Bobcat.

bigcountry wrote in post #9454124
i've been racking my brain over this. i think i am going to stick w/ the 600mm for now. i can hold it "ok". and i like that extra 100mm, but as much as i change my mind, im sure i'll have a different answer tomorrow.

The other problem I have with the 500 or 600 is they are prime lenses. I have to crop the photo on the fly. The 500mm minimum focus range is 15 feet... When shooting grizz, it is often difficult to get the entire bear in frame (and I cant switch lenses during those situations)!

jaimej26 wrote in post #9454156
The other problem I have with the 500 or 600 is they are prime lenses. I have to crop the photo on the fly. The 500mm minimum focus range is 15 feet... When shooting grizz, it is often difficult to get the entire bear in frame (and I cant switch lenses during those situations)!

i hear ya. i am going to alaska in july and i'll be taking two bodies various lenses (including the 300 2.8 IS) and tele's , but probably leaving the 600 f/4 at home.

what time of year did you take that photo of the grizzly and the salmon?

bigcountry wrote in post #9454164
i hear ya. i am going to alaska in july and i'll be taking two bodies various lenses (including the 300 2.8 IS) and tele's , but probably leaving the 600 f/4 at home.

what time of year did you take that photo of the grizzly and the salmon?

I'd take the 600mm - we always take a 300 f3.8 also, but you will wish you had the 600 if you don't take it.

The grizz and salmon was taken in late july -

We were on a custome trip - Tim treadwells pilot (willy Fulton) flew us in to Hallo Bay. Just us and a bear guide.. great time... tons of bears and no people! Had 14 at one time around us...

Wow... Fantastic shot!

What a capture. I want to live where YOU guys live! (but you can keep the grizzlies for yourselves...)
Karen

Beautifull...I have yet to find one in the wild that was even reasonably photographable

jaimej26 wrote in post #9454048
I planned on purchasing the 600mmL instead of the 500mmL, but after trying both, I changed my mind. The 600 was heavier and bulkier - it was hard to hand hold. I can handhold the 500 with some success. Personally, I believe the 500 is the best choice for wildlife.

Thanks for the response Jamie. I can see that with 2 or 3 bodies, and a 50, 100-400 and 500, I should be good to go, for what I'm after.
Time to start a "500-fund"!

Saw the slide show on it and that was fantastic ! Clearly these are magazine publishing material . Do you have your own wildlife magazine out yet ??

That shot is BEAUTIFUL!!!!!!!!!!!

What a great shot! Well done.

Excellent. You had a very rare bobcat which actually seemed to tolerate human presence. Wild cats are pretty much the hardest thing to photograph other than the weasel family(wolverine, fisher, etc).

The nothern Rockies are the place to be for wildlife in the lower 48, hands down.

nice capture. I like how the color of his eyes are similar to other colors in the BG

Jaime - Outstanding photo! One of my favorites.

BEAUTIFUL capture , nice work , thanks for sharing!!

Absolutely beautiful.