A good lens for AK

[Groucho]

Just got back from AK and can definitely say IS or VR would be a huge plus. With a limited budget, maybe you will want to look at a camera with built in IS. Hey, where is Groucho? I'm sure he will have a preference on this!

Actually, I found problems when using IS on a PnS on Kilimanjaro Safaris, the bucking movement of the truck worked against the IS and was actually producing blurrier photos than without. A more advanced IS like on a DSLR (body or lens) may work better. Obviously for the walking attractions (Jungle Trek, etc), the IS could prove invaluable.

I've heard a lot of good things about the Canon and Nikon 70-300mm zooms, but I don't really pay too much attention so I have no say in this. Pentax does have a hole in quality zooms that go to 300mm - they have one coming soon that goes to 250mm but I think it may be slightly higher-end, but probably not that much different than the C/N options w/o IS, but more than the $230 or so (minus $50 rebate) that their 50-200mm goes for.

For price, certainly, you can't beat the K100D - body with kit lens for $515 or so, 50-200m for maybe $180 after rebate... and you've got a real nice setup with two stabilized lenses for about $700. You won't have 10mp but the real-world difference isn't all that great. If you do want 10mp, the Pentax offering (K10D) costs a good bit more than the XTi but is a more advanced camera. The Sony Alpha is a slightly cheaper 10mp option with in-body IS and has gotten great reviews (don't all DSLRs!)

An advantage of a 200mm lens is that it will be a good bit lighter and smaller than a 300mm one - the Pentax 50-200mm is barely bigger than the 18-55mm when at its shortest. It should also be easier to get a steady photo - as ndelaware proved, it's not impossible to get a good shot with handheld 300mm, but it's sure not easy!

I'll probably bring my old heavy 400mm with me to AK but it'll probably be attached to a monopod (or tripod) at all times. The reach will be fun but it will be much more challenging to use than a smaller, lighter, shorter, faster lens.

But I'm not looking to change anyone's mind here, it sounds like the OP is set on a camera and I'm not one to answer that specific question very well.

 

[garris3404]

One thing to keep in mind with the 70-300 IS is that while you can take amazing photos at 300mm with only a 1/25 shutter speed, that shutter speed will only be useful if your subject is not moving. If the animal in AK, or maybe your kids on the soccer field, is moving then your pictures will turn out blurry no matter how good your IS is because IS only minimizes camera shake, not subject shake.

So while the 70-300 IS does what it does very well, there are many situations where it won't help. So if you are thinking of using the lens for other things, like I plan on using mine for my kids sports, then you might want to consider a faster lens.

I have a Nikon D50 with the 18-200 VR lens. My kids play soccer and I get great shots. You just need to switch to a higher shutter speed.

 

[garris3404]

My 18-200 VR Nikon lens has a setting for thr type of VR. You can use normal mode (works with panning) for most shots. It also has an active mode when riding in a vehicle (safari ride).

 

[ndelaware]

One thing to keep in mind with the 70-300 IS is that while you can take amazing photos at 300mm with only a 1/25 shutter speed, that shutter speed will only be useful if your subject is not moving. If the animal in AK, or maybe your kids on the soccer field, is moving then your pictures will turn out blurry no matter how good your IS is because IS only minimizes camera shake, not subject shake.

So while the 70-300 IS does what it does very well, there are many situations where it won't help. So if you are thinking of using the lens for other things, like I plan on using mine for my kids sports, then you might want to consider a faster lens.

Why would you try to take a picture of a kid or animal running @ 1/25. I shot it at 1/25 due to the sun being behind the gorilla. The 70-300IS has the newest edition of Canon's IS. It can be set to work while you are panning the camera and the IS only helps control the up and down movement of the lens which makes it ideal for most sports where kids are running.

While almost everyone would like to have the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM, not everyone has $1700 in their budget. For them the 70-300IS is an excellent alteranetive. I personally can't stand the look of the white lenses. Of course it helps that I don't suffer from lens envy either.

 

[handicap18]

One thing to keep in mind with the 70-300 IS is that while you can take amazing photos at 300mm with only a 1/25 shutter speed, that shutter speed will only be useful if your subject is not moving. If the animal in AK, or maybe your kids on the soccer field, is moving then your pictures will turn out blurry no matter how good your IS is because IS only minimizes camera shake, not subject shake.

So while the 70-300 IS does what it does very well, there are many situations where it won't help. So if you are thinking of using the lens for other things, like I plan on using mine for my kids sports, then you might want to consider a faster lens.

Excellent points to keep in mind.

I think for Animal Kingdom's walking tours and even the safari ride, the IS/VR is a great example of how it should be used. Its also useful in macro. The thing I found be most frustrating was actually holding the lens still at the 300mm length to get pictures of non moving subjects no matter what my ISO was. While your standing there waiting for the tiger to move his head in the right direction so you can get a good head shot, holding that camera and lens can make even the steadiest hands tremble a bit. With IS/VR, that small tremble wont be noticeable. I also tried taking a few really upclose pictures of pins in the parks using my 70-300 non VR/IS lens and they all came out blury due to camera shake. I've also run into other situations where camera shake at the long end of the zoom has been an issue. This is where VR/IS shines!

The VR/IS 70-300 lens can still be used for your kids outdoor sporting events, just bump up the ISO to 800 or 1600, just like you would if you were using a non VR/IS lens. Just turn the VR/IS off. Though like most everything else, try it both ways, what may work for one person, wont work for someone else.

 

[puddleduck]

Thanks for all the info. I like the photo's. Are there any walk around lens suggestions?

 

[Steve's Girl]

Thanks for all the info. I like the photo's. Are there any walk around lens suggestions?

Just got back from WDW. Had my Nikon D80 with the 18-135 kit lens. I found this lens worked very well for most everything. Loved the wide angle and found that I had enough zoom most of the time. I may crop a few pictures to get a little closer, but overall, was very happy with the range of this lens. While this lens is not considered a fast lens, I was able to get decent night pictures without a tripod (even at Fantasmic).

 

[garris3404]

... Are there any walk around lens suggestions?

I like the Nikon 18-200 VR lens. It'a a great walk around lens!

 

[jann1033]

these are in somewhat AK conditions( but not as fun, at our local zoo) with my canon 28-135 IS
imo this is a little soft but just wanted to show it cropped about as close as possible and comparing to the 300 so same subject matter

this one is actually farther away but maybe the lighter subject helped ( and gorilla would not come out from partially behind a rock

and imo this one is fine for a normal range( same shot as the cropped head just not so cropped)

not at all a good judge of distances but the lion was probably 50+ ft away, the gorilla maybe 30+(????) lioness was pretty much in the back corner, gorilla the mid section of normal sized zoo enclosures

 

[boBQuincy]

This is with the 70-200 at it's best, around f/8, using the wire mesh screen for a support (it's not that good of a support really). I *love* this lens!

 

[MarkBarbieri]

I agree that IS is of limited value on the Safari ride. The bouncing will overpower any IS system. I'd strive for getting the fastest shutter speed possible. The only problem with that approach is that high shutter speed means wide aperture which means fast, accurate focusing is a must. All in all, the it's just darned hard to shoot on the Safari ride unless you get stops at just the right time or you have bright light to work with.

For the trail walks, the Canon 70-300 IS would be a really good lens in this price range. The Canon 70-200 F/4 L lens would also be really nice. The L is better optically but it costs more, doesn't have the reach, and doesn't have the IS. Like everything, you have to pick the trade-offs that work best for you.

My recommendation is the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS and a 1.4x extender. It's way outside of your stated price range, but if you lug it around all day, you'll get enough exercise to cancel your fitness club membership. Maybe the cost savings there will help you justify it.

 

[ukcatfan]

I thought of one other thing that can help with any camera. Ask to sit in the front row of the safari. I don't know why it took me sooo long to think of that. It is at least half as bumpy up there. My DD slept through the ride in the front row when she was about 2yo.

Kevin

 

[garris3404]

I thought of one other thing that can help with any camera. Ask to sit in the front row of the safari. I don't know why it took me sooo long to think of that. It is at least half as bumpy up there. My DD slept through the ride in the front row when she was about 2yo.

Kevin

The best place to take pictures is in the last row. You can get great pictures from the sides and the rear.

 

[garris3404]

My recommendation is the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS and a 1.4x extender. It's way outside of your stated price range, but if you lug it around all day, you'll get enough exercise to cancel your fitness club membership. Maybe the cost savings there will help you justify it.

 

[Groucho]

My recommendation is the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS and a 1.4x extender. It's way outside of your stated price range, but if you lug it around all day, you'll get enough exercise to cancel your fitness club membership. Maybe the cost savings there will help you justify it.

While they're at it, they can beat themselves with chains, offer to pull the parade cars with their teeth, or throw the firework shells into the sky themselves.

Of course, that's not stopping me from bringing the old, very heavy 400mm, which does its best work when stopped down a bit so a tripod or monopod is mandatory too... I expect to be pretty tired at the end of each day!

 

[jann1033]

This is with the 70-200 at it's best, around f/8, using the wire mesh screen for a support (it's not that good of a support really). I *love* this lens!

bob, just when i thought i knew what i was getting you have to add this lens to the equation for my feeble brain.. how far were you when you took this...sigh monopod and f4L?
however i believe the price difference between the f4L and 70-300 IS is less than $50 ( last i looked)

groucho...
how far do i have to pull the parade car with my teeth to get the one mark mentioned?

 

[MarkBarbieri]

just when i thought i knew what i was getting you have to add this lens to the equation

If you're going to get the 70-300, you may as well get the IS one. If you're going to spend that much money, you should get the 70-200 f/4 L instead. It's not too much more money.

If you're going to spend that much money on a lens, you want to do it right, so you should get the 70-200 f/4 L with IS. Of course, the IS isn't always a substitute for a wide aperture, so you should get the 70-200 f/2.8 L instead. But then again, sometimes IS is better than a wider aperture, so instead of compromising, you should get the 70-200 f/2.8 IS L. Yeah, that's it.

 

[ndelaware]

The 70-200 f/4 is a great lens at an awesome price Jann. It is probably Canon's best performance for price value. It doesn't, however, have IS and that was why I chose the 70-300 IS.

 

[jann1033]

If you're going to get the 70-300, you may as well get the IS one. If you're going to spend that much money, you should get the 70-200 f/4 L instead. It's not too much more money.

If you're going to spend that much money on a lens, you want to do it right, so you should get the 70-200 f/4 L with IS. Of course, the IS isn't always a substitute for a wide aperture, so you should get the 70-200 f/2.8 L instead. But then again, sometimes IS is better than a wider aperture, so instead of compromising, you should get the 70-200 f/2.8 IS L. Yeah, that's it.

well i have no problem with that line of reasoning but....
could you talk to my husband???

 

[jann1033]

The 70-200 f/4 is a great lens at an awesome price Jann. It is probably Canon's best performance for price value. It doesn't, however, have IS and that was why I chose the 70-300 IS.

yeah that's the problem...i want both for $600 total