Good advice, Jerome. As an aside, I used to do a bit of zoo photography with a 135. Sure it was too short for some of the smaller animals, but with a little patience I got quite a few good shots. I would think a 300 would be adequate for most zoo shots. Also should work for a lot of game preserve shooting. In the wild a 300 would be marginal.
Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto ----- Original Message ----- From: "jerome" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I haven't read all of the emails, but rather caught the above blurb from > someone's response. However, I felt compelled to mention that the more I read, > the more this is starting to sound moreso like a need for better technique > rather than better equipment (even though both may very well be the case). By > technique, I mean a few things: > > a) perhaps being more patient. If the animal is not in a good vantage point > (e.g., not close enough) then sometimes you just gotta wait it out. Sometimes > seconds, sometimes minutes... sometimes it just means "maybe another day". In > some instances it can simply mean finding a better point to shoot from. But of > course this is not always possible. Sur, You may be able to reach things that > you couldn't before but keep in mind: 1) f2.8 + 2x TC + at least 1 stop for > good measure (or even 2 for DOF) = your right back at f8 or f11. and 2) as Mark > pointed out, dealing with that 2x TC can really knock your image quality down a > few notches anyway. > > b) Learn the behavior of your subjects. The reason I say this is because you > seem unsatisfied with a 1/125 sec. shutter speed, and suggested that this > makes "many shots...impossible". This kinda baffles me since I can't remember > the last time I was able to shoot above 1/100 with either the 300mm f2.8 OR the > 400 f2.8.. > > Given that the best zoo photos are typically on overcast days and/or with > animals shying away from direct sunlight, I usually live around the 1/30 to > 1/60 range, with 1/15 not being unusual. Granted, I use ISO 100 film... but the > point is that it (slow speeds) works, and few shots are "impossible" unless > you're specifically trying to freeze action. You just need timing. And a whole > heap of patience for that right moment (which may literally last 1 second as > the animals pauses for thought or changes direction). > > I kinda sensed the "if I had a big fast lens, then click click click and > excellent photos are mine" syndrome for a second there. So I just thought I'd > mention this since I'd hate for you (or anyone) to spend a heap of money on > fast primes and be totally disenchanted when they find that the equipment > additions didn't "save the day". >
