The best lens for Liv2Trip

The 200 f/2.8 first shot.
The 135L second shot.
No cropping nor postprocessing.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Couple of more fliers.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Peter, superb and sharp as always! Whats your exif if you don't mind? Thanks!

Great in-flight shots Peter, and I just love the Canadian goose shot, he is sounding an alarm has he lands.

Another thread with me in the title ,,, I am humbled,, Thanx pops ,,, very nice captures that you managed here,,, so what do you think , you and I both know that the 200 is an awesome lens but I need more reach and I know you are very big on the 300 F4.0L which works quite well with converters ,,,, I did some research on the 300 and 400 last night , the price of both make them both appealing, I'm leaning more towards the 300 because of it being an F4, wish I had the money for a 300 F2.8L,,, maybe I should just come visit you that way I could try all of the lenses that Canon makes

John, thank you very much for your kind words. The main exif data are (f3.5,1/2000 sec), (f6.3, 1/1250), (f8, 1/1250) and (f8, 1/400).
All in foul weather so ISO is high on all four shots. The last shot is odd, I do not remember why was that I allowed the shutter speed to slip that low, i.e., 1/400 sec. Normally I would not let it go much under 1/800 or so for flight shots even of large, ponderous flying birds. In fact, should have been shot in the Tv mode.

Thank you Tony, perceptive of you to have seen that the goose was alarming, however, the picture was taken on a takeoff, not landing.

liv2trip wrote in post #2114652
Another thread with me in the title ,,, I am humbled,, Thanx pops ,,, very nice captures that you managed here,,, so what do you think , you and I both know that the 200 is an awesome lens but I need more reach and I know you are very big on the 300 F4.0L which works quite well with converters ,,,, I did some research on the 300 and 400 last night , the price of both make them both appealing, I'm leaning more towards the 300 because of it being an F4, wish I had the money for a 300 F2.8L,,, maybe I should just come visit you that way I could try all of the lenses that Canon makes

The 300 f/2.8 too heavy.....it'll kill ya swinging it back and forth. If you try to shoot upwards with it, your elbows can not be propped agaist your trunk any more, and then very soon you'd start to wobble so bad that even IS will not help ya.

The deadliest/fastest camera lens combo for fast, responsive and lengthy (in duration) in flight photography is 135L/200f2.8/300f/4 all mounted on a MkIIN.

If it was not for their major weight, the 300f/2.8 and 200 f/1.8 would also be superb inflight lenses. But if you happen to be strong like bull moose, that would be the way to go.

And I do not care what Liquidstone does with his 400 or 500.....have not seen him take too many shots of some really fast action yet. Hell, how can you have fast action anyways with the MFD of those lenses ?

However, lest I forget.....there could be a contrary example here. There is a Toronto feller (Jody) on the FM Animals Forum....he's a real master of flight photography......if I remember right, he might be using the 400 f/5.6 on the "Bushawk".

Superb in-flight shots, i love #1.

Petkal wrote in post #2114694
However, lest I forget.....there could be a contrary example here. There is a Toronto feller (Jody) on the FM Animals Forum....he's a real master of flight photography......if I remember right, he might be using the 400 f/5.6 on the "Bushawk".

your right pops It's Jody Melanson and he does do some amazing inflights and he shoots with the prime,,, like I said I may have to pay you a visit so I can test all these lenses

Very nice in-flight captures Peter. Great timing on the last.

Thank you Apatchy and Reyno.
Wayne, I had seen Jody write that he could not shoot swallows w/o the "Bushawk". I tried my best, the 400 f/5.6 was just not cutting it for me. The 300 f/4 a bit better, but still not good enough. So now I use 135L and 200 f/2.8 for swallows. As for the "Bushhawk", i'd be reluctant to carry that around for fear of getting arrested or shot or something.

Well, when are you coming to the Big Smoke ?(He, he)

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

That is an excellent swallow.....you see, the 200 f/2.8 can do it.
Everything is easier with the right tool.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

wow bravo encore I love that tree swallow awesome shot ,,,, your really out to show us your panning skill,,, makes it hard to beleive you when you say your just a shaky old guy lol,,, does the word sandbagger mean anything to you