Well I'm going to be getting glove trained for the rehab birds that I posted about previously so I'll be able to take them out of their enclosures...which would only allow me about 7 feet of room to photograph them....and take them wherever I want for photos, they have a 60 foot flight enclosure on sight for instance. I think that some of the other handlers might even hold the birds on their arms so that I can get some "real" backdrops in the nearby woods for photography. All of the photos with handlers would be headshots most likely as I don't want these birds to seem like they are rehabbed...I want it as "wild" as possible. If I use the flight enclosures I'll most likely bring some sort of foliage or branches in there to make it look more natural as well.
I want these photos to be the best they can be. I'll have a lot of time to make them perfect as there is no pressing timeframe that this must be done. I am going to use the photos to make calendars and postcards for them to sell in order to help fund their project.
I am honored to be allowed to do this as another individual has done this for them but he took the photos and ran...so if you all see any kickin' closeups of raptors and owls for sale in Sapphire, NC be sure NOT to buy them as this is where his photos are for sale I was told. The only reason that I was allowed to do it is because one of my professors is personal friends with the ladies that run the clinic and he vouched for me. Now I get the privilege of being glove trained with these awesome animals!!! Hawks and Owls are my passion, my favorite part of my Biology major was learning about them.
Anyhow, enough about that....
I am getting a Sigma macro lens...150 or 180, haven't quite decided yet. I also have a Canon 100-400mm. I will be shooting on my Digital Rebel XT on a new Manfrotto 190XPROB with 322rc2 head.
Normally I'd use the 100-400 but these birds will allow me to totally manipulate them for an image, and they aren't too skiddish around me even when I'm 5 feet from them (I've been spending some time with all of them in order to accomplish this!!)
What lens do you guys think will yield me better results? I'm probably going to play around with both of them but if there is a clear choice that I'd be better off using I can save some time and effort.
And sorry for the long post but I hope you can sense how excited I am about this!!
When I begin photographing them I'll be sure to post some photos in order for you all to tell me how to improve them. I want them to be the best they can be.
Thanks!!
Posted by Kent Staubus on February 22, 2008 at 9:56 AM
You might start running into problems with the minimum focus distance on the Canon100-400mm. I suggest you check that out. You could use an extension tube, but I'm not sure that would keep AF, IS, and metering on your camera. If not, the macro lenses would allow you to focus from close distance. That's what they are for.
Kent in SD
Posted by Steve Foss on February 22, 2008 at 10:13 AM
Kyle, first off, congrats!
As for the lenses, I think you'll end up using both.
The MFD of the 100-400 is just under 6 feet. At that distance, you can make just the head of a hawk nearly fill the frame at 400mm, and if it's a GHO head you'll actually have to back off the zoom to get the whole head in at that distance. If you use a tube with the zoom you will lose autofocus.
However, the macro will be a bit sharper, and you may feel that's enough of an added plus to pull that out of your bag. Because you're in pretty much total control of the environment, the handiness of the zoom isn't as important, since you can easily move forward and back with the fixed macro to achieve the framing you want. And if, for example, you want a real closeup and the bird will allow it, you can move in with the 150 and isolate an eye/beak shot, for example.
I understand and applaud your desire to do your very best work. In the end no matter what helpful advice you get in here, it's going to be a bit different out there mostly because your shooting style may or may not match those giving you the advice. To respond directly to the question you asked in the title of your post, I'd probably end up shooting with nothing more than the 100-400, based on the circumstances you described. Also VERY nice to be able to go back as often as you need to reshoot as you experiment.
If you feel you need more reassurance about lens choice before going in, you can always go to the garden store and buy a plastic GHO, the kind used in gardens to deter crows, and experiment with each lens at various distances. Those decoys tend to be about life-sized. It's probably not a bad idea, anyway, as the macro will be new to you and it's always good to practice a bit with a new piece of equipment before taking it into a shoot.
Thanks for the input...I'm too psyched about this.
Here's a list of the birds I get to photograph....
Great Horned Owl
Barred Owl
Screech Owl
Barn Owl
Turkey Vulture
Red Tailed Hawk
Red Shouldered Hawk
Broad Winged Hawk
American Kestrel
Rhea
Emu
I think they got the Rhea and Emu from people who owned them illegally, I'll prob have to use the 100-400 for them as I'm NOT getting in their pen with my gear...they are some territorial muthas!!
Thanks!
Posted by Steve Foss on February 22, 2008 at 11:08 AM
Kyle, I envy you the opportunity. Have a great time!
My only similar "glove" experiences were with a couple of bald eagles and a GH owl. I found my 100 macro and 80-200 f/2.8 to be the most useful lenses from the standpoints of working distance, framing and DOF management. I ended up using very shallow DOF to manage background distractions, and for that the wide aperture was invaluable. Based on my shooting circumstances anyway, I found myself using the 100 most for size and portability, and the lower end of the 80-200 zoom range any time that was on the camera. I just never needed the long end of the zoom. In fact, if my macro had been a 150 or 180, much less my 200, I probably never would have put it on the camera. In fact, my 200 was in my bag, and it stayed there.
Come to think of it, all that shooting was on a full frame film body, and I'd find focal length to be an even greater issue doing the same shots with a cropped digital body such as your rebel (or my Nikon D2X for that matter. I'd be using my 24-120 for the same shooting today.
But my shooting distances were always within 10 feet. Modification would be called for with longer distances.
Practice a lot beforehand! The plastic yard owl is a good idea.
Have fun - you're sure to get some great head shots. I think your macro will be your best friend.
Sandy r
Posted by Scott Linstead on February 22, 2008 at 2:14 PM
Have you considered renting a 70-200 f2.8 to get some really nice OOF backgrounds? I think subject isolation will be an important consideration under these conditions.
Scott
Posted by Dan Borzynski on February 22, 2008 at 3:08 PM
are all captive in controlled situations. These were all taken with a 180 macro and a FILM body. For your digital body, you would need a 100 mm for something similar. I was standing 2+ to 7 feet away, depending on the bird.
I'd take your macro, the 100-400 and an extension tube. Borrow a tube, if need be, but bring one. Since it is a controlled situation, you should have plenty of opportunity to work inside the minimum focussing of the zoom. The macro will give a few more options.
The other bird shots there were with a 300 mm and some combination of convertors and film and digital bodies and are not really relevant to your question.
I don't know much about extension tubes....what would you guys recommend?
Posted by Dan Borzynski on February 23, 2008 at 12:28 AM
Canon or third party, Canon compatible - either will work. They are empty tubes with the appropriate electrical connections so the usual brand specific recommendations really aren't as needed for tubes. There is also almost nothing that can go wrong with them so used is a very reasonable way to go.
You'll lose focussing at infinity but that is a reasonable tradeoff. Extension tubes are not used when you want far focussing anyway.
Buy or borrow - I'd try to spend some time with one before the shoot. Changing the focal length of the zoom means you need to change the focus of the lens. This can also be a bit unnerving when you first put on your camera - a lot of your zooming and focussing habits may not quite work with them. It is pretty easy to get used to them but you'll look a bit silly the first time the focus doesn't behave exactly like you are expecting.
One last bit of fun - it you want to take a picture of your finger print, put one on the front element of a 24-28 mm lens, then add an 8 mm tube, and then stop down to f22.
Do extension tubes mess up your Image Quality? I wouldn't think so since there is no glass involved.
Posted by Steve Foss on February 23, 2008 at 8:05 AM
Kyle, you're right. No loss of IQ.
Canon's are very expensive. I bought a full set of the Kenko tubes (three) for $159, just a bit more than a single Canon 25mm tube for $129. You want to get metal tubes whichever way you go so there's no flex with multiple tubes and a heavy lens. Canon and Kenko are both metal, though some of the really inexpensive tubes are plastic (bad for flex).
They're nice to have for macro work in particular, allowing you to go much closer than the lens' native MFD, although as Dan said you lose infinity focus. The more tubes you use, the closer you can focus, and you can use combinations of different length tubes depending on how close you need to get to achieve your goal.
But to avoid looking like they are new to you at a shoot with other people around, it's best to practice a bit with them beforehand. With the push-pull zoom of the 100-400, making a tube or set of tubes work is further complicated by the fact that autofocus is lost. You can still do it with practice, but tubes are easier to use on primes than push-pull zooms, and since you'll have the macro there's simply no point in putting a tube on the 100-400 except for the fun of experimenting.
Discussion
12 repliesI want these photos to be the best they can be. I'll have a lot of time to make them perfect as there is no pressing timeframe that this must be done. I am going to use the photos to make calendars and postcards for them to sell in order to help fund their project.
I am honored to be allowed to do this as another individual has done this for them but he took the photos and ran...so if you all see any kickin' closeups of raptors and owls for sale in Sapphire, NC be sure NOT to buy them as this is where his photos are for sale I was told. The only reason that I was allowed to do it is because one of my professors is personal friends with the ladies that run the clinic and he vouched for me. Now I get the privilege of being glove trained with these awesome animals!!! Hawks and Owls are my passion, my favorite part of my Biology major was learning about them.
Anyhow, enough about that....
I am getting a Sigma macro lens...150 or 180, haven't quite decided yet. I also have a Canon 100-400mm. I will be shooting on my Digital Rebel XT on a new Manfrotto 190XPROB with 322rc2 head.
Normally I'd use the 100-400 but these birds will allow me to totally manipulate them for an image, and they aren't too skiddish around me even when I'm 5 feet from them (I've been spending some time with all of them in order to accomplish this!!)
What lens do you guys think will yield me better results? I'm probably going to play around with both of them but if there is a clear choice that I'd be better off using I can save some time and effort.
And sorry for the long post but I hope you can sense how excited I am about this!!
When I begin photographing them I'll be sure to post some photos in order for you all to tell me how to improve them. I want them to be the best they can be.
Thanks!!
Kent in SD
As for the lenses, I think you'll end up using both.
The MFD of the 100-400 is just under 6 feet. At that distance, you can make just the head of a hawk nearly fill the frame at 400mm, and if it's a GHO head you'll actually have to back off the zoom to get the whole head in at that distance. If you use a tube with the zoom you will lose autofocus.
However, the macro will be a bit sharper, and you may feel that's enough of an added plus to pull that out of your bag. Because you're in pretty much total control of the environment, the handiness of the zoom isn't as important, since you can easily move forward and back with the fixed macro to achieve the framing you want. And if, for example, you want a real closeup and the bird will allow it, you can move in with the 150 and isolate an eye/beak shot, for example.
I understand and applaud your desire to do your very best work. In the end no matter what helpful advice you get in here, it's going to be a bit different out there mostly because your shooting style may or may not match those giving you the advice. To respond directly to the question you asked in the title of your post, I'd probably end up shooting with nothing more than the 100-400, based on the circumstances you described. Also VERY nice to be able to go back as often as you need to reshoot as you experiment.
If you feel you need more reassurance about lens choice before going in, you can always go to the garden store and buy a plastic GHO, the kind used in gardens to deter crows, and experiment with each lens at various distances. Those decoys tend to be about life-sized. It's probably not a bad idea, anyway, as the macro will be new to you and it's always good to practice a bit with a new piece of equipment before taking it into a shoot.
Good luck!
Here's a list of the birds I get to photograph....
Great Horned Owl
Barred Owl
Screech Owl
Barn Owl
Turkey Vulture
Red Tailed Hawk
Red Shouldered Hawk
Broad Winged Hawk
American Kestrel
Rhea
Emu
I think they got the Rhea and Emu from people who owned them illegally, I'll prob have to use the 100-400 for them as I'm NOT getting in their pen with my gear...they are some territorial muthas!!
Thanks!
Come to think of it, all that shooting was on a full frame film body, and I'd find focal length to be an even greater issue doing the same shots with a cropped digital body such as your rebel (or my Nikon D2X for that matter. I'd be using my 24-120 for the same shooting today.
But my shooting distances were always within 10 feet. Modification would be called for with longer distances.
Have fun - you're sure to get some great head shots. I think your macro will be your best friend.
Sandy r
Scott
http://www.danborzynskiimages.com/birds.htm
are all captive in controlled situations. These were all taken with a 180 macro and a FILM body. For your digital body, you would need a 100 mm for something similar. I was standing 2+ to 7 feet away, depending on the bird.
I'd take your macro, the 100-400 and an extension tube. Borrow a tube, if need be, but bring one. Since it is a controlled situation, you should have plenty of opportunity to work inside the minimum focussing of the zoom. The macro will give a few more options.
The other bird shots there were with a 300 mm and some combination of convertors and film and digital bodies and are not really relevant to your question.
You'll lose focussing at infinity but that is a reasonable tradeoff. Extension tubes are not used when you want far focussing anyway.
Buy or borrow - I'd try to spend some time with one before the shoot. Changing the focal length of the zoom means you need to change the focus of the lens. This can also be a bit unnerving when you first put on your camera - a lot of your zooming and focussing habits may not quite work with them. It is pretty easy to get used to them but you'll look a bit silly the first time the focus doesn't behave exactly like you are expecting.
One last bit of fun - it you want to take a picture of your finger print, put one on the front element of a 24-28 mm lens, then add an 8 mm tube, and then stop down to f22.
Canon's are very expensive. I bought a full set of the Kenko tubes (three) for $159, just a bit more than a single Canon 25mm tube for $129. You want to get metal tubes whichever way you go so there's no flex with multiple tubes and a heavy lens. Canon and Kenko are both metal, though some of the really inexpensive tubes are plastic (bad for flex).
They're nice to have for macro work in particular, allowing you to go much closer than the lens' native MFD, although as Dan said you lose infinity focus. The more tubes you use, the closer you can focus, and you can use combinations of different length tubes depending on how close you need to get to achieve your goal.
But to avoid looking like they are new to you at a shoot with other people around, it's best to practice a bit with them beforehand. With the push-pull zoom of the 100-400, making a tube or set of tubes work is further complicated by the fact that autofocus is lost. You can still do it with practice, but tubes are easier to use on primes than push-pull zooms, and since you'll have the macro there's simply no point in putting a tube on the 100-400 except for the fun of experimenting.