If your answer was yes, try Burrowing Owls. Respect their space and they'll be just as curious about you as you are them. These images were made with my 100-400 Canon II at 400mm from my blind. I use a very expensive blind because it works so well and is so comfortable, plus I can drive it to most any location. Yes, it's my car and the owls have no problems with allowing me to use it.
Basically you’re correct ... but there are a few damselflies that don’t bring their wings back to it’s abdomen when at rest. Another difference is the head. The damselfly’s eyes are separated by It’s head whereas the dragonfly’s eyes surround it’s head.
Correct. Thanks for sharing your knowledge.
Thank you. Wonderful story about people that we could use more of today.
I just ran across a box of approximately 20 misc. projector bulbs. Any suggestion on what I should or could do with them? I just don't have any projectors anymore. Thanks.
Who said a pop-up flash is useless in wildlife photography? Last Thursday I was lucky to find some Blue Grosbeaks withing camera distance as I was using a Canon 100-400 on a 7DII. These birds never got in the sun and my images just didn't look great, so I decided to try the pop-up flash. The birds were 50 to 60 feet from me so I put on my Rogue Safari booster and one of the birds was kind enough to stay around for a portrait.
Jerry, I've had the 180 and returned it because, and only because it was so heavy and did not have IS. I also had and still have the 100 and love it. I replaced the 180 with a Sigma 150 and after having it back to Sigma twice for the same problem, sold it. I also have the 50 macro and the 65 1-5X macro but the 100 is always the lens I pick up first. Hope that helps answer your question, Jer
Terrific images. Thanks for sharing.
I use the Tamron 16-300 on a 7DII as my walk around lens. I’ve had it since it first was introduced and have been very pleased with it, again as a walk around lens. It’s not the sharpest of my lenses but I continue to go back to it because it works well enough.
I use the 100-400 II on my 7D II as well but my lens to use when not using the 100-400 is the Tamron 16-300. Light, small, versatile and with good IQ. It’s done well for me over the last 3 or 4 years.
I use the 100-400 II on my 7D II as well but my lens to use when not using the 100-400 is the Tamron 16-300. Light, small, versatile and with good IQ. It’s done well for me over the last 3 or 4 years.
If the mark I does a great job for you stay with it. I used that lens for years and was extremely happy with it but I changed to the mark II because of the varied uses for that lens I wanted out of it. The Mark II lenses ability to focus close is to me the factor that caused me to switch. As I said the mark I is a terrific lens and is it worth changing to the mark II depends on the type of photography you do. For birds and BIF, it would be hard to see the difference even if the IS and focusing speed is supposed to be better.
Correct. She said an issue with the 90D and the viewfinder and I simply suggested diopter adjustment. It’s surprising how many folks forget that essential adjustment.
If you want to use this carry around lens for wildlife I’d seriously consider the Tamron 18-400. I use this lens on a 7D as well as a 80D and enjoy the size & weight & results with this lens. I also use the 100-400 II and yes it is sharper but it weighs much more and is probably too heavy to be used as a carry around lens.
I use that lens on a 7DII as well as a 5DIV. For wildlife, I prefer the 7DII except when photographing hummingbirds. If I had to start over with a new body I would seriously look at the 90D. As to your comment about the 90D viewfinder, I’m surprised because it’s the same as any other Canon DSLR. The critical issue is adjusting the diopter adjustment. Other than that issue, what else about the 90D did you not like. 10 frames per second makes that body a great tool for wildlife. Again, the 7DII is my favorite camera with the 100-400 II but I’m sure the 90D would make me happy.