Gear for bird photography in Costa Rica?

I may have to a chance to visit Costa Rica sometime in mid-late summer. If I go, my focus will be on finding and photographing wildlife (sloths, monkeys, frogs, snakes...you name it, but especially birds). Right now I have a 500/4 IS (v1), 70-200/2.8 II, and a 100 and 180mm macro, among other less-wildlife oriented lenses. Bodies are 1D3 and 5D2. I also have teleconverters. I've long desired more reach for here in Ohio, but I wonder what the ideal lens is for bird photography in CR? Take for example the 800L. This may be an ideal lens here, but in CR is it too long/dim? Of course if I ever did upgrade to an 800, I would also get something like a 300/4 as well.

I don't know...just random thoughts I guess. It would be a once in a lifetime trip and I'd want to make the most out of it.

Heya,

I would think the 500/4 would be fine, with the 70-200 F2.8 II right next to it. Question is, do you really want to be trying to get around with an 800L? Gonna hire someone to watch your back the whole time? And carry the gear?

If I were going to take a single lens, I'd probably want something like a 300 F2.8 and a mid-range zoom that has a wide side, like a 24-70. The 300 F2.8 is great for the dim/dark/canopy covered areas. And in the decent light, it's a 600 F5.6 which is plenty of reach. In the areas you'll be in, most the species will not be far away and are relatively used to people in the public areas. but they are also decent sized mammals, and not tiny birds, so you can get plenty of comp options at 600mm and probably even at 300mm really.

So that said, without buying anything, the 500/4 and a 1.4x TC makes a lot of sense.

Otherwise, I'd want the 300/2.8 and the TC's.

Very best,

Thanks for the reponse!

Yes, I'd imagine that the 500/4 would be a great lens in Costa Rica. But as I spend 99% of my time in Ohio, where wildlife is hard to get close to, I might just end up upgrading to something longer. I'd imagine, as you said, that the dimness of the 800L could be problematic in CR. If I find a good deal on a 600/4 or 800/5.6, it makes sense (to me) to jump on it. As far as lugging around an 800 and hiring someone to watch my back, I ask why a 500/4 would be much different? It is nearly as heavy (8.5 vs 9.9 lbs) and still rather enticing to a thief. I do plan on having my gear with me at all times (eating, sleeping, going to the bathroom, etc). I would not leave it out of my sight for any amount of time.

But you make excellent points: most wildlife will be human-acclimated, and the 800L would have limited use compared to the 500. I'm guessing a 400/2.8 vII might be THE wildlife lens in CR.

birder_herper wrote in post #17452381
Of course if I ever did upgrade to an 800, I would also get something like a 300/4 as well.

I don't know...just random thoughts I guess. It would be a once in a lifetime trip and I'd want to make the most out of it.

My "Birding" setup is a Canon 1DX + a Canon 300 F2.8 L IS and a Canon 800 F5.6 L IS. If I am not walking too rar (up to 1 mile on the flat) I will take both, but if a bit of a hike is involved then I take either one depending on the range required.
I should say that I am totally biased! Since getting the 800 F5.6 most of my other lenses are gathering dust, I simply love this lens! For smaller bird species you can never have enough length but this comes at the price of weight, minimum focus distance, money and aperture.
Given that you have a 500 F4 heavy lenses are no strangers to you and the 800 is just under 2lbs heavier so it's not a big problem.
The MFD can be an issue occasionally (it is 6 meters) though this can be improved a touch with an extension tube. However if you want frame fillers then this is the lens to get.
If your subjects are pretty close the DOF is very small so I normally shoot at F8 to F11 if the range is really short. If you subjects are further away, say 12/3 meters + then F5.6 is fine for smaller birds. Stopping down may give you issues with the ISO if the light is not great - I have no ideas of conditions in Costa Rica.
Given the lenses that you have I suspect that your 500mm with a 1.4 extender is going to be very good and will not involve the expense of moving to an 800.
One other suggestion, have you considered selling both your cameras and getting a 1DX? I have used the 1D3 and owned the 1D4 and found that the 1DX is a significant upgrade in all departments - except weight as it's heavier. Note if you have any spare 1D3 batteries they will work fine. If you want reach then Canon claim that the 1DX will equal the 1D4 (16MP and 1.3 crop), I disagree, have used both alongside each other I feel that the 1DX crops much better than the 1D4 allowing a very slight increase in reach even though the MP density is lower. AF is significantly better than the 1D4 and quite a bit more compared with the 1D3. Iso is a very significant improvement as well - I shoot in Manual with Auto ISO and pay no attention to the ISO until it exceeds 8000 and I will use 16000 at a push (though I may need a little NR at this level).
The advantage of getting the 1DX is that it will perform on all your lenses whilst changing a lens will only improve that one lens, also the Canon 2 x Mk3 extender becomes quite viable on your 500 F4 when stopped down a little.
This is just food for thought, but I think it is an option that you should consider.