| I've
owned Canon professional camera equipment for
over 30 years, starting with my first F1 in the
mid-seventies (see 35mm
equipment list). In 2004, after two or three
years following the progress of digital equipment,
I finally bit the bullet and purchased a digital
kit.
The
equipment is, in a word, IMPRESSIVE. I firmly
believe that I'm getting better photos because
of my new digital gear. Some of this is because
I had to upgrade to modern lenses, but a lot
of it is because it's easy to experiment with
digital.
Because
I had old Canon FD equipment (which was totally
incompatible with Canon's EOS system) I may
just as well have bought into Nikon or maybe
Olympus. I stuck with Canon because I felt
they had the best solution to my needs, and
also because in 30 years of using Canon equipment
it has seldom let me down.
However
Canon are sadly lacking in a couple of long
lens areas, specifically...
- 400
5.6 L, an oldy and a goody, but why no
IS yet?
- Why
no L-series 200-400 zoom yet?
If
they bring out one or more of the above I'll
be reaching for the credit card.
Meanwhile,
below are some thoughts on the equipment I
currently use.
Canon EOS 1D
mk2 N
Since purchasing this body I've spent most
of my time building a new motorhome so I can't
comment much on it's usability in the field.
But from the small amount I've used it so
far, if this isn't the world's best camera
for photographing wildlife I'll eat my Landcruiser.
Canon
EOS 10D
While not a pro-quality camera it is very
good. Overall I'm very happy with the 10D,
to this point I have never filled the 9-frame
buffer and had to wait before taking another
shot, one of my fears before using the camera.
There are a couple of things I will mention
though.
The
quick control dial. This is a large wheel
located at the rear of the body. It's multipurpose,
but is commonly used to adjust the exposure
compensation, focus point etc. When shooting
I find it's location a bit cumbersome, and
feel that the equivalent control on the Nikon
is better placed.
Apparently
it was common on older EOS cameras to nudge
this wheel unintentionally, thus causing a
change in settings. This is still a problem,
and Canon have provided an on-off switch for
the wheel. But if you turn it off then the
bloody thing isn't usable when you need it.
I
leave it switched on and tolerate the occasional
change to exposure compensation, which is
the most common function for the wheel.
Depth
of field preview button, I also find this
difficult to locate, especially when shooting
a vertical photo at ground level, a very common
situation when shooting macro, and this is
one of the main times you need DoF preview.
The
on-camera flash is generally a feature only
found on "amateur" cameras, but
I find it very useful. Sometimes I just want
a quick bit of fill flash, and it's much easier
to pop up the flash than get the larger one
from my bag.
One
problem I've encountered with the on-camera
flash is shading by a wide angle lens. With
the 17-40 (and I assume any other similar
wide angle lens) set to 17mm the lens throws
a shadow on the subject, and that's without
the lens hood in place.
After
one year: I'm well happy with this
body and have solved the problem of only having
one body by buying another 10D and then a
1DMk2. 6mpx is enough for magazine work and
A3 prints.
There
does seem to be quite a long shutter lag on
the 10D and I'm now convinced that I'm loosing
some shots because of that.
Battery
pack
At first I wasn't going to buy a battery pack,
reasoning that it would stop me getting the
camera low enough for some macro work. This
is true, but I haven't really noticed that
has been a problem. Anyway it's a fairly quick
job to remove the pack.
Now
I have one I'm glad I bought it, the most
obvious reason is the improved ergonomics
when shooting vertical. Of course the ability
to hold two batteries is good as well, however
I find that I usually run it with only one,
an ability that's useful, and not well known.
I
keep the other in the camera case, this is
the digital photography equivalent of a reserve
petrol tank. You can have all the low-fuel
warning lights in the world on your dashboard,
but there's nothing quite like a spluttering
motor at the traffic lights to send you straight
to the petrol station.
Similarly
I find the act of changing batteries to be
a very loud and clear message that I'm at
the 50% mark (I only have two batteries at
present).
Of
course this battery changing may happen at
an inappropriate moment, so I sometimes insert
the second one if it looks like I'm getting
low, and may have to concentrate 100% on taking
photos.
The
Canon battery pack will accept two batteries
with unequal charge, running off the most
highly charged until they are equal.
17-40/4
L zoom
The selection of a wide-angle zoom was one
of the main reasons I delayed my move into
digital. Canon have not addressed this problem
very well in my view and, on the surface,
Nikon appear to have a much better range.
For
example, with Nikon, you can buy a 12-24,
20-120 and 70-200, thus covering just about
every situation. However I have heard that
the shorter two of these lenses aren't great.
What
really tipped the balance for me was an analysis
of my photos.
Although I've always had very wide lenses,
down to 14 or 16mm, and considered myself
a keen wide-angle user, I found that wasn't
necessarily the case.
In
analysing the 1000s of images on my database
I found that only about 300 where taken with
lenses wider than 28mm. If I narrowed the
search to those images I considered to be
"good", I had only about 30 wide
angle (<28mm) shots. When I looked at my
"best", there was only 3.
This
realisation finally got me over the wide angle
hurdle, so, as the 17-40 is equivalent to
27-64 on the 10D (22-51 in the 1D Mk2), and
it's half the cost of the 16-35, my decision
was made. At f4 it's a little slow, but I
can live with that in a wide lens.
The
bottom line is that you tend to see photos
that it's possible to take with the equipment
you have. For years I used a 5x4 camera with
only two lenses, 90 and 210mm. No super wides
here, and yet I made some of my best ever
images with that combination.
After
one year: Very good, my least used
lens over the past year but only because of
the subject matter I've been concentrating
on. When used it's really sharp. Since buying
this lens Canon have brought out the 10-22
zoom, it's quite good by all accounts but
I don't need it. It's an EFS lens as well,
and as such it doesn't fit on my 10Ds or 1D,
but also I don't want to commit to lenses
that won't work with full-frame bodies.
24-105/4
L IS zoom
Fantastic lens and, on a full-frame
camera at least, the ideal walk-around bottle.
It's a bit long for this on a 1.6 factor camera
(38-168mm equiv) but fills the gap between
my 17-40 and 70-200 (which I mostly use on
a 1.4 converter, making it a 157-488 equiv)
nicely.
Fantastically
sharp, and the IS is great. I'll never buy
a lens without IS again.
100/2.8
macro
You can stick any lens on extension tubes
to get macro capability, and that's what I
used to do. But a good macro lens will blow
you away.
Firstly
the quality is way better, the lens is designed
for this job.
Secondly,
with a longer focal length, you get an improved
working distance. To get 1:1 (approx.) with
extension tubes I used to put a 28mm lens
on a 25mm tube. This worked, but the subject
was in focus when about 20mm from the lens.
Very few subjects will allow you to get this
close, and those that do want to attack their
reflection.
With
a 100mm macro you can get 1:1 with the lens's
front element still being about 150mm from
the subject.
Even
at 2:1 I'm still several inches from the subject.
I
always wanted a 180 or 200mm macro but they
are very expensive. With the 10D I get the
equivalent of 160mm for a reasonable price
and weight.
After
one year: Fantastic, sharpest thing
I've ever seen by itself, and still very good
with the 1.4 converter and/or extension tubes.
IS would be a real bonus, surely this lens
is due for the IS makeover.
70-200/2.8
L IS zoom
This is one serious lens, with a 35mm equivalent
focal length of 112-320mm on the 10D (91-260
on the 1D Mk2). It's heavy, but nowhere near
as heavy as a 112-320/2.8 would be, even if
Canon or Nikon made one. The closest I know
of is the Sigma 120-300/2.8 which weighs in
at 2.6 kgs, twice weight of the 70-200.
As
the 300/2.8 focal length is almost an industry
standard for large wildlife, this is a perfect
lens for this application.
The
IS works well, the auto focus is fast, and
the lens is very sharp, all of which you would
expect for 3500-odd dollars.
I
find two things annoying with the lens, both
small things, but annoying nonetheless. The
tripod mount it not large enough to be comfortably
used as a carry handle, I find I can barely
jamb a couple of fingers between it and the
lens, not enough when carrying a heavy and
expensive piece of kit. This annoyance is
largely fixed when using a Wimberly quick
release plate.
Secondly,
both the IS and AF on/off switches protrude
slightly from the lens barrel. This is presumably
to make them easier to find by touch, but,
just about every time I place the lens back
into my camera case they catch on the material
and move to the "off" position.
Next
time I use the lens I waste a couple of, sometimes
valuable, seconds before I realise what's
happened. I'll just have to get used to checking.
On
several occasions the lens has performed weirdly,
or failed, to be more precise. Once, usually
when using a converter, it refuses to focus,
going through the motions, but settling on
a point that was way off.
On
other occasions, with or without a converter,
nothing happens at all, the camera simply
locks up.
On
all occasions removing and replacing the lens
fixes the problem. As this action presumably
reboots the lens' processor I guess it has
a problem.
After
one year: Probably the best lens
of its type in the world. I still bump the
IS and autofocus switches by mistake though.
Unbelievably sharp even at 2.8, extremely
good with the 1.4 converter, and still pretty
good with the 2x, especially if you stop down
one stop.
400
f4 DO IS
One day I hope, unless Canon bring out a 200-400/4.
1.4x
converter
Works
well with my 70-200, and in fact is almost
permanently mounted to this lens. Loss of
image quality is not noticeable (unlike the
2x).
This
converter gives me a 157-488 equivalent focal
length on the 70-200 and the 10D, (127-364
on the 1D), a nice range for most wildlife,
and still fairly fast at f4.
2x
converter
This doubles my 70-200, giving me a 35mm equivalent
of 224-640/5.6 (182-520 on the 1D Mk2). As
it happens this range is ideal for most smaller
wildlife, especially birds, which is why I
bought the converter.
The
combination is a little slow for my liking
(f5.6) and really should be stopped down at
least one stop for sharp images. This makes
the 70-200 an f8 lens which is a tad slow,
although still very usable in the field.
Right-angle
finder
Don't leave home without one. One reason I
stayed with the Canon F1 for 30 years was
the speed finder, a device that allows you
to look down into the camera and easily take
low-angle photos without breaking your neck.
The speed finder worked well, but was difficult
to use when shooting vertical photos at ground
level.
The
right angle finder is better than the old
speed finder, allowing the easy shooting of
either horizontal or vertical photos with,
if required, the camera right on the ground.
For
a lot of macro work this is essential.
The
only disadvantage the right-angle finder has
is that it's a separate piece of equipment
that must be attached or removed according
to the needs of the shot. The old speed finder
was part of the camera.
The
right-angle finder has it's own dioptor adjustment,
but there's no détentes, so I find
that I'm resetting the focus every time I
use it.
Some
gaffa tape will be applied before long.
Extension
tubes
I can see no reason to buy "genuine"
extension tubes, they're simple devices with
no glass. For the price of a single Canon
tube, I bought a set of three generic ones.
The
Canon documentation states that some lenses
may not auto focus when placed on extension
tubes. I find that the 70-200 zoom works with
the tubes, but it's with the 100 macro that
I need them the most, and that does tend to
focus hunt more that normal on the 10Ds.
In
general, when shooting macro with an extension
tube, I switch to manual focus. However, if
the subject is particularly fast moving, I'm
more likely to get the shot with the auto
focus enabled, it still misses, but not as
much as I do.
420EX
flash
In the past I've never been much of a user
of flash, but that's because I hadn't encountered
these new-generation versions. The 420 is
fantastic, handling fill flash and off-camera
macro work effortlessly.
But
why not buy the next model up, the 550 (or
580)?
I
wanted to be able to use the flash in wireless
mode (see the STE2 below), the 550/580 can
do that of course, but it's a lot more expensive,
mostly because it can be a controller as well
as a slave. The 420 can only be a slave.
But
if you only need one flash, the 420+STE2 is
a more versatile combination, allowing for
both on- and off-camera flash. These two devices
costs about the same as a single 550/580.
If
you need two flashes anyway, and plan to always
use one of them on-camera, then I'd get a
420 and a 550/580.
After
one year: I use flash all the time
now, almost every nature shot I take has at
least a little fill, and with all my macro
shots I use flash as the primary light source
and I balance the daylight if possible. The
420 works fine and I've since purchased a
580 as well.
580EX
flash
Just like the 420 only more so. This is now
my primary flash for everything except macro.
It's normally mounted on top of the 70-200's
tripod mount with the STE2 as a controller
and a Better Beamer to increase its punch.
This is a great combination for bird photography.
MT-24EX
Macro flash
This is an amazing flash and I would
recommend it to anyone who is into macro photography.
Used
with both flashes mounted on the lens the
light can be a bit flat depending on the subject,
even with the ratio set to 8:1. eg. head A
has 8x more light than head B.
It
is however easy to remove one or both of the
flash heads and place them further from the
lens to give a more interesting light. I find
that, so far, I have only done this once or
twice, preferring to use a third flash if
the subject will stay still long enough for
me to set it up.
Each
flash head has a hot shoe and a 1/4"
threaded hole on the bottom, so you can mount
them to just about anything if you wish. A
friend of mine who has been using some special
flash arms is considering buying this flash
and mounting the heads on his existing arms.
This will work well, and give more options
with the lighting as the heads will be placed
further apart.
After
some use
Although there are about 20 possible ratios
to select, ie. 8:1 through to 1:8 plus only
head A or B, I find that I always use the
two extremes, that is 8:1 or vice versa. This
is because I'm trying to create light that
is as interesting as possible. Unfortunately,
to get from one extreme to the other you have
to go though all the other possibilities by
pressing a button a hundred times or holding
it down and waiting for what seems like hours
as it auto repeats.
It
doesn't sound like a big deal, but when you
only have seconds to get a shot this can be
a bit frustrating.
STE2
flash transmitter
The STE2 will control the 420EX flash (and
many others) wirelessly. This works well,
and I find it very convenient to just place
the flash on the ground and work around a
subject without any wires.
However,
you do need to keep the flash's sensor pointing
roughly at the camera, and this has caused
me to miss shots because I didn't realise
that things weren't aligned as well as they
should have been. It's very good, but not
perfect.
For
that reason I may still invest in a remote
wire.
Wimberly
quick release clamps
For years I used a cheap quick release clamp,
and to be fair it did a reasonable job. It
was never very secure, but while it worked
I didn't have the incentive to upgrade.
My
cheap clamp broke last year, so now I've moved
to the Wimberly system, which is based on
the Arca Swiss standard.
This
stuff is very expensive, a few clamps and
plates cost around A$550, but they do work
well, and should last forever.
First
impressions
VERY well made, all the parts fit together
like they were made for each other, which
I suppose they were.
Gitzo
G2220 Explorer tripod
I own about 300 tripods, and they all suited
my purpose at the time they were purchased.
But these days I need a flexible pod, one
that is "macro friendly", that can
independently move each leg, and with a centre
column that can easily go to the horizontal
or even upside down.
The
original macro friendly tripod was the Benbo,
and in fact I still own a Benbo 1 which I
bought about 20 years ago. They are great,
but I've grown to dislike the way that the
entire tripod is held together by a single
clamp, undo the clamp and all three legs plus
the centre column can collapse. You get used
to it of course, but it can be difficult to
adjust, for example, just one of the legs
when the centre column is poking out horizontally.
Also
the Benbo 1 is quite large, way too big for
backpacking. They do make a smaller version
called the Trekker, but I felt it was time
for a new approach.
Enter
the Gitzo 2220 Explorer. Each leg is independent
with an infinitely adjustable angle, and the
centre column can be easily flipped to any
angle and rotated. In short, exactly what
I want.
There
are several tripods on the market that have
removable centre columns which can be inserted
in various other configurations, the new Manfrotto
190 is one that springs to mind. However,
removing and replacing the column in a different
hole is nowhere near as convenient
as just loosening a knob. Trust me on this.
Why
not carbon fibre?
Several times over the years I've looked into
buying a CF tripod, and, so far, I've come
to the conclusion that they just aren't worth
the money.
However
I am looking at getting one soon, a saving
of even just 1kg is a lot at the end of a
10k walk.
Wimberly
Plamp
This marvelous gadget clamps to a solid object,
usually the tripod leg, at one end, and a
moving object at the other, thereby stopping
the moving object from moving. For macro work
this is invaluable.
First
impressions
This device is made from parts you can easily
get from a hardware or engineering shop, and
in fact I did consider making my own. However,
the price of the components was nearly as
much as the Plamp, for example, the flexible
part is just a coolant hose from a milling
machine, $30 (Aus) from a shop in my town.
It's only $45 for the entire Plamp and there's
no mucking around.
The
small clamp does appear to be a bit strong
for my liking, it may actually crush a small
plant. I'll see how it goes in the field.
Tamrac
5578 backpack
No exaggeration, I've owned just about EVERY
camera case/backpack ever made, mostly because
my kit, and photography style, has changed
over the years.
I
have two Lowepros, one is an over-the-shoulder
type, good for short sorties, but it doesn't
fit all my gear, and becomes a real pain in
the shoulder very quickly. The other is a
Nature Trekker, not bad, but a crappy harness
and still not large enough.
After
some research I decided to give Tamrac a try.
In these days of digital photography I felt
that the external compartments would be useful
for memory cards, batteries etc. Plus the
tripod should fit snuggly in between the compartments.
First
impressions
The pack is longer and narrower than the photos
indicate, that's fine by me.
The
pockets in the external compartments don't
hold batteries that well. I find I have to
put 6 AAs in each so they're in tight enough
not to fall out when I open the compartment.
Trouble is, I use batteries in lots of four,
not six.
My
tripod fits nicely in between the compartments
and straps on securely.
Overall,
everything fits snuggly and appears to be
safe and secure.
Fotobar
portable CD burner
(known as the RoadStor in the US)
I use the Fotobar to burn CF cards
before processing with the computer. This
provides me with my "negatives"
and a backup. Once burned, the CD is inserted
into the PC and the RAW files are read and
converted.
I
also use the device to free up my cards when
in the field for a day or so.
It
works well, the only problem I have with the
device is that it doesn’t split a large
card, say 1gig, over two CDs as I was told
it would, and as the ads imply.
After
one year: After downloading a firmware
upgrade from the manufacturers (MicroSolutions)
I can now burn from CF cards larger than 700meg.
There's
a new version now that will burn DVDs, that
would be nice.
So
that's my system as it stands today. Is it
the perfect nature photography kit? No, but
it's damn close.
A
few months ago I was on the verge of buying
a 400 f4 DO, but at over A$9000 I just couldn't
bring myself to sign the cheque. I could still
do with a very long tele, I just have to find
a way to justify it.
I
also analysed my long tele shots and found
that over 2/3rds where taken at a focal length
less than the 640 maximum I currently have.
This tells me that, more often than not, I
crank the zoom back to get the perfect composition.
Also
I remembered many occasions I've been lying
on the ground unable to move for fear of scaring
the subject. As the bird (or whatever) approached
I was able to zoom back and still get a nice
composition. There's no way I could have changed
lenses, or even picked up another body.
So
I need a long zoom, 200-400 f4 would be perfect.
Are you listening Canon!
Never
the less, if Canon don't come up with something
soon I will probably bite the bullet and get
the 400 DO.
|
