we don't actually go out specifically for birds, it's just that with the Wimberley we can focus and shoot fast enough to photograph them easily.

<b>Dealing with the 500mm for birds might be a job best suited for a Wimberly but for all-around general safari photography I think the mobility to react quickly and to change your line of sight makes the bean bag just right.</b>

I don't follow this ... you can &quot;change your line of sight&quot; faster with the gimbal head than with the heavy lens on a bean bag.

Here's a couple of interesting posts from someone who went with Andy to Tanzania and felt the bean bags were limiting for long lenses ... to quote &quot;one of the trip members who also had along a Canon 500mm f4/L IS (bought just weeks before the trip) had the misfortune of having it tumble off the roof of his Land Rover onto the road, a fall of about 8 feet. The 1.4X Extender that was attached to it shattered, but the 500mm survived&quot; ...

Speaking of the bean bags supplied by Andy he wrote &quot;they didn't solve the problem that those of use with larger lenses encountered, which is the need to constantly hang onto this heavy equipment — heaving it up into position and then back down again. Unlike as seen in Figure 1 above, one can't leave a setup like this unattended, or some $15,000 worth of lens and camera can easily fall 8 feet to the ground, as happened to one of our workshop's photographers.&quot;

The T-mount is stable enough that we can keep it on the roof all the time, just moving it from side to side as necessary, which is far easier than having a single bean bag (if you can put multiple bean bags up secured with bungee cords then it's similar though).

He also mentions the Dutch photographer he met with the 300-800 Sigma (a lens about twice as heavy as the 500 f/4) ... I met this guy in April 2006 in Tanzania and he had dropped the Sigma off a window bean bag, only about a 3 ft fall but it broke the lens.

This was the same trip where we had the cheetah jump on our roof and bump into the unattended T-mount with Wimberley twice as he slipped on the roll-back roof cover. Big difference in stability.

Here's the links to the web site referenced above ... I don't like the 'solution' he came up with much either, he sheared a pin because he has to keep the mount at such an awkward angle.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/lo...tanzania.shtml
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re...ow-widow.shtml

As Andy mentioned a drawback is these only work on a couple of types of roofs, so when we are booking a new place (like Kenya) we make sure the guy knows what we need in jeep roofs. It's also a drawback that they sell for over $200, but after using one and also using bean bags it's no contest to me, it's worth it.

Bill

Andy,
I have sent you an email, along with a few of my own images. Please be gentle.

Your comments on the 1Ds Mark III vs the 1D Mark III are really helpful. I never really considered the buffer question. Actually I was more concerned about the file size and the amount of storage I would need, both at home and in the field. I had pretty much discounted that after looking into the enormous hard drives now available. Even though I'm a casual birder and seldom do BIF captures, I do like to try and capture animal interaction. The buffer limitation would cramp my limited abilities. I'm looking forward to your new bag, perhaps my wife will indulge me just one more bag. She is a good sport, provided I take her on safari.
Regards-Chuck

Andy,
I have sent you an email, along with a few of my own images. Please be gentle.

Your comments on the 1Ds Mark III vs the 1D Mark III are really helpful. I never really considered the buffer question. Actually I was more concerned about the file size and the amount of storage I would need, both at home and in the field. I had pretty much discounted that after looking into the enormous hard drives now available. Even though I'm a casual birder and seldom do BIF captures, I do like to try and capture animal interaction. The buffer limitation would cramp my limited abilities. I'm looking forward to your new bag, perhaps my wife will indulge me just one more bag. She is a good sport, provided I take on safari.
Regards-Chuck

Bean bag story. On my May 2007 safari at Leopard Hills, my ranger was Marius. Great guide, chap and excellent photographer. His standard kit is a Canon 30D with 100-400 L. And he likes to use a bean bag, actually two that are sort of velcroed stacked together for height. Anyway, we were viewing two leopards when Marius dropped this bean bag combo over the door sill. One of the leopards heard it and came over to investigate while Marius begged him not to take his bean bag. Well, the leopard took it anyway and began playing with it and the other leopard joined in. We left the sighting, minus bean bag, to let another vehicle in. But good news the leopards tired of it and another ranger (different camp) retrieved it for Maurius. It was muddy and had a few holes in the bags. I got it all on video, Marius has a copy.

regards - tom

Tom, I think I would frame the bag :-)
Chuck

Bill-

the situation you are referring to about the 500mm lens hitting ground is actually quite different. During a quick lunch break, he rested his 500mm lens on the hood of the Land Rover, and when somebody jumped inside to grab something the movement of the vehicles caused the lens to roll off the hood. So the situation wasn't related to a bean bag at all.

I think Michael isn't a fan of the bean bags because he didn't like to move his camera around: he preferred to leave the whole setup ready to go, which I believe is a very very very bad idea. This is why his Kirk window mount shearing on him. He was simply putting too much pressure on the setup with all of the bumping around.

So both of these stories really don't have much to do with bean bags.

In my opinion, no matter what the solution is, one should expect to bring the camera and lens back into the vehicle when not in use. This greatly reduces the chances of damage.

This is obviously a sort of religious discussion, and it is nice to have options to consider. I remember on my first few safaris I brought with me no less than 3 different solutions that I would try out. In the end I decided that for my own needs I liked the beanbag the best. It weighed the least, cost the least and was useful for how I needed it to work for me. And it is scalable, as I bring around 80 people to Africa a year, and I provide these bean bags prefilled and ready to go for all travelers. I am working on my own design at the moment, and will put my first prototype into action later on this year. It is difficult to improve on an already good design, but I am trying!

Bill,
I understand what you are saying and I can appreciate how the sidekick would be useful. Don't misunderstand me but I think for anything less that the 500mm it is not the only solution. In Botswana, where I would most likely use it in order to stabilize from an open vehicle, we were always off-road. The terrain was unbelievably rough and we tracked wild dog for three days. I could never have covered that ground with anything mounted and set up, not even a clamp minus the camera and lens. It was all I could do to stay in my seat and keep my gear from falling. My guide knew the kind of light I wanted and I explained the kind of dog interaction I was trying to capture. When the pack came to rest, I was able to shoot in a split second. Same thing happened when we found the dogs after an impalla kill and the hyenas moved in. No time to set up just throw the bean bags on top of one another and start shooting. No way we could have positioned the 4X4, we had to improvise shooting positions. Had my rig been mounted, I would have missed some incredible images. On the other hand, I like the occasional bird shot and can see how it might help to have a Wimberly. Since I already have a Really Right Stuff 55 Ballhead, it would not be much additional investment. If I go full frame, an Andy has given me good reason to review that thought, I might be tempted to go for the 500mm lens. I don't think I would use a Wimberly in Tanz for the 500, but in Bots...I might try it on a Manfrotto clamped to the bar rail. I suppose some people can use this setup offroad, but I just can't imagine flying through the bush, all rigged up. Actually, for Botswana I would like to see someone design a way of clamping various size bean bags to the front rail. In the meantime, I continue my quest for the &quot;perfect&quot; Lilac Breasted Roller. Perhaps when I finally find it, I will have found my solution :-).

By the way, please excuse my typos, I can't stand reading this little box to edit my posts.

Regards-Chuck

<b>I can appreciate how the sidekick would be useful.</b>

Hi Chuck, just to be clear I DO NOT recommend the Sidekick for the roof mount for the heavy lenses, there are too many things to vibrate off and because the lens is attached sideways it will likely fall off if the main screw vibrates loose.

I recommend the Wimberley gimbal head. The big lenses are basically weightless on this head once you get it balanced. These two links show the difference:
http://www.tripodhead.com/products/wimberley-main.cfm
http://www.tripodhead.com/products/sidekick-main.cfm

I have the Sidekick and have used it mainly in Alaska on fly-in trips where I also had medium-format film cameras, so could not carry a ball head and the big Wimberley, but it's a compromise with the heaviest lenses and I wouldn't use it on safari (this is one of Reichmann's problems with the rig he broke). Any time I can use the big Wimberley instead that's what I take.

<b>I think for anything less that the 500mm it is not the only solution.</b>

Yeah, I said this on my web page and in my first post here ... &quot;We use bean bags for smaller lenses up to say 100-400 or 400 f/5.6&quot; ...

<b>In Botswana ...</b>

My recommendation was for East Africa, where the jeeps are usually set up differently than the more open jeeps in Bots ... the original post said &quot;I am planning a safari to Tanzania in early 2008 ...&quot; and that's what I was writing to.

Bill

Bill,
Thanks for your in depth explanation. I'll keep that in mind if I get the 500mm and use it in Botswana. Tanz is just different, the landscapes are more vast and the distances great. The added lens length seems to make more sense. In Bots, I often wanted less and I have considered taking a 70-200 2.8 L IS instead of the 100-400mm. For me, it keeps coming back to weight.
Cheers-Chuck

Chuck, Bill &amp; Andy,
I have been watching this discussion with a great deal of interest, as I am planning a Tanzania trip in June-July 2009 and I plan to have acquired a 300/2.8IS with TCs by then (the decision being dictated by cost, size and weight). I'd be curious to hear your thoughts about support for that lens on a 30D/40D in the vehicles typical of Tanzania (we will have a private land rover for about half the trip, then be in the vehicles provided by CCA and Sayari camps). Our other camera body (XTi) will be fitted with the 100-400 or 70-200/2.8, as conditions dictate, but we hand-hold those lenses to generally good effect anyway.
I was thinking just to take several bean bags, but I am curious if you would suggest a monopod or some sort of bracket setup instead. Looking forward to your thoughts.

Chris
www.pbase.com/cwillis

Chris, as you can probably guess, I use a bean bag for all support needs from wide angle to super telephoto. I use pop top vehicles in Tanzania, and this works great for me. I have never stayed at Sayari, as I usually have my own private camps setup in the area, but I would expect them to have open-sided vehicles with a canvas top. I am sure somebody else will chime in here about open-sided vehicles, but I have had good success with both bean bags and also with a wimberly mount (either attached to a metal bar or attached to a tripod with 2 legs on the floor and one shortened leg on the seat, all secured with bungee cords and/or gaffer tape). It really depends on how many people are also in the vehicle with you. If it is only 1 per row, you have it easy. If more, be prepared to try out different scenarios.

If you have picked up one thing from this discussion, it is that different solutions work for different people. Just be prepared to modify or adandon one idea for another if it doesn't work out. Choices are a good thing!

Chris, I'd probably just bring a couple of bean bags for the situation you describe. The 300 with those bodies is about 4 lbs lighter than the 500 with the 1D bodies, and sharing a jeep half the trip will also make it easier to use beanbags.

Bill

Chris,
Your rig is pretty much what I'm using, the 300 2.8 L IS with and without a 1.4X TC and a 100-400mm on a second body. The bbean bags will work fine in as Bill and Andy suggest. The 300mm is a wonderful lens and I was shocked to learn how little quality was lost using a 1.4X TC. Once you get that lens, you will discover how hard it is to take the hood on and off. I leave it on at all times and pull a neoprene Hood Hat (OpTech) over the hood for prtection. sometimes I keep both bodies and lenses in a bag on the middle seat ready to go. The bean bags are at my feet and ready to throw onto the rooftop or grab bar at a moments notice. I have taken a monopod but really didn't find I used it much. I have also read that the 300mm takes a 2X TC quite well. I remain skeptical but many birders like the combination. Consider the 400mm DO as well. The 400mm f4 DO is smaller than the 300mm 2.8 L IS and on you cameras, you would gain an additional 160mm. It is also my understanding (not from experience) based on reviews, that the Canon teleconverters are significantly better, at least with Canon lenses.
Regards-Chuck

Excellent, thank you all for your comments. Now I just need to get the money together for all this gear!

Chuck, I have also read that the 300/2.8+2xTC works well, and I have seen quite a few bird pictures on PBase with this combination that seem very sharp and detailed. I plan to try it out well before the safari on some local birds and see how it looks.

I have not read very positive things about the 400/4 DO. Certainly it is lighter than the 300/2.8, but the reviews I have seen describe it as significantly lacking in sharpness and contrast in comparison to the 300/2.8 or even the 300/2.8+1.4xTC. Those kind of comments, plus the price tag, have put me off the 400/4 as a lens on my desired list. Frankly, for that much money, I would just get a 500/4 and deal with mounting and carrying it around.
The 300/2.8 also appealed to me for dealing with close-in animals in low light. I know from experience with my 70-200/2.8 just how great that aperture performs in low light, and it is tempting to have a longer focal length that would be equally capable in low light. The 400/4 or 500/4 won't give me that option. Maybe it isn't worth much in real life, but it seemed appealing in theory.

Thanks again for your comments.

Chris
www.pbase.com/cwillis

Chris-

If you are balking at the price of a 300mm f/2.8, I might suggest renting a 500mm lens. I spoke with the owner of lensprotogo.com the other day, and it looks like it would be around $450 for a rental for a typical length of a safari. I was quite impressed, actually. I absolutely love the 300mm f/2.8, but I did sell it a few years ago to fund my 2nd 500mm lens that I put into my rental pool to offer up to safari customers as a value added service. Heck, I even shlepp the darned thing to Africa!! But seriously, the 400mm DO is a nice lens but it is certainly no 300mm f/2.8. You lose quality to gain the weight savings. I have a DO that I use frequently, but might sell it to help fund a 1DsMkIII this year. Yikes.

Either way you go, you really cannot go wrong with any Canon telephoto prime. I still look back at my 300mm f/4 shots and I am still extremly happy with them.

Chris,
I struggled with the same decision last year. I decided on the 300mm but it was a very difficult decision for me. I found many great examples of what the 400mm DO could deliver and I must say that it is also an impressive lens. However, I knew that if I got the 400mm, I would have no excuse to buy the 500mm. So...if you get the 300mm the next obvious addition must be a 500mm. What spouse can argue with that rationale :-). I rally love the 300mm 2.8 L IS lens, however, one thing I must now take into consideration more conciously is depth of field. You are probably more accustomed to the 2.8 aperature, I found that I needed to stop down in order to capture all parts of the scene I was interested in. For example, two Malachite Kingfishers feeding one another proved difficult. One was always out of focus. I know how to handle that now but I was wrong in the field and so have fewer images then I would have liked. The 500mm is a beast but a beautiful one. Another possibility for you to consider might be a 300mm f4 L IS. It is much smaller and less costly and is supposed to take a 1.4XTC pretty well. Of course you end up with a 5.6 lens but you might also be able to swing a 500mm in addition. All great things to think about . By the way, didn;t you do a Grollia Treck last year with the 100-400mm. I recall you got some awesome shots.
Cheers-Chuck

Renting is definitely an option I have in mind if the trip rolls around before I buy the new lens. In fact, I had planned to rent a 300/2.8 and try it out before buying it. I am planning a trip to the St. Augustine Alligator Farm Rookery in the spring to shoot some birds and figured that would be a good test. It certainly will give me an idea of the logistics of carrying and shooting with that lens. I may also rent a 500/4 for a week and try it out the same way -- the difference being that I would absolutely need a tripod and Wimberley head to even use it -- no handholding or mere monopod use with that one, I don't think!
We have a lens rental place here in Atlanta (Professional Photo Resources) that rents lenses by the day, and the weekend rate is very reasonable, even for the big primes. In fact, I rented a 70-200/2.8 from there to try out before I bought one. For a longer rental I think the web-based rental places cost less.

Thanks again.
Chris

Chuck, thanks for those thoughts. The DOF with a 2.8 aperture definitely was a surprise to me when I first started using my 70-200/2.8. In fact, I usuall shoot that lens at f4 unless light conditions or an artistic choice make me want to open it up wider. But at 300mm the DOF would be even less, except for a much more distant subject.

I did do four gorilla treks earlier this year (January) with the 100-400 and I was really happy with the results (the pics are in my PBase gallery). Thank you for remembering those. We just got back last weekend from Mongolia and China, and I think I got some really nice pictures of wild horses and Demoiselle Cranes in Mongolia with the 100-400. When I process them, we'll see how they turned out ...

Chris
www.pbase.com/cwillis

Chris,

I don't think you'll be disappointed by the 300/2.8 IS with TCs. It's what I've been using for nearly three years now (I'm not in a position to get a 500/4) and it's light enough to use with ease in a vehicle with beanbag or monopod (I'm talking the open vehicles of southern Africa) and even for short walks with monopod (a few kilometres). I have a 100-400 IS but rarely take it on safari.

John

John, that is a persuasive endorsement considering it is coming from you. I do think that the 300/2.8 is the right choice for my budget and needs, but I will have some opportunities to test that before the next trip to Africa.

On the point about ease of carrying around, I ran into a photographer using a 1D body and a 400/2.8 a couple of weeks ago in China. I could not believe how big and heavy that rig looked to try to deal with!

Chris

Chris,

Not long after I bought my 400/2.8 a few years ago, I was foolish enough to carry it with EOS1n and suitably heavy tripod around a few kilometres of wetland boardwalk. Never again! Because I like walking with camera, the 300/2.8 eventually replaced the 400.

I'm looking forward to giving the 300/2.8 its second safari workout in Zambia next year. I'll have a backup EOS3 with 24-105/f4 L IS, plus a small medium format camera (a delightful Fuji GS645S Wide 60 which I bought secondhand a few years ago).


John

John, I can only imagine what it would have been like to carry the 1n and 400/2.8 and tripod around for a day. I shoot with two friends who use 30Ds, 500/4s and CF tripods, and that looks hard enough to me!

Chris

The 400mm f/2.8 is an awesome lens, but the speed isn't necessary for wildlife photography in this day and age. I am finding that my shot on the 500mm are almost always between f/8 and f/14, as the depth of field needed dictates the stopping down. The 400mm is awesome, but really best for sports photography. Talk about wicked sharp!

Unless you prefer to shoot slow film, as I do, Andy ;)