Visit to Wildlife heritage foundation

S

Steve W

Messages
266
Edit My Images
No
I'm visiting the Wildlife heritage foundation in Kent in July and wanted to get feed back on weather I need to hire the Canon 70-200 2.8 Mk2 IS lens.

I have recently upgraded my 450D to 7D Mk2 and also just purchased a Canon 100-400 Mk2 lens, I also have a Canon ef-s 15-85 lens, meaning I have the focal range of 15-200 covered (although I have 15mm gap between 85 and 100).

Bearing this in mind is it still worth me paying £90 to hire the 70-200 2.8 MK2 IS lens for the day?

I have asked this question before, but now I have the 7D MK2 and 100-400 Mk2, I'm thinking it's not worth the cost as the two are excellent together.
 
It makes me think that as you are considering that you need the 70-200mm, why did you buy the 100-400mm as it sounds a great length for wildlife?
 
The 70-200 is not long enough for wildlife photography, the extra reach of the 100-400 is invaluable. However for my day at the WHF I will not need the full reach of the 100-400, from what I understand I will only need 100-200.

I'm asking if the slower lenses I have will be good enough, the 7D mk2 has better ISO handling so I'm guessing I should cancel the 70-200 2.8 hire....
 
I'm not sure this will help but I thought I would share my experience... I accidentally took my 100-400 II to a local floodlit football match instead of my 70-200 f/2.8 - using it on my 5D3 (which I think is better at handling noise than the 7D2) - I was absolutely gutted as it was a cup match, but I was amazed how brilliant the lens was.

You will be able to get shallower depth of field with the 70-200 2.8 - and maybe it will be easier to lose any cage bars if there are any? Having said that I used the 70-300 which had similar apertures to the 100-400 and was able to lose them at our local zoo. I don't know the Wildlife Heritage foundation and what the set up is.

I think I'd be tempted to save my £90
 
If your going on one of there photographic workshops you do have this in the description "There is no requirement to have any previous knowledge of your camera, nor are large lenses required; point & shoot cameras welcome. We will give you as much tuition as you want/need." I read that as the 15-85mm lens should be enough from the reviews. If its the general visit I would take the 100-400 and pray for nice weather. then there is this on there web sight http://www.whf.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=32&Itemid=233
 
Bebop said:
I'm not sure this will help but I thought I would share my experience... I accidentally took my 100-400 II to a local floodlit football match instead of my 70-200 f/2.8 - using it on my 5D3 (which I think is better at handling noise than the 7D2) - I was absolutely gutted as it was a cup match, but I was amazed how brilliant the lens was.

You will be able to get shallower depth of field with the 70-200 2.8 - and maybe it will be easier to lose any cage bars if there are any? Having said that I used the 70-300 which had similar apertures to the 100-400 and was able to lose them at our local zoo. I don't know the Wildlife Heritage foundation and what the set up is.

I think I'd be tempted to save my £90
Click to expand...

Thanks, just what I was after. I hired a 100-400 a few years ago for a zoo holiday and managed to loose the bars on most cages with it, yes I guess the shallower DOF may help and may me loose the bars. However I also have the Canon 100 2.8 macro lens that I could use if I need to get a shallower DOF, so maybe saving £90 would be a good idea, especially as I have just paid a lot for a new camera and lens :)


Ziploc said:
If your going on one of there photographic workshops you do have this in the description "There is no requirement to have any previous knowledge of your camera, nor are large lenses required; point & shoot cameras welcome. We will give you as much tuition as you want/need." I read that as the 15-85mm lens should be enough from the reviews. If its the general visit I would take the 100-400 and pray for nice weather. then there is this on there web sight http://www.whf.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=32&Itemid=233
Click to expand...

Yes I am going on a 1-2-1 photography workshop. I guess as I will probably not spend this sort of money on a photography workshop so was thinking I should have the best lens for the day. At the time of booking I had a 450d and the 15-85, since then I have upgraded to the 7Dmk2 and 100-400 mk2 so now am wondering if I need to still spend the £90 on the hire.
 
looking on there website under the photographic experiences it states two clear things
NO MONO PODS or TRIPODS ALLOWED (you will be able to lean on the fence so don't worry about not being able to hold your lens
and Some of the best shots taken on site are taken with the smaller cameras. The ideal lens is 70-200mm.
so i understand your thinking in terms of hiring the 70-200
its alot smaller, lighter and faster and with the IS its probably invaluable however your 100-400 has Mode 3 IS which is tracking mode which may well be better suited for following the big cats around.

obviously if they are pretty close then you'll be shooting at the 100 end so it really boils down to the weight of thing and just checking theres not a lot in it. the 70-200 is 3.28lb the 100-400 is 3.46lb
 
If I was going I would take my 70-200 f2.8 and be playing around in aperture mode. But if it was a general visit where I could not guarantee close ups it would be the 100-400 to get the close ups.
 
dean messenger said:
looking on there website under the photographic experiences it states two clear things
NO MONO PODS or TRIPODS ALLOWED (you will be able to lean on the fence so don't worry about not being able to hold your lens
and Some of the best shots taken on site are taken with the smaller cameras. The ideal lens is 70-200mm.
so i understand your thinking in terms of hiring the 70-200
its alot smaller, lighter and faster and with the IS its probably invaluable however your 100-400 has Mode 3 IS which is tracking mode which may well be better suited for following the big cats around.

obviously if they are pretty close then you'll be shooting at the 100 end so it really boils down to the weight of thing and just checking theres not a lot in it. the 70-200 is 3.28lb the 100-400 is 3.46lb
Click to expand...

The weight and size of the lenses are pretty similar, so this is not really an issue when considering the 70-200. I'm leaning towards cancelling the 70-200 and using the 3 lenses I have, the 15-85 for really close up and 100-400 for cats that are slightly further away, unless I'm missing something fundamental here.
 
Ziploc said:
If I was going I would take my 70-200 f2.8 and be playing around in aperture mode. But if it was a general visit where I could not guarantee close ups it would be the 100-400 to get the close ups.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree, if I owned a 70-200 f2.8 IS II as well as the 100-400 MK2, I would take the 70-200 instead of the 100-400. However I need to spend £90 to take a 70-200 compared to spending nothing to take my 100-400, so if I take my 100-400 and do not hire the 70-200 will I regret not spending the £90, or will the combo of a 15-85 and 100-400 be sufficient?? That is the question :)
 
ok lets look at it another way. with the 70-200 your losing 200mm reach over the 100-400. and in the location your going its not like you can get closer.
with the 100-400 you lose 30mm at the front end. if your to near you can step back or switch to your 15-85.
looks like its pretty much all outside anyway so light isnt an issue , so i think the 100-400 will be the best result ( and save you £90 too )
 
If money is no object hire the f2.8 lens and enjoy good boken images. If money is tight save £90 and use the 100-400 and 15-85 lens. I get the felling you will use the 100-400 for most of the day as dean messenger says you can move around to get the shot your after.
The 100-400 will be good enough for the day. The 70-200 f2.8 has advantages to it but will cost £90 and when you fall in love with the results it will end up costing more. Stop worrying and enjoy the day.
 
No, you don't need to hire the 70-200 f2.8 as the 100-400L will do a great job. You will need the 15-85 as well for some larger animal shots, shots where smaller animals are close to you and enclosure shots as the 100-400 has an effective focal length of 160mm at the short end on the 7D Mk2.
 
dean messenger said:
ok lets look at it another way. with the 70-200 your losing 200mm reach over the 100-400. and in the location your going its not like you can get closer.
with the 100-400 you lose 30mm at the front end. if your to near you can step back or switch to your 15-85.
looks like its pretty much all outside anyway so light isnt an issue , so i think the 100-400 will be the best result ( and save you £90 too )
Click to expand...

yeah it's all outside, I think so as well, so will cancel the 70-200 and put the £90 towards a Canon 1.4 III extender :) Thanks for input, it has been appreciated

Ziploc said:
If money is no object hire the f2.8 lens and enjoy good boken images. If money is tight save £90 and use the 100-400 and 15-85 lens. I get the felling you will use the 100-400 for most of the day as dean messenger says you can move around to get the shot your after.
The 100-400 will be good enough for the day. The 70-200 f2.8 has advantages to it but will cost £90 and when you fall in love with the results it will end up costing more. Stop worrying and enjoy the day.
Click to expand...

I'm not worrying, just trying to make a informed decision based on other peoples experience, I only have a few days left to cancel without being charged. I think the 15-85 and 100-400 combo will suffice in this case. Thanks very much for your input, it has been much appreciated.
 
Jackwow said:
No, you don't need to hire the 70-200 f2.8 as the 100-400L will do a great job. You will need the 15-85 as well for some larger animal shots, shots where smaller animals are close to you and enclosure shots as the 100-400 has an effective focal length of 160mm at the short end on the 7D Mk2.
Click to expand...

Thanks, 15-85 and 100-400 combo it is then :D
 
Steve W said:
yeah it's all outside, I think so as well, so will cancel the 70-200 and put the £90 towards a Canon 1.4 III extender :) Thanks for input, it has been appreciated.
Click to expand...

7D Mk2, 100-400 Mk2 and 1.4x Mk3 work well together.
 
It does sound like you have made the right choice. Your current lenses should be good enough for what you will likely need the WHF day. You won't have much to worry about with a 100-400 focal length at WHF, you can always try out the 15-85 for some different images. I'm guessing clean background will be the biggest issue, your 100-400 will be ideal for zooming in to get those clean, uncluttered backgrounds.


Steve W said:
The 70-200 is not long enough for wildlife photography, the extra reach of the 100-400 is invaluable.
Click to expand...

It all depends on how close you can get, it's really a case of using the right lens for the job. Getting close is important to really show detail in an image. My 70-200 f4 is one of my most used lenses for wildlife. Ok you can't expect to photograph owls in flight or something like but when you can get close it can be ideal. On a recent trip to photograph red squirrels it was the only lens I used, my 200-400 stayed in the bag. I'm soon off to skomer for 2 days and I think again the 70-200 will probably be my most used lens, maybe not for the in flight puffin shots. I'm even thinking of picking up something wider (24-120) for some different wildlife images to the telephoto images the 70-200 and 200-400 give. There are a time and place for both, it's just using them at the right time or planning your wildlife images around the kit you have.
 
Jackwow said:
7D Mk2, 100-400 Mk2 and 1.4x Mk3 work well together.
Click to expand...

Indeed, the 1.4x is £285 from HDEW so hopefully I'll get that in the next month or so.

rob-nikon said:
It does sound like you have made the right choice. Your current lenses should be good enough for what you will likely need the WHF day. You won't have much to worry about with a 100-400 focal length at WHF, you can always try out the 15-85 for some different images. I'm guessing clean background will be the biggest issue, your 100-400 will be ideal for zooming in to get those clean, uncluttered backgrounds.




It all depends on how close you can get, it's really a case of using the right lens for the job. Getting close is important to really show detail in an image. My 70-200 f4 is one of my most used lenses for wildlife. Ok you can't expect to photograph owls in flight or something like but when you can get close it can be ideal. On a recent trip to photograph red squirrels it was the only lens I used, my 200-400 stayed in the bag. I'm soon off to skomer for 2 days and I think again the 70-200 will probably be my most used lens, maybe not for the in flight puffin shots. I'm even thinking of picking up something wider (24-120) for some different wildlife images to the telephoto images the 70-200 and 200-400 give. There are a time and place for both, it's just using them at the right time or planning your wildlife images around the kit you have.
Click to expand...

Thanks for explanation, you are right, as with most things in life, it's about having the right tools for the job, very rarely can you use one tool for everything. I will take my Canon 100mm f2.8 macro as well, this will allow me to try some nice clean background shots. Hopefully the photographer and keeper(s) will try and keep the bigger cats a few feet away from the wire so that we have the ability to "loose" the wire in the shots.
 
i recently visited the British wildlife centre in surrey, and for most of my shots oddly ended up using my 85mm Portrait lens.
small mammals mainly there and enclosures are quite small and open so no issue with distance.
only the otters required the long zoom but my ancient 100-300 just wasnt up to it terms of image quality.
looking at the WHF does look like you can fairly close to the big cats tehre and your biggest enemy will be fencing.
however looking on flickr you can get a good diea of what results people are getting and what they shot with from the exif
https://www.flickr.com/search/?q=wildlife+heritage+foundation

alot if it seems between the 100-200 lens range with a few wider shots thrown in. so this should allow you to use the 100-400 at the lower end allowing you to shoot at f4 for the shallower DOF and most likely get some cracking shots with your 100mm macro or 15-85
 
Yeah having a look at the photos, the first 5 or so where between 200-300 focal range, so happy now, just want to go and see the wonderful cats :D

I'm at Howletts today and Port Lympne tomorrow, so will get to try out the 7dmk2 and 100-400mk2 combo in anger now :D
 
Steve W said:
I'm visiting the Wildlife heritage foundation in Kent in July and wanted to get feed back on weather I need to hire the Canon 70-200 2.8 Mk2 IS lens.

I have recently upgraded my 450D to 7D Mk2 and also just purchased a Canon 100-400 Mk2 lens, I also have a Canon ef-s 15-85 lens, meaning I have the focal range of 15-200 covered (although I have 15mm gap between 85 and 100).

Bearing this in mind is it still worth me paying £90 to hire the 70-200 2.8 MK2 IS lens for the day?

I have asked this question before, but now I have the 7D MK2 and 100-400 Mk2, I'm thinking it's not worth the cost as the two are excellent together.
Click to expand...

I went to WHF a while ago and some of the enclosures don't let much light in. Having the faster lens might prove helpful. If on a photography day they let you up to the inner fence on some of the enclosures so you could be pretty close too.
 
I was there a couple of months back (great place) and took my 7DMkII and 100-400mm II lens. So an exact match for you!

You have to get your lens right up against the fences (square mesh, big enough for the centre of your lens to see through), so make sure you have a UV filter on to protect the front of the lens (as lens hoods will put you too far back). So due to this closeness there were a handful of occasions I wished I could get shorter than 100mm, but this was outweighed by having the longer reach most of the time which I really appreciated.

When the animals get close you are told to retreat from the fence anyway!

Here's a couple of my shots from the day:



 
amazing shots Philip, I hope I have a clear day like you as it will help a lot.
 
I've done whf in the past, before the 100-400 mk ii was out, and I did use my 70-200 for most of the day. However, I doubt that you will take many photos of big cats at f2.8 - I'd go for the 100-400. The range is great even if you don't need anything above 300 odd. I own both, if it was one or the other id be really torn, but I certainly wouldn't spend 90 bucks on it!
Enjoy your day!
 
Steve W said:
amazing shots Philip, I hope I have a clear day like you as it will help a lot.
Click to expand...

Thanks Steve. It was actually hammering down with rain for about half of it, but then the sun came out thankfully!
 
A couple to show you typical access I've had at WHF on previous visits...

You don't need to worry about fences getting in the way :D

bigcat154.JPG


bigcat320.JPG


bigcat216.JPG



One of my favourites

bigcat.jpg
 
Just make sure you have a protection / uv filter on the front of your lens as it's going to be mashed up against the wire all day.
 
@fabs What happened to the review section ?, from what I remember Yv did a good write up on the do's & don'ts of the WHF
 
The problem with that is you lose the flexibility of moving round as you have to reposition the lens if the subject moves. If you are on a gap in the wire you can move yourself / your shoulders around to change angles, being 3" further back with a hood you can't do that. That's my experience of it anyways.
 
Adam J said:
The problem with that is you lose the flexibility of moving round as you have to reposition the lens if the subject moves. If you are on a gap in the wire you can move yourself / your shoulders around to change angles, being 3" further back with a hood you can't do that. That's my experience of it anyways.
Click to expand...

Can't say I ever had that issue if I'm honest. Always seemed to be able to manoeuvre myself as needed.
 
I've done 2 visits and I would say a 70-200 and something a bit shorter is fine on a crop body.

Shot at 200mm on my old 50D

Pepo the Cheetah by Steve Jelly, on Flickr

Shot at 100mm.

IMG_4643_1024 by Steve Jelly, on Flickr

100-400 on a FF body would offer some decent portrait opportunities. If I went again, I'd run my 70-200 on my 7D and my 150-600 on my 6D. All bases covered I reckon.

One thing I will say, do take time to take in the beauty of the cats. First time I went I never really stopped to look at the animals, just kept shooting them. Don't get too close to the tigers, especially if they turn their back on you !! :D
 
You do know you've now got me thinking about going again don't you....... :confused:
 
I've just spent the day photographing snow leopards, clouded leopards, tigers, Barbary lions, and fishing cats at howletts. Tomorrow I'm at port lympne to do the same again.

I'm very impressed with sharpness and speed of focus of the 7dmk2 and 100-400 mk2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top