African lens help !! Please share your experience :)

[D&A]

Bill....as I was scrolling down this page reading each post and started to view your image, I thought "hmmm", not much to it! Then I continued to scroll till I viewed the entire frame of the shot including that little bird in the lower right hand corner. Wow, changes the entire impact of the shot (an excellent one at that). As they say "I've now seen the entire picture and get it"...LOL! The approach to the subject matter is different and unique and that is one of a number of reasons it really works!

Marc said something in his post (above) that truly resonated with me. Yes, I am a firm believer that the right tool for the job is generally preferable but I too sometimes like the challenge of approaching things differently and find it creatively stimulating to have some limitations. There have been times I have used MFD when a 35mm DLSR system was the preferable camera/lens combo to use simply to see how I could get the MFD system to adapt, hopefully resulting in capturing images that are both interesting, a bit different and ultimately useful.

Dave (D&A)

 

[Andy Biggs]

Ok, here are just a few images to illustrate what can be done with medium format out on safari. All shots taken with a Phase One DF + 240mm lens.

 

[Shashin]

I would like to put a little twist to the "right tool for the job" concept. Having shot medium-fomat film and digital for documentary work, I would say that you need to develop the "right skills for the job." All the types of images that are presented as proof that AF is required were also made before the invention of AF. While some feature make the "job" easier, the photographer can also compensate for the limitations of the equipment by developing the skills. The first AF camera I bought, Hexar AF, was annoying as hell as I was missing more and slower than with my MF cameras. I did figure it out, but if your photography is only successful because of the technology, you are not there yet. BTW, I find MF on my Pentax 300mm on my 645D faster and easier than the AF.

 

[Bill Caulfeild-Browne]

I agree, Will. Some of the best safari pictures were made LONG before AF!
Bill

 

[D&A]

I agree, Will. Some of the best safari pictures were made LONG before AF!
Bill

Same thing with publishable pro sport images. The photographer intimately knew his subject matter and often anticipated the shot in advance...pre focused and had most settings nailed prior to pushing the shutter. Same thing with wildlife shots. Some of the most memorable ones were done long before AF was commonly used.

Dave (D&A)

 

[GrahamWelland]

Same thing with wildlife shots. Some of the most memorable ones were done long before AF was commonly used.

Dave (D&A)

Certainly most of the original wildlife shots. I confess that yet another 600mm critter eyeball shot bores me to tears these days ... (and I confess that I've shot my fair share of them myself too).

 

[Andy Biggs]

I don't think autofocus is needed for good wildlife photography, unless your interpretation of the natural world is all about action, killing, chases, etc.

 

[Bill Caulfeild-Browne]

Certainly most of the original wildlife shots. I confess that yet another 600mm critter eyeball shot bores me to tears these days ... (and I confess that I've shot my fair share of them myself too).

Yeah, I agree and I have sinned too! In the end textbook ID shots are just that - you really don't want them hanging on your wall. Shots with the wildlife in context (se Andy's above) are far more interesting.

I have shown this pic before but it's worth repeating as an example of what I mean. Interestingly, it was not taken with a DSLR, despite my first post in this thread, but a Phase DF and 240 mm manually focussed!

 

[Mark Gowin]

Ok, here are just a few images to illustrate what can be done with medium format out on safari. All shots taken with a Phase One DF + 240mm lens.

Andy,

Thank you for sharing your photos. Well done. I have done the close up wildlife portraits with super telephotos and dSLRs. However, I have been migrating toward the environmental wildlife photos such as you have posted. I came to the conclusion that I prefer to see the wildlife with some context.

 

[GrahamWelland]

Bill/Mark

I totally agree with you both and Andy. Those environmental wildlife shots are beautiful and appeal (to me at least) much more than just animal/tight background shots we often see.

:thumbs:

 

[Shashin]

But the great thing about the tight animal portraits is nature documentary film makers can go to the local zoo and get the shots they need without having to blow the budget on actually going out into the wild. Much nicer hotels too.

+ 3 on the environmental work.

 

[pesto]

Maybe Pesto can chime in and share experience/advise from his use of the S2 with the Mamiya 500mm.

I have indeed been using the mamiya 500 APO on both the P1 DF/ P40+ and more recently with my Leica S2-P with the Leica adapter; actually, I go back a little further back than that having used it as originally intended on a Mamiya 645 film camera when it was first offered.

On any of the "modern" cameras you will be be limited to stop down metering and manual focus. The focusing "problem" turns out to be not all that significant given Leicas bright view finder, the lenses great optics, and its inherent shallow depth of field at open aperture (which is what I have used for the majority of my images). I have always loved this lens as its image quality, when I am able to get things right, is exceptionally good. I would however hasten to warn that this can be a difficult and unforgiving lens to use and it is heavy and cumbersome to use in the field, especially the South Florida swamps and marshes. A strong tripod is an absolute necessity and a gimbal head is to strongly recommended as well. All that I can say is that this lens will test your patience, your skills, and your endurance but in the end I still find it all worth while... well, most of the time I do!

Since the question has been asked, I believe that my preference would be for the Leica S2 and Contax 350. You would gain full open aperture metering, superb image quality, and a much more compact and manageable package...just my two cents.

I hope that this helps and wish you well.

Douglas Benson.

 

[jaree]

I have the S2 and was in a similar situation where I was deciding what to carry for an upcoming trip to a rather remote and rugged geography where I would be hiking for 8-10 hours. It may be heresy, but I am going to get a compact super-zoom - the Panasonic FZ200 (600MM FF equiv at the long end) as a supplement to the S2 for long range shots. Playing with sample RAWs from the FZ200 and looking at some Flickr samples convinced me that is the perfect companion to the S2 for my purposes. S2 with 35 and 120 + FZ200. My M9 will stay home. I will see how it works out.

I don't exhibit my prints in a gallery [they are not that good anyway!], nor do I print big, but still like to have good quality IQ when displayed on a monitor. In good light, the newer compact super-zooms are quite capable. Some fleeting photo ops will present themselves only at a distance and for trips such as these you better be prepared for them - if you are fiddling with changing lenses, you will likely miss them.

On another note: if you are patient, you can get native S lenses at a good price from private sellers. I was able to get the 35, 70 and 180 S lenses in mint condition for US $9K.

Or, you can ditch the S2 altogether and get the Nikon D800E with the 24-70 and the new 80-400 lens which will cover all bases with no loss in IQ + allow you much greater hand-holding capability. For your once in a lifetime trip, that may be a viable option to consider.

 

[D&A]

Bill/Mark

I totally agree with you both and Andy. Those environmental wildlife shots are beautiful and appeal (to me at least) much more than just animal/tight background shots we often see.

:thumbs:

I think we're up to +4 on the enviormental work and justifiably so. I think at one time or another many of us were into close up portrait type wildlife imagery but it's only natural to gravitate to or have our concept of wildlife photography change. It's no different than changing likes or dislikes for different forms of image capture.

For the most part I've moved away from the super telephotos of the 35mm DSLR variety, but am guilty of keeping a medium format 600mm for occasional use. At least in the case of this lens, its manual focus and does often present a challenge under certain types of shooting situations and for this I am thankful.

Dave (D&A)

 

[Landscapelover]

I understand the above comments about "environmental wildlife".
As some of you may know, I love MFD as much as all of you. However, if I have a chance to go to Safari tour, at least I want to get a few shots of the lion etc with big bright eyes. I don't think you will have this opportunity with the Leica S2 unless you will be there for months but you may turn out to be their meal
If this is a yellowstone trip, I may try the Leica S2 alone but this is a Safari! I don't want to scratch my head or cry by not bringing necessary equipments or finding out most pictures by a long MF tele in a car or in low light are all blurred.
I would bring both a 35mm-DSLR and long tele (prime or zoom) to get big bright lion eyes (at least to show to your kids you went to Safari) and a wide angle lens and the S2 with a couple of lenses to get environmental wildlife. The 35mm-DSLR weight nothing. And I think it is a challenge to create pictures with a super tele that different from others, I think there is always a possiibility.
To be honest, the quality of pictures by D800E and Leica S2 are not that much difference. Why bother to use the MF lens which is good for only slow environment over the big aperture with VR (or even zoom) 35mm -DSLR lens. I don't think, in general, you can tell from pictures whether which ones are taken by Leica S2 or D800E.
The bonus is you can get the African landscape with freezing stars, milky way or star trails with the 35mm DSLR. I don't believe Graham will go to Safari without his D600
Well! This is a MFD forums, what can I say? Try to post the same title in LUL or Fm Forums and the responses would be very interesting

Best
Pramote

 

[fotografz]

I understand the above comments about "environmental wildlife".
As some of you may know, I love MFD. However, if I have a chance to go to Safari tour, at least I want to get a few shots of the lion etc with big bright eyes. I don't think you will have this opportunity with the Leica S2 (I have it myself) unless you will be there for months but you may turn out to be their meal
If this is a yellowstone trip, I may try the Leica S2 alone but this is a Safari! I don't want to scratch my head or cry by not bringing necessary equipments or the pictures by a long tele are all blurred.
I would bring both the 35mm-DSLR and long tele and S2 with a couple of lens to get both "environmental" and regular wildlife.
Well! This is a MFD forums, what can I say. Try to post the same title in LUL or Fm Forums and the response would be very interesting

Best
Pramote

Leave ALL the gear at home, and buy a "Lion with big bright eyes" from Shutter Stock for $20. There are a million to choose from ... :ROTFL:

Just yanking your chain :angel:

- Marc

 

[Landscapelover]

Leave ALL the gear at home, and buy a "Lion with big bright eyes" from Shutter Stock for $20. There are a million to choose from ... :ROTFL:

Just yanking your chain :angel:

- Marc

You can buy tons of Sport Illustrated Magazines (Model Edition) to dream of but they will never be better than your wife You can tell the story to your grand kids and they will not get bored.
You've never known. You may get a picture of butterflies in front of the lion's bright eyes and can win the prize.
I would not be too pessimistic. Be positive

Pramote

 

[fotografz]

You can buy tons of Sport Illustrated Magazines (Model Edition) to dream of but they will never be better than your wife You can tell the story to your grand kids and they will not get bored.
You've never known. You may get a picture of butterflies in front of the lion's bright eyes and can win the prize.
I would not be too pessimistic. Be positive

Pramote

I wouldn't recommend trying to make one of those Lions your wife ... or her cubs will be dining on your carcass ... THEN the other Safari photographers WILL have something interesting to photograph.

- Marc

 

[pesto]

I think we're up to +4 on the enviormental work and justifiably so. I think at one time or another many of us were into close up portrait type wildlife imagery but it's only natural to gravitate to or have our concept of wildlife photography change. It's no different than changing likes or dislikes for different forms of image capture.

For the most part I've moved away from the super telephotos of the 35mm DSLR variety, but am guilty of keeping a medium format 600mm for occasional use. At least in the case of this lens, its manual focus and does often present a challenge under certain types of shooting situations and for this I am thankful.

Dave (D&A)

Over the years I too have moved away from the "filling the frame is the name of the game" approach to photographing critters in favor of capturing a more environmental view. Given the respect and courtesy that I see as due animals in their native habitat, a longer lens is the appropriate tool for me on many occasions and I believe that this consideration is, at least in part, what the original question here may have been addressing. As an additional benefit of the 500 APO, I find the perspective and rendering very much to my liking despite the "inconvenience" of lugging it about in the wilds. With the availability of the Contax to S2 adapter, I have been giving serious consideration to buying a Contax 350 to not only provide a wider view but to significantly lighten my load as well.

Douglas Benson

 

[pesto]

I wouldn't recommend trying to make one of those Lions your wife ... or her cubs will be dining on your carcass ... THEN the other Safari photographers WILL have something interesting to photograph.

- Marc

Marc, You quite obviously have not had occasion to meet my dear wife

Douglas Benson