taking pictures at a zoo. NEED HELP

hello all. im going to go to the zoo in a couple of days, and i just got a 70-300 lens, and its pretty hard to keep it stable handheld at 300mm. so anyway, i was wondering when you go to the zoo, do you take a tripod with you? or do you shoot handheld. thanks

and if this needs to be moved, go ahead mods.

handheld, it's extremely bright at a zoo.

If you can shoot at 1/500 second shutter speed or faster, you should be OK. If there's not enough light for that (don't forget to crank up the ISO setting if needed), then you will want some sort of support for the camera/lens. A monopod provides support, but not a lot of stability. A good tripod provides the needed stability.

However, a tripod (and maybe even a monopod) may not be allowed at the zoo. Call ahead to find out.

You don't state which lens, but I'm guessing that it's one without IS. Like Skip said, try keeping it above 1/500. Outside in full sun you shouldn't have any problems achieving a high shutter speed. When I take my 100-400 to the zoo I do take my monopod, but that is more out of convenience and comfort then out of necessity.

yes, you are correct. it does not have IS. its a sigma 70-300 APO DG lens

i just went ouside to shoot at 300mm without a tripod, and it seems i can get some decent shots without a tripod at 300mm.

thanks for the advice everyone.

You can just about always find a fence or something to rest your camera on while you shoot at a zoo. This will effectively be like shooting with a monopod.

I take a tripod with me to the zoo and I'm usually successful in getting it set up where I want it without getting in other people's way.

Kurt

While we're on the topic of zoos, I visited an outdoor aquarium during my vacation last week and decided to snap some shots of the seals. There was one siting on a rock with a perfect pose, but no matter what I did, it's skin was blown out with some glowing white highlights (histogram confirmed this). It was a very sunny day and it's skin was extremely reflective. I took a standard exposure and under compensated, but the skin was just reflecting too much light and would not show any detail, or if it did the background would be grossly underexposed. Any trick to getting this right (without an HDR of course, which is kind of impossible on a live animal)?

Pat H wrote in post #6080901
While we're on the topic of zoos, I visited an outdoor aquarium during my vacation last week and decided to snap some shots of the seals. There was one siting on a rock with a perfect pose, but no matter what I did, it's skin was blown out with some glowing white highlights (histogram confirmed this). It was a very sunny day and it's skin was extremely reflective. I took a standard exposure and under compensated, but the skin was just reflecting too much light and would not show any detail, or if it did the background would be grossly underexposed. Any trick to getting this right (without an HDR of course, which is kind of impossible on a live animal)?

A polarizing filter might have a chance of reducing the direct reflections.

SkipD wrote in post #6081169
A polarizing filter might have a chance of reducing the direct reflections.

Yeah I thought that might be the solution. Unfortunately I haven't gotten them yet for my new lenses. Stupid move on my part going on vacation without them.

well, i went to the zoo, and got some pretty decent shots there. theres only two things i regret. one, i was to exited, and instead of adjusting my shutter speed, i bumped the iso to 1600.

and two, i got stuck in a crowd of 14 people, and had no room to move around to take pictures. but i got rid of them by staying at one exhibit for an extra ten minutes.

i will post the pics up soon.