Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Wildlife Talk 
Thread started 19 Jan 2018 (Friday) 19:37
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Which Lens for Pantanal Trip?

 
Bogino
Senior Member
Avatar
472 posts
Gallery: 29 photos
Likes: 124
Joined Sep 2011
Location: Southern California
     
Jan 19, 2018 19:37 |  #1

I'm in the process of finalizing plans to visit the Pantanal this October. My 2 primary photo targets are, of course the Jaguar, and secondly Hyacinth Macaws.

I own the Canon 70-300mm f/4 - 5.6L lens and I also just acquired a Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM which I love. Question is:

Which of the 2 should I take and why? If the 70-200mm should I consider an extender for that?

Thank You.


Canon 7D Mark II; Canon 70-300mm "L"; Canon 100mm Macro; Tamron 24-70mm; Tokina 11-16mm 2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
12,477 posts
Gallery: 140 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3114
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Post edited 9 months ago by Tom Reichner. (4 edits in all)
     
Jan 20, 2018 03:14 |  #2

Bogino wrote in post #18544760 (external link)
I'm in the process of finalizing plans to visit the Pantanal this October. My 2 primary photo targets are, of course the Jaguar, and secondly Hyacinth Macaws.

I own the Canon 70-300mm f/4 - 5.6L lens and I also just acquired a Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM which I love. Question is:

Which of the 2 should I take and why? If the 70-200mm should I consider an extender for that?

Perhaps you will find some info here that is helpful:

http://photosafaris.co​m …razils-Pantanal-2012-Trip (external link)

and:

https://www.dpreview.c​om/forums/thread/41361​24 (external link)

and also:

https://www.wildlifewo​rkshops.com …-the-pantanal-photo-tour/ (external link)

All seem to advocate a lens longer than either of the two that you currently have. . It wouldn't surprise me in the least if you end up taking a 100-400mm or a 150-600mm zoom on this trip, either via rent or purchase.

Of course, even with a big lens, you'll probably still want to take your 70-200mm lens along for those occasions where a wider, more contextual field of view is desired.


.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Trik
Senior Member
Avatar
854 posts
Gallery: 116 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 1976
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Dorset, England
     
Jan 21, 2018 12:09 as a reply to  @ Tom Reichner's post |  #3

I agree strongly with Tom - the longer the reach the better, especially for a trip like you are planning. I don't think you'll regret it and find you are over-lensed - the reverse in fact.

Good luck with the trip.


http://www.trikimages.​co.uk (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cutaway
Member
50 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jul 2006
     
Jan 21, 2018 14:23 |  #4

We were in the Pantanal last year. Given the 2 lenses you mentioned I'd go with the 70-300. As others have said, the longer the better. My wife's long lens was the 100-400. I had the 100-400v2 plus a 600mm. In addition to the reach of the longer lenses it's important to consider that many shots will have to deal with heavy shade and early morning/late afternoon light. While the 600mm was sometimes overkill it was a big advantage to have an f4 lens.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scrumhalf
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,258 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Likes: 3388
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Portland OR USA
     
Jan 21, 2018 16:03 |  #5

I don't have anything to add to the thread that hasn't been said, other than my feelings of indescribable jealousy.

Have fun! And share your photos!


Sam
5D4 | 6D | 7D2 (2 bodies) | Reasonably good glass
Gear List

flickr (external link)
If I don't get the shots I want with the gear I have, the only optics I need to examine is the mirror on the bathroom wall. The root cause will be there.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RPCrowe
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,989 posts
Likes: 940
Joined Nov 2005
Location: San Diego County, California, USA
     
Feb 24, 2018 18:37 |  #6

Although the 70-300mm f/4-5.6L is a great lens, it is pretty slow at its longest end. The shots of the jaguar at least, may occur in very low light levels where the f/2.8 would be an advantage.

You didn't mention if you are shooting with a full frame or a crop camera. If full frame, I suggest that you get a crop camera as a back up and as a second camera. If you are shooting with a crop camera, I suggest a full frame as a back up and second camera.

I would not go on a trip without a back up camera. Several years ago, I fell climbing a hill on the first day of a ten day trip to Alaska's Kenai Peninsula and broke my Canon 40D. The 30D I had as a back up and second camera saved the trip photographically.

I use a 1.4x TC with both my 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II and my 70-200mm f/4L IS lenses but, I understand that the 2x MK iii TC meshes quite well with the 70-200mm f/2.8 (series) lenses.

I would also bring a hotshoe flash equipped with a flash extender for fill light.


See my images at http://rpcrowe.smugmug​.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bogino
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
472 posts
Gallery: 29 photos
Likes: 124
Joined Sep 2011
Location: Southern California
     
Jun 02, 2018 14:46 |  #7

UPDATE:

I ditched the 400mm and in its place I acquired the Canon 100-400mm Ver. 2. So in addition to that lens I also have the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM. Would you suggest taking both of those (pretty heavy load) or leaving the 70-200mm behind? My only reservation is that I've read the 70-200mm f/2.8 is better and faster in lower light situations. I'm expecting, assuming I'm lucky" that photographing jaguars will be from the boat that I'm in and the jaguar on the side of the river bank whereby in some situations the jaguar may be out in the open (better lighting) while in other situations the jaguar might be viewable but under the cover of bushes and trees under lower light. Any additional thoughts on that?

Thank You.


Canon 7D Mark II; Canon 70-300mm "L"; Canon 100mm Macro; Tamron 24-70mm; Tokina 11-16mm 2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mybludog
Member
Avatar
230 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 131
Joined Nov 2013
Location: Newcastle, Australia
     
Jun 06, 2018 05:07 as a reply to  @ Bogino's post |  #8

I'd be taking both lenses on 2 different bodies mate. That way you have a backup and it'll give you more options.

This trips on my bucket list, who are you travelling with?


Just like a dung beetle......flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
12,477 posts
Gallery: 140 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3114
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Jun 06, 2018 08:56 |  #9

Bogino wrote in post #18637814 (external link)
I acquired the Canon 100-400mm Ver. 2. I also have the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM. Would you suggest taking both of those (pretty heavy load) or leaving the 70-200mm behind?


Mybludog wrote in post #18640107 (external link)
I'd be taking both lenses on 2 different bodies mate. That way you have a backup and it'll give you more options.

.
I agree with the 2 lens / 2 body suggestion.

I see that your body is a 7D2. . I would strongly suggest that you pair that with a full frame body so that you can get the most versatility when it comes to framing scenes the way you want to. . Having two lenses and two bodies with different sensor sizes should provide you some pretty decent versatility. . Your 70mm on a 7D2 will only give you a 98mm field of view - are you really going to be happy with that as your widest option?


.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bogino
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
472 posts
Gallery: 29 photos
Likes: 124
Joined Sep 2011
Location: Southern California
     
Jun 25, 2018 21:40 |  #10

Just to update and rehash:

I have the Canon 100-400mm ver. II and the Canon 70-200mm f.2.8L IS II. I also have a Canon 2x Extender. Lastly, I have access to a Canon 70-300mm L which my daughter currently uses.

I only have 1 body which is the 7D Mark II.

Many have suggested pairing the 7D Mark II with a full frame body which I do not currently have. I've actually been thinking of adding one to my collection as I've never shot with full frame, however, I'm not ready right now to put out big $$$ for one. Would a 6D version I suffice? I'm open to suggestions.

Is the consensus then to take the 100-400mm; 70-200mm; 7D Mark 2 and ideally a full frame as a back-up? (by the way--I also have a Canon 60D which I haven't used in awhile but it's perfectly fine.)

My travel dates to Pantanal will be from October 23 - November 1 or 2. I believe that's the tail end of the dry season so I will not be surprised if we get some rain. Hopefully not. I'm also going out with a single local guide. Just me and him and not one of those more touristy boat rides with 7 or 8 others. This way I'll have more freedom. If we do get some rain and/or cloudiness I'm guessing I'll have to deal with low light conditions. Any comments about that would be appreciated.


Canon 7D Mark II; Canon 70-300mm "L"; Canon 100mm Macro; Tamron 24-70mm; Tokina 11-16mm 2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bogino
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
472 posts
Gallery: 29 photos
Likes: 124
Joined Sep 2011
Location: Southern California
     
Jul 08, 2018 12:28 |  #11

Mybludog wrote in post #18640107 (external link)
I'd be taking both lenses on 2 different bodies mate. That way you have a backup and it'll give you more options.

This trips on my bucket list, who are you travelling with?

I am traveling with a local guide that I was referred to by a friend. It is not one of those "jaguar tour" things with a bunch of other people but rather just him and me so I can have all the flexibility I need for my photographic endeavors. I'll be out there in the end of October. If you'd like, contact me after mid-November and I can let you know how it went.


Canon 7D Mark II; Canon 70-300mm "L"; Canon 100mm Macro; Tamron 24-70mm; Tokina 11-16mm 2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
garbidz
Goldmember
Avatar
1,719 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 17
Joined May 2005
Location: Reunion Island
Post edited 4 months ago by garbidz. (2 edits in all)
     
Jul 14, 2018 05:06 |  #12

On a crop body, you get a nice reach with the 70-200 f/2.8 II. You also get faster and more accurate autofocus. The image quality is unbelievable.
Hand-holding anything longer than that is not evident even with the IS, especially low light. A 1.4x extender might be a good idea.
In my mind, you should take the L to see the Onça!
It is an amazing glass. I can hardly hide my jealousy. Pantanal!


bag

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davholla
Senior Member
995 posts
Gallery: 135 photos
Likes: 597
Joined Nov 2014
     
Sep 24, 2018 06:02 |  #13

Bogino wrote in post #18658580 (external link)
I am traveling with a local guide that I was referred to by a friend. It is not one of those "jaguar tour" things with a bunch of other people but rather just him and me so I can have all the flexibility I need for my photographic endeavors. I'll be out there in the end of October. If you'd like, contact me after mid-November and I can let you know how it went.

Add it to the thread as it should be fascinating




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,552 views & 11 likes for this thread
Which Lens for Pantanal Trip?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Wildlife Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is bsowde
688 guests, 265 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.