Hey Dan,
The brown bear images on your website are beautiful. If not too much trouble, I'd love to know what camera/lens combination were you using for those photos?
Tx,
Clark
Lenses for Brown Bears in Katmai NP
- Thread starter BillW
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
The brown bear images on your website are beautiful. If not too much trouble, I'd love to know what camera/lens combination were you using for those photos?
Tx,
Clark
Hey Bill,
I just replied to you in the Pantanal thread about the the two converters, so I won't repeat most of it here. With your question about AF and the converters, you are spot on... the 1.4x will not negatively impact optical performance or AF on your Z6ii, but the 2x may reduced AF speed. I found that if I prefocused the 2x / lens combo, AF was very good. If, on the other hand, the lens + 2x had to find the subject due to extreme differences in start to final focus, it really struggled to lock on.
Regarding your lens choices for the trip... it sounds perfect. I think the 200-500 on a D500 or D850 will work well for Katmai and the 70-200S + or - converters on a Z body will be a great combination. I really want Nikon to release the 200-600mm lens for their Z bodies. The potential of this lens on the Future Z9 has kept me frozen in the Nikon system. If neither can be obtained before May 2022, I'm not sure what I will do. With my trip to Zimanga (w/ their Bence Mate hides) in July 22 nearly paid for, I definitely want to go to Africa with a high end, yet relatively small kit.... While the 180-400 fits the "high end" requisite, it's not even close to small!
Have a great time in Katmai... I look forward to seeing some of your pics!
bruce
Lake Clark 2012: D7000/200-400 VR2 on monopod, D300/70-200 2.8 on strap
Brooks 2013: D4 or D800E/200-400 VR2 on tripod, second body/70-200 2.8 on strap; switched out D4/D800E as primary depending on lighting conditions
Lake Clark 2014: D4 or D810/500 f4 on tripod, second body/70-200 2.8 on strap; switched out D4/D810 as primary depending on lighting conditions
Katmai 2015: D810/500 f4 on tripod; D4 or D7200/80-400G on strap depending on conditions
Katmai 2018: D850/500 f4 on tripod; D4/200-500 on strap; on this trip had some severe weather. D850 got wet and had intermittent problems. Switched it out for D810 a few times. Also went mobile a few times and shot solo with either D850 or 810 on the 200-500
Glad you asked. That was an interesting exercise to go through.
Thanks Bruce. Very helpful. Excited to go.
Thank you, Dan!
O
Well-known member
Hey, I am enjoying looking listening and learning from peoples different travel experiences I read about.
Exotic lenses are always preferred choices but sometimes not always practical, Cost weight size ?
and mostly are fixed focal length with less flexibility. The versatile exotics are usually large or heavy.
To me I always look for the optimal lens light gathering capacity and sensor image quality along with versatility especially for unknown applications.
Above all I avoid overthinking things.
In the case here in, the tour guide advises 100-400....this is an easy and simple challenge to meet.
I feel good composition will always tell the best story.
Only an opinion Oz down under
Exotic lenses are always preferred choices but sometimes not always practical, Cost weight size ?
and mostly are fixed focal length with less flexibility. The versatile exotics are usually large or heavy.
To me I always look for the optimal lens light gathering capacity and sensor image quality along with versatility especially for unknown applications.
Above all I avoid overthinking things.
In the case here in, the tour guide advises 100-400....this is an easy and simple challenge to meet.
I feel good composition will always tell the best story.
Only an opinion Oz down under
D
Deleted member 115
Guest
A quick report on my trip to Katmai National Park and Preserve. In short, it was a wonderful trip. Lots of bears, including spring cubs and older cubs. And lots of sub-adults sparring with each other.
We ended up going to Brooks Falls on the first day, as the lodge owner said that there was a lot of bear activity there. He was right. At one point, I counted 26 bears that I could see from the falls through a block or two downstream. I’m sure we saw at least 40-50 bears there in a half day. Of course, as we taxied in on our float plane, I counted 26 float planes already tied up there. So more people than bears. I was still very glad we went there. Amazing to watch bears catching salmon in mid-air and diving for them below the falls.
We spent the rest of our time in less travelled parts of the park and preserve — I think the park alone is bigger than Yellowstone and Yosemite combined. The bears were where the salmon were, of course, and there is a heavy sockeye run this year.
As to equipment, on the long end, I ended up taking the 500 mm PF and the 70-200 f2.8S lens with the two Z mount TCs. At Brooks I had the 500 mm PF on my D850 and the 70-200 with the 2x TC on my Z7II, switching from one to the other. The rest of the time, I used the 500 mm PF or the 70-200 with one of the TCs on the Z7II, as carrying two bodies with attached lenses was less practical, given the hiking and terrain.
I’m pretty happy with the results. It was often nice to have 500 mm. And other times the flexibility of a zoom was nice. No doubt that the 200-500 mm zoom would have filled both roles and I missed a few shots (or at least changed them to more extreme close-ups) when I had the 500 mm PF on and it was a bit long and I did not have time to change lenses. But the zoom is heavier and we did a lot of hiking (depending on the day, between 4 and 7.2 miles). Apart from Brooks Falls where you have maintained paths and boardwalks, the hiking was fairly rugged, at times slippery, requiring going up or down slopes along the streams, walking through dense bushes (at lower altitudes), and a number of river crossings. So I was glad for the light weight of the 500 mm PF. I also think I would have missed 500 mm if I had had only a 100-400 mm along.
I was the only Nikon shooter in the group. The others shot Canon, both DSLRs and mirrorless. I don’t know Canon models well. But the leader and a couple other participants had the R5 and 100-500 mm lens. That lens is amazingly compact — made me think it would be nice if Nikon made something similar for the Z bodies. The others mostly used the Canon 100-400 mm, in some cases with a TC. One person (the youngest in the group) carried the Canon 200-400 mm lens with built-in TC on a monopod. He loved the lens, but said it did get heavy, and at times awkward, on our hikes.
I was quite happy with my gear. The Z7II did very well with the 500 mm PF and 70-200 with either the 1.4x TC or 2x Z TC. I had no trouble following bears, even as they ran in my direction chasing salmon. I mostly used single point and AF-C, as I could keep the focal point on the bear. Photographed a few eagles in flight, switching to wide area small for that. Of course, the terrain was not forested (except at Brooks), so the backgrounds were often simpler than you might find elsewhere.
I did not use my 14-30 or my 24-70 (should probably have used the latter for some scenics, but was a bit lazy and tended to use my iPhone or the 70-200 at 70 and stitch if needed). I also did not need the 70-300 AF-P FX lens or Z6II that I brought as backups.
Still sorting through my photos. Ended up with about 10,000 — it got that high in part because I shot in high-extended mode at Brooks to try to catch the right moments with bears catching salmon in mid-air and also for some bears fishing in rivers that charged around after salmon.
Again, a wonderful trip. I hope to go back again sometime.
We ended up going to Brooks Falls on the first day, as the lodge owner said that there was a lot of bear activity there. He was right. At one point, I counted 26 bears that I could see from the falls through a block or two downstream. I’m sure we saw at least 40-50 bears there in a half day. Of course, as we taxied in on our float plane, I counted 26 float planes already tied up there. So more people than bears. I was still very glad we went there. Amazing to watch bears catching salmon in mid-air and diving for them below the falls.
We spent the rest of our time in less travelled parts of the park and preserve — I think the park alone is bigger than Yellowstone and Yosemite combined. The bears were where the salmon were, of course, and there is a heavy sockeye run this year.
As to equipment, on the long end, I ended up taking the 500 mm PF and the 70-200 f2.8S lens with the two Z mount TCs. At Brooks I had the 500 mm PF on my D850 and the 70-200 with the 2x TC on my Z7II, switching from one to the other. The rest of the time, I used the 500 mm PF or the 70-200 with one of the TCs on the Z7II, as carrying two bodies with attached lenses was less practical, given the hiking and terrain.
I’m pretty happy with the results. It was often nice to have 500 mm. And other times the flexibility of a zoom was nice. No doubt that the 200-500 mm zoom would have filled both roles and I missed a few shots (or at least changed them to more extreme close-ups) when I had the 500 mm PF on and it was a bit long and I did not have time to change lenses. But the zoom is heavier and we did a lot of hiking (depending on the day, between 4 and 7.2 miles). Apart from Brooks Falls where you have maintained paths and boardwalks, the hiking was fairly rugged, at times slippery, requiring going up or down slopes along the streams, walking through dense bushes (at lower altitudes), and a number of river crossings. So I was glad for the light weight of the 500 mm PF. I also think I would have missed 500 mm if I had had only a 100-400 mm along.
I was the only Nikon shooter in the group. The others shot Canon, both DSLRs and mirrorless. I don’t know Canon models well. But the leader and a couple other participants had the R5 and 100-500 mm lens. That lens is amazingly compact — made me think it would be nice if Nikon made something similar for the Z bodies. The others mostly used the Canon 100-400 mm, in some cases with a TC. One person (the youngest in the group) carried the Canon 200-400 mm lens with built-in TC on a monopod. He loved the lens, but said it did get heavy, and at times awkward, on our hikes.
I was quite happy with my gear. The Z7II did very well with the 500 mm PF and 70-200 with either the 1.4x TC or 2x Z TC. I had no trouble following bears, even as they ran in my direction chasing salmon. I mostly used single point and AF-C, as I could keep the focal point on the bear. Photographed a few eagles in flight, switching to wide area small for that. Of course, the terrain was not forested (except at Brooks), so the backgrounds were often simpler than you might find elsewhere.
I did not use my 14-30 or my 24-70 (should probably have used the latter for some scenics, but was a bit lazy and tended to use my iPhone or the 70-200 at 70 and stitch if needed). I also did not need the 70-300 AF-P FX lens or Z6II that I brought as backups.
Still sorting through my photos. Ended up with about 10,000 — it got that high in part because I shot in high-extended mode at Brooks to try to catch the right moments with bears catching salmon in mid-air and also for some bears fishing in rivers that charged around after salmon.
Again, a wonderful trip. I hope to go back again sometime.
Bill, so glad that you had a wonderful trip! Thank you very much for the follow up report - the information you shared is extremely interesting, and very helpful to me as I plan my first trip there in the fall. I hope you'll share some of those 10,000 images with us on BCG!
O
Well-known member
I enjoyed your trip .........The standout is hearing of your joy, excitement, the journey, you seem to have really enjoyed it. What a wonderful trip by the sounds of it.
I guess if you went there at another time the focal ranges best suited may be different again, and the bears may not be in the exact location again ??
The 2 things you mention that standout out is flexibility in focal range and weight, focal range covering things is 70-500mm you had perfectly covered........the other was weight
and I respect that as important considering the climbing hiking.
The question i have is what would you take or do differently next time knowing what to expect and how would you deal with weight, leave a camera body and lens at home ??
What in your pack could be left out to offset the load ??
Oz down under
Thank you.
I have not posted a photo here before. Will look for the instructions.
Would it work to post a link to a SmugMug gallery? I do that for family and friends, so it might be easier if it works. Hope to decide on an initial set for posting later this week or on the weekend.
I think I recall you were considering taking the 200-500 mm lens. I think that would be a good choice, depending on where you go, how far you hike and what the terrain is like there.
I was there for the sockeye/red salmon run, which is very good this year. I think that run will generally be over by the fall. But the cohos/silver salmon run later in the season. I have fished for them in prior years in September.
Thank you. It was a great trip. Seeing the salmon run in Alaska is a natural wonder.
During the various salmon runs (king, pink, chum/dog, sockeye/red, and coho/silver), the bears are where the salmon are, so that can change during the season with different salmon runs. And it can change day to day as a run progresses. We used float planes to get various places in the park and preserve, as there are no roads. The lodge owner / chief pilot and the photographer leading the group were both very experienced. We also did a little scouting each day by plane to see where the salmon were and where the bears were active (usually the same place). And if you are there outside the salmon runs, the bears are much more dispersed, I'm told.
As to gear, each trip may be different and YMMV.
For me, going back I would skip the 14-30 mm. The 24-70 was wide enough for most scenics (and I should have taken more). I might take a Sony RX100 variant or a Nikon J5 to have a small camera that would be better for scenics and group shots than an iPhone, but would be small. If I did that, I would consider dropping the 24-70. That would mean another size of battery.
If there was less walking/hiking and/or the terrain was easier, I might consider having two bodies out on a double black rapid strap. But that would not have worked where we were hiking out in the field. Two cameras with lenses attached did work well at Brooks. I might also consider the 200-500 mm lens, as it would cover most of shooting, if the weight and size is ok, given the anticipated walking/hiking and terrain.
If I were a Canon shooter, I would take an R5 and the new 100-500 mm lens (assuming you can get them, I hear they are in short supply). A bit jealous of the small size of the 100-500.
Backups are a good idea. I would not go without two bodies (although I would likely carry only one in the field if hiking, at least if I went back to a lodge each day as we did -- different question if camping) and a plan for what to do if you break your principal long lens (which could just be to bring a 70-300 or a TC for a 70-200). No one on my trip broke any gear, but slips and stumbles were common enough. Going back, I might not take my D850, as I have been shooting with a Z7II and Z6II most of the time this year. I wanted a DSLR along in case I found any issues using the Z bodies for bear action. The Z7II worked great and when using a single body, I used the Z7II and left the D850 and Z6II at the lodge to reduce weight in the field.
I brought my hiking poles and was very glad to have them, including for river crossings. The Katmai-Lake Clark-Iliamna area had a lot of snow this last winter, so water levels were higher than usual (making some stream crossings a bit more tricky) and there were snow fields in some places, which the bears seemed to like.
Polarizers were useful, cutting the glare or reflections on water and getting better views of the salmon. I brought one for each lens, but a better approach might have been to bring one or two and step-up rings. I used a polarizer on the 70-200 with TCs. I did not use one on the 500 mm PF, although I had it along.
I used the Z7II to shoot some video at Brooks Falls and of sub-adult bears play-fighting. Recommend trying it if you can, in addition to stills. My wife loved seeing video of the salmon leaping up Brooks Falls and bears catching them mid-air. She also liked seeing video of the bears play fighting.
I used 2 batteries in my Z7II on most days, but carried more just in cases. Access to charging might be an issue if camping and could argue for a DSLR kit.
Glad to hear that you had a good trip. With that much hiking you certainly got to see things first hand. Look forward to seeing some of your images.
O
Well-known member
Thank you for your valuable tips and information. You really enjoyed the journey ........
Polarizers and step rings are noted thank you.
I to find that when friends come over they always ask to see video rather than stills, its becoming increasingly more and more popular,
hence i have stopped investing just for now till the seas of change calm down and clear weather allows for safe sailing ahead.
The Canon combo option you mention sounds the best and hence if i left Nikon it would be for Canon but for Video mainly.
I am retaining a very simple basic Hack system in 35mm for the short term, Nikons wholly trio 14-24, 24-70 G, 70-200 FL and a 200-500 with 2 x D850 units and hiring/borrowing for a while ( tax deductible) if need anything more or special, 600mm F4, D5 D6, Z9 when available.
I am leaning towards MF for serious landscape and all still work, waiting for the Fuji to leap to 150 or 200mp ? Printing large 1x 2 to 3 meters range is on the horizon.
I need to really develop my technique and skill sets for video.
I have plenty of time, i am not in a hurry or missing out on much, i have unloaded all the exotic and high $ end Nikon FX gear.
The move to mirror less for me is not a burning matter, i haven't invested in the Z system deliberately as its fruit not quite ripe enough but its getting there with maybe drilled down Z9 benefits.
My go to as i walk out the door is the 70-200 FL, 16mm fish eye. 1x D850.............1.4 TC
Oz down under
BillW
Detailed reports, great reading. Thank you.
Detailed reports, great reading. Thank you.
Here is a link to a SmugMug gallery with a few photos from my trip. I have lots of images to go through, so I'm not sure they are the best. But I found them interesting and used them for a group slideshow on the last night of my trip.
wwelke.smugmug.com
Photos for Group Slideshow - wwelke
This gallery hosted by SmugMug; your photos look better here.
wwelke.smugmug.com
Those are fantastic pictures.
Thanks.
Calson
Well-known member
When I was at Brooks I took the 200-500mm and 500mm was long enough for any shots taken from the platform but 200mm was much too long and I missed many shots that I could have captured with the 80-400mm lens. I can hand hold the 200-500mm all day long but when I did that with the 200-400mm lens my body did not fair well and I found myself using a tripod with this lens.
On the crowded platform at Brooks Falls a tripod is difficult to locate and place and when you have your spot you will be reluctant to leave it.
On the crowded platform at Brooks Falls a tripod is difficult to locate and place and when you have your spot you will be reluctant to leave it.
fulltimewanderer
Active member
Yes, Fantastic! Looks like you took the correct gear.
When we were at Brooks, there was a 30-40 minute wait to be allowed on the platform closest to the falls and a 30 minute limit to how long you could stay there. You could leave and do another wait to go again. Later in the afternoon, the wait was shorter. The rangers there said that there are times when the wait is even longer, There was no limit or wait at the platform that was a bit further from the falls.
Not super fond of waits, but Brooks was worth it.
Tripods were not allowed to be used on the platform closest to the falls, unless you kept the legs together and basically used it as a monopod.
O
Well-known member
Looks like the 200-500, 70-200 Fl, with a 1.4 TC in the back pocket seems like still the best all round do every thing selection and one D850......all on a light weight Mono Pod.
Pity about the crowds and waiting...........
Oz down under
You picked the right year to visit Katmai. ADFG just reported this year was the biggest sockeye run in Bristol Bay since they started keeping records in 1893. Estimated 66 million sockeye.
A second body wold be a must…by the time one pays for the trip to Brooks Falls…a spare body pales in cost. I would carry multiple lenses too…for the same reason…
Abinoone — I posted a link to a SmugMug account earlier in this chain with a few photos from the trip. Wanted to make sure you saw it. It did seem to work to do it that way.