More reach for my 6D?

[mom2rtk]

If you get a nice day, the Rebel should do a great job! but if it's a dreary overcast day, you might have to pump the ISO to keep your shutter speed up.

We were there during a tropical storm last time (2013) so lots of dreary overcast days. Thankfully the odds of that happening again aren't high. I would not like to have to pump up the ISO on the T2i. Still not sure if I want to pack it though.

 

[boBQuincy]

Want close ups of gators? Take a boat ride into the Okeefenokee! You won't need a long lens, this guy was only 15' away. Taken with a Kodak DC4800.

 

[mom2rtk]

Want close ups of gators? Take a boat ride into the Okeefenokee! You won't need a long lens, this guy was only 15' away. Taken with a Kodak DC4800.

That looks like a great option for gator viewing too! We'll be doing most of our gator hunting in southwestern Florida though.

Did you see much other wildlife on your boat ride?

 

[boBQuincy]

We saw plenty of herons, egrets, turtles, a few snakes, and more. The birds were too far away for my little P&S but the stars of the show are the alligators and they are not shy. We rented a small jon boat although there are guided tours in a slightly larger boat (16 passenger or so). A lot of people canoe or kayak through the swamp. It is beautiful but I want a little more between me and the gators than a kayak.

 

[havoc315]

The reach of a prime and teleconverter..

I was sitting up here:

Citi Field Panorama by Adam Brown, on Flickr

With 300mm and 2x teleconverter:

untitled-132.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr

 

[mom2rtk]

Those are really awesome Havoc! I think even I could enjoy watching major league baseball with that in my hands!

 

[mom2rtk]

We saw plenty of herons, egrets, turtles, a few snakes, and more. The birds were too far away for my little P&S but the stars of the show are the alligators and they are not shy. We rented a small jon boat although there are guided tours in a slightly larger boat (16 passenger or so). A lot of people canoe or kayak through the swamp. It is beautiful but I want a little more between me and the gators than a kayak.

LOL, not sure I'd want to be in a jon boat with alligators around. I definitely would want more than a kayak! We did kayak around Tarpon Bay last time and ended up situated over a pod (?) of manatee. It was quite awesome but hard to capture on camera.

IMG_0446 by mom2rtk, on Flickr

 

[mom2rtk]

I still haven't decided if I'm going to rent something or not. If I do, the choice might come down to what's available the day I would need to pick it up. I don't want to pay for extra days just to hold something.

I was leaning toward leaving my 70-200 f/4l IS home and just renting the 70-300 f/4-5.6l IS. But then I started wondering about whether I want to carry the extra weight. I was a whimp about carrying the 70-200 f/2.8l IS when I rented it and know I wouldn't want to carry that around. I would rather go with my f/4 lens and settle for what I could get after cropping.

If I went with one of the extenders, it would leave the alternative of only carrying around the extra weight when I expected to need the extra reach.

Here's the weight info I put together:

Canon 70-200 f/2.8l IS: 52.6 oz.
Canon 70-200 f/4l IS: 26.8 oz.
Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6l IS: 37 oz.

The 1.4 extender is 8 oz.
The 2.0 extender is 11.5 oz.

Anyone have experience carrying the 70-200 f/2.8l IS and the 70-300 f/4-5.6l IS and could share how they felt in comparison?

 

[elmoandzoey]

I just carried a Tokina 80-200 f2.8 through DL for 5 days along with 3 more lenses (Canon 10-18, Sigma 30 1.4 and Tamron 17-50 2.8), my 40D with attached grip and a usually filled 2.5l hydration pack. The Tokina is comparable in weight to the Canon (it's a complete metal lens - even the hood is metal...), the Sigma is 15oz, the Tamron 17oz and the Canon 8.5 oz - just the Sigma and the Tamron would be the weight of the extra Canon zoom you are looking at.

I didn't mind the weight of that setup at all - in fact I hardly ever noticed I had such a load on my back until I took the backpack off my back. But then I have to say I have a backpack with a very good suspension and strap system (Lowepro Photo Sport). I even added a 3.5 lbs tripod and 3 cans of Monster to the load for the 24hr event. I think it really comes down to how you are going to carry it? I wouldn't want to carry that weight in a messenger, slingbag of regular backpack the whole day for sure but if you have a good suspensions system, why not?

I even saw someone will a completely filled up Lowepro Rover 45l at DL. I snuck a peak at the load when he changed lenses right next to me. Now that I wouldn't want to carry the whole day, even with a good suspension system....

 

[mom2rtk]

I just carried a Tokina 80-200 f2.8 through DL for 5 days along with 3 more lenses (Canon 10-18, Sigma 30 1.4 and Tamron 17-50 2.8), my 40D with attached grip and a usually filled 2.5l hydration pack. The Tokina is comparable in weight to the Canon (it's a complete metal lens - even the hood is metal...), the Sigma is 15oz, the Tamron 17oz and the Canon 8.5 oz - just the Sigma and the Tamron would be the weight of the extra Canon zoom you are looking at.

I didn't mind the weight of that setup at all - in fact I hardly ever noticed I had such a load on my back until I took the backpack off my back. But then I have to say I have a backpack with a very good suspension and strap system (Lowepro Photo Sport). I even added a 3.5 lbs tripod and 3 cans of Monster to the load for the 24hr event. I think it really comes down to how you are going to carry it? I wouldn't want to carry that weight in a messenger, slingbag of regular backpack the whole day for sure but if you have a good suspensions system, why not?

I even saw someone will a completely filled up Lowepro Rover 45l at DL. I snuck a peak at the load when he changed lenses right next to me. Now that I wouldn't want to carry the whole day, even with a good suspension system....

I hear you. I'm just a whimp about carrying around heavy bulky stuff.

Looks like my entire process here was for nothing. I had decided to go for the 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS. Second choice was the 2X extender. And it turns out both are back out of stock again and I just called and confirmed they won't be back in stock before we go.

My choice at this point is the 1.4 extender or the 100-400 lens. I don't want to carry the 100-400 and I haven't decided yet whether the 1.4 extender is worth the drive across town.

 

[elmoandzoey]

I was really fretting about loosing extra range going from 70-300 to the 80-200 f2.8. And guess what - I was more than happy with the reach for F!, even though I was towards the back of the viewing area. Even during Aladdin I had great reach with it, even though I was up in the balcony. I had it on for Mickey and the Magical Map and quickly changed back to the 17-50 because I was way too zoomed in. Point is - I would rather go with the 1.4 than lugging around the extra lens. I know you are FF VS my crop but maybe the 70-200 will be enough after all. And then you'll regret lugging around the 100-400. That thing is.... monstrous.

 

[kellymartin612]