Which Lens for zoo?

TxDiver wrote in post #10911886
I can't understand the attraction of photographing at the zoo. To me, the fact that the animals are already caught, and in a cage, takes away from the luster of it. If they were in the wild, I would be very interested to take pictures, but not at a zoo. I mean, you can go look at a zoo any time, so I don't get any sense of capturing a special moment. I guess that's just me. Do any others share such a view (and I'm not knocking the posters that do like it, just that I can't get excited about it personally).

Why does every picture have to be a "special moment?"

Not that I completely disagree, but your post is really, really elitist. Not everybody can afford to take a month off from work and fly to Africa just because they want to snap a pic of a lion. Besides, I'd rather not see wild places like Africa and Siberia turn into Disneyland for every wannabe wildlife photographer.

Jumping in the middle of all this, just my 2cents.

I went to the zoo, had my 24-105, 70-200, and 400. Put the 400 on, left it on all day.

TxDiver wrote in post #10911886
I can't understand the attraction of photographing at the zoo. To me, the fact that the animals are already caught, and in a cage, takes away from the luster of it. If they were in the wild, I would be very interested to take pictures, but not at a zoo. I mean, you can go look at a zoo any time, so I don't get any sense of capturing a special moment. I guess that's just me. Do any others share such a view (and I'm not knocking the posters that do like it, just that I can't get excited about it personally).

I have gone to the zoo and taken pictures but I understand where you are coming from in a sense. For many they may never be able to go out and shoot an animal in the wild that they will see in a zoo. Even better for them are the designs of the zoo settings, no longer are the animals kept in concrete cells with iron bars between them and the viewer. The bigger zoos and many of the smaller ones are into creating natural habitat. I have seen many images taken in zoos that if the photog didn't tell you they were in a zoo you would not know.

However there is nothing like the thrill of the hunt, catching an animal in the wild doing what it does naturally. Many of my friends have taken images of herons, and many have herons in flight but it takes being in the right spot, at the right time to get images like this ....

I enjoy the zoo because it's fun ... that's all just a personal choice. Admittedly, even if I could afford to spend $25-30K on an African Safari, I'd think of better things to spend my cash on ... like ... new lens to go to the zoo. LOL! JK

hanjolee wrote in post #10888153
70-200mm is just too heavy to carry around...

Yeah, at 1.7 pounds (760 g) the 70-200 f/4 L IS is a bit too heavy for some folks. After all, it weighs almost as much as a bottle of water, and to make matters worse you have to lift it all the way up to eye-level. Makes you feel sorry for all those poor videographers. Their gear often weighs 15-30 pounds.

krb wrote in post #10914015
Why does every picture have to be a "special moment?"

Not that I completely disagree, but your post is really, really elitist. Not everybody can afford to take a month off from work and fly to Africa just because they want to snap a pic of a lion. Besides, I'd rather not see wild places like Africa and Siberia turn into Disneyland for every wannabe wildlife photographer.

Ehhh, actually my thought was quite the opposite of elitist. I would be hard pressed to afford to pay for a trip just for a safari, so if I did, then I would want to practice up a bit with wildlife photography before going, since it would be a once in a lifetime thing most likely. Anyway, carry on...

My family and I are going to the zoo next month, for the first time in about 30 years. Maybe longer. I hadn't really thought about which lens/es to take, so this thread interests me enormously. At this point, I think I'll take the 17-55, to capture photos of the humans, and the 70-300 for the animals.

Whatever I take, I hope the photos will be better than those taken by my old Olympus Trip 35.

20 years now just about every time a camera has went anywhere with me I've had from the widest I've owned to the longest. Currently that's 10-400, one body, five lenses, and one flash. You just get used to taking it.

Daniel Browning wrote in post #10917649
Yeah, at 1.7 pounds (760 g) the 70-200 f/4 L IS is a bit too heavy for some folks. After all, it weighs almost as much as a bottle of water, and to make matters worse you have to lift it all the way up to eye-level. Makes you feel sorry for all those poor videographers. Their gear often weighs 15-30 pounds.

heck.. i tried handholding my 5DII gripped with my 70-200L f2.8 IS and video the Shamu show at seaworld.. and man.. after 2 mins of it.. that was enough for me. ended up leaning it against a railing to record more.

EOS mE wrote in post #10924865
heck.. i tried handholding my 5DII gripped with my 70-200L f2.8 IS and video the Shamu show at seaworld.. and man.. after 2 mins of it.. that was enough for me. ended up leaning it against a railing to record more.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=917000

krb wrote in post #10926964
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=917000

thanks ken.. this will definitely help out.. since i don't hit the gym..
but this looks like the posture i use when playing paintball before...

EOS mE wrote in post #10928995
thanks ken.. this will definitely help out.. since i don't hit the gym..
but this looks like the posture i use when playing paintball before...

Check out his video, it's based on the stance he uses for shooting in rifle competitions, which makes sense because in both cases you are trying to accompish the same "steady shooting platform."

ok... time to keep this thread moving..
here's some more shots with the 70-200 f2.8L IS... glad i brought it!!

walking a cheetah on leash.. shot from the 2nd level of the tour bus:

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'