Tannin
Storage? I am Storage!
More generally, most of the things I want to take pictures of only really work in daylight - or, in the worst case, with flash, an area I have yet to explore, and probably won't for quite some time, as I have so much else to learn.
My 100-400 lives on the camera almost all the time as I can't abide seeing a rare bird and not being ready to take a shot of it. Every time I put the other lens on I feel a bit nervous.
Besides, I haven't figured out a good way of carrying all the gear yet. Well, OK, I have figured it out, but I haven't gone out and bought the raw materials and persuaded Belinda to sew them up for me. What I want is a sort of open holster that I can drop the pointy end of the 100-400 into and have the camera body sit on my right hip with the lens pointing down, lying along my thigh. Then, if desired, I can have scope and tripod over my right shoulder (Belinda made me a pair of shoulder pockets, each attached to a heavy cotton shirt, each with room to slide in a rectagular bit of padding - I use ordinary carpet turned upside down - and slide it out again for washing.), 100-400 on my hip, and third camera on my left hip where I can reach it right-handed.
Sounds ridiculous? Well, apart from the 100-400, that's what I've been doing for years. It works really well. At present I'm just hanging the Canon off a shoulder strap, but that's no good when you have a scope and tripod to carry as well- it swings around and gets in the road and bangs into things.
Anyway, at present I only have one tripod mounting plate, which the scope uses, so I'll have to get another one (they are quick release) and mount that on the 100-400. Plus figure out a way of carrying the Swarovski when I have the Canon on the tripod. (Use the same hip holster? Should work if I can figure a way to stop it sliding all the way out and falling down.)
My tripod, by the way, is a Manfrotto 190 NAT-3, which is OK but a little too flexible for my taste. I've been meaning to get a carbon fibre one for quite a while now. (Big $ there.) Probably another Manfrotto, though I might look at Gitzo if I can get used to the different leg lock arrangements.
My head is the faithful old Manfrotto 501. Most top photographers seem to be mad about ball heads, but I've never tried one. I don't like the idea of not having a tilt-pan handle. With the 501, which is actually a video head, I like to do it up quite tight and use quite a lot of force to pan/tilt. That way, I don't have to adjust anything. It's firm enough to shoot with (at my ~2000mm effective focal length) without any further action on my part, and generally without droop. But, of course, it is fairly slow to pan/tilt when it's set that stiff. This doesn't usually matter, as your field of view with the digicam setup is only one or two degrees, so your typical panning movement to follow a bird along a perch or frame a shot is in the <1 degree to ~15 degree range anyway, so it doesn't slow you up as much as a losen head, pan, tighten head routine would. (Probably - haven't ever tried it with a Wimberley or etc.) Whether all this will still apply to the DSLR or not, I have yet to discover.
My 100-400 lives on the camera almost all the time as I can't abide seeing a rare bird and not being ready to take a shot of it. Every time I put the other lens on I feel a bit nervous.
Besides, I haven't figured out a good way of carrying all the gear yet. Well, OK, I have figured it out, but I haven't gone out and bought the raw materials and persuaded Belinda to sew them up for me. What I want is a sort of open holster that I can drop the pointy end of the 100-400 into and have the camera body sit on my right hip with the lens pointing down, lying along my thigh. Then, if desired, I can have scope and tripod over my right shoulder (Belinda made me a pair of shoulder pockets, each attached to a heavy cotton shirt, each with room to slide in a rectagular bit of padding - I use ordinary carpet turned upside down - and slide it out again for washing.), 100-400 on my hip, and third camera on my left hip where I can reach it right-handed.
Sounds ridiculous? Well, apart from the 100-400, that's what I've been doing for years. It works really well. At present I'm just hanging the Canon off a shoulder strap, but that's no good when you have a scope and tripod to carry as well- it swings around and gets in the road and bangs into things.
Anyway, at present I only have one tripod mounting plate, which the scope uses, so I'll have to get another one (they are quick release) and mount that on the 100-400. Plus figure out a way of carrying the Swarovski when I have the Canon on the tripod. (Use the same hip holster? Should work if I can figure a way to stop it sliding all the way out and falling down.)
My tripod, by the way, is a Manfrotto 190 NAT-3, which is OK but a little too flexible for my taste. I've been meaning to get a carbon fibre one for quite a while now. (Big $ there.) Probably another Manfrotto, though I might look at Gitzo if I can get used to the different leg lock arrangements.
My head is the faithful old Manfrotto 501. Most top photographers seem to be mad about ball heads, but I've never tried one. I don't like the idea of not having a tilt-pan handle. With the 501, which is actually a video head, I like to do it up quite tight and use quite a lot of force to pan/tilt. That way, I don't have to adjust anything. It's firm enough to shoot with (at my ~2000mm effective focal length) without any further action on my part, and generally without droop. But, of course, it is fairly slow to pan/tilt when it's set that stiff. This doesn't usually matter, as your field of view with the digicam setup is only one or two degrees, so your typical panning movement to follow a bird along a perch or frame a shot is in the <1 degree to ~15 degree range anyway, so it doesn't slow you up as much as a losen head, pan, tighten head routine would. (Probably - haven't ever tried it with a Wimberley or etc.) Whether all this will still apply to the DSLR or not, I have yet to discover.
