Lens for Zoo

I'll be heading down to Woodland Park Zoo in Seattle this weekend and need some advice.

I'm taking my 35L for all around while in Seattle and debating which other one to take. I don't really want to take the 70-200 II as I don't think I'll use it other than at the zoo. Don't want to lug it around.

Two options for me are.

1. Take my 135L with 1.4x

2. Pick up a Sigma 85 on the way down.

My preference is option 2, BUT will 85 be good enough for Woodland? Thanks.

You should rethink about 70-200 + 1.4X TC, last time I go to zoo, 200 don't cut it.

200mm does NOT cut it at my zoo! I've used the 300mm f4 with decent success, but the best zoo lens I've used is my 400mm. Bottom line, the longer the better. The 135mm with the 1.4 just isn't long enough and an 85mm at the zoo is a joke. The animals will be laughing at you! The 70-200mm with the extender should give you some good shots.

KY707 wrote in post #12630716
You should rethink about 70-200 + 1.4X TC, last time I go to zoo, 200 don't cut it.

+1

You may even consider the 2x tc if you've got a 70200 II

70-200 II with a 2x converter

You have the sharpest zoom made and you want to get a lens within that range? Rent a 400 5.6 or 300 4.0....you need length my friend!

You'll certainly need a long lens. I use the 120-400OS Sigma at the zoo.

100-400L and a 50mm are all that I have ever needed when going to the zoo.

400mm is definitely needed. 200mm is way too short. Using an teleconverter with your 70-200 would be the cost effective way.

I find carrying around a lot of gear awkward depending on the amount of people at the zoo. Bad enough just walking around with a DSLR and a big lens. I hit a kid on the head with the lens hood when I was swinging the camera up to use. Not hard though. Changing lenses is a bit of a pain in the back side. That is why the 100-400L was so appealing to me. The Sigma 120-400mm f/4.5-5.6 DG HSM OS APO is a great lens too. A little softer at f/5.6 on the long end compared to the Canon L. A lot cheaper though. Stop it down to f/8 and you are flying. If you get one used just for the trip you can always sell it again. Or rent either of the lenses. The Sigma 150-500mm did not appeal to me. Not much difference from 400mm to 500mm. But the maximum aperture drops to f/6.3 around 300mm. Only 1/3 stop, but you have to shoot at f/8 already to improve on sharpness.

At 400mm you can easily shoot through the cages without seeing the bars and blur out the background to hide any signs of the hand of man (fence, cage, buildings, etc). You get more frame filling shots.

Check out my website. Go to the animals gallery to see images form the zoo with the 100-400L. On my first visit I brought four lenses. I was constantly changing between a 70-200 and a 400 prime. On visits II to IV I only brought the 100-400L (I sold the 400 prime) and either a 50 or 85mm prime.

I used my 28-300L at Brookfield Zoo in Chicago last year, only lens I took, and 300mm was BARELY enough reach. Was able to mitigate via cropping to get some good results, but next time the 70-200 MKII with a 2xTC will probably be over the shoulder assuming I can deal with having 2 lenses with me (family pictures + animal pictures can all be done with the 28-300L) as opposed to one.

I used to take my 70-200 f/4 IS + 1.4x TC on our zoo trips, and at times wanted more reach. I added a 100-400L to the kit last year, and took it to the zoo for the first time this spring. I was much happier with the results.

sleeper wrote in post #12630511
I don't really want to take the 70-200 II as I don't think I'll use it other than at the zoo. Don't want to lug it around.

This is one reason I have the 70-200f/4L IS. That, and its half the price.

I generally take my Tamron 70-300 and a monopod. (I've become quite tired of people not watching where they're going and kicking/tripping over a tripod, which are fully allowed.) I'll also grab my MkI 50 1.8 if I'm planning on hitting the aquarium, reptile house, etc. where things are closer and the light dimmer.

Which camera are you taking, the 5D or the 50D? If the 5D, even the 70-200 will probably be too short. I often take just my 200 f/2.8 lens to the zoo and it works great on a crop camera, but it depends on your zoo. My 100-400 works great too, but sometimes it's not worth taking a big lens and fighting the crowd.

I just looked up this question the other day and found this thread. As a few people pointed out there, are you going with family or just for photography? If for photography, you'll want the 70-200. I went with the family and took my 24-105, 30 and 85. I never took the 24-105 off the camera. I was able to zoom out to get shots of what the kids were doing. On the long end 105 was a bit limiting on getting animal shots, but I still got some good shots.

I think the 100-400 is out question. Just don't have the $$$ for that.

Looks like the consensus is the 70-200 II. I haven't used a safe at a hotel yet, but are they generally big enough to hold a 70-200 II? I really don't want to carry that around other than at the zoo.

I'll be taking the 5D2. I'm only going to the zoo for a half a day and would prefer the 5D2 for the rest of the trip.

I did have a 70-200 f4 IS before, but traded up for the II. Too good of a deal to pass up.