Zoom Zoom?

[waynecrider]

It's coming into what I call shooting season down here in SE Florida, the time when Festivals come around more, more people, more boats in town, the sun doesn't burn holes into your brain and the weather is not always 90 degrees plus with 100% humidity. Then the Glades start drying out congregating wildlife into the sloughs and you get better opportunities for shots.
I've not really shot for over a year now, almost 2, and am itching to get back into the game with a good zoom package that will cover wildlife and events, portraits and some macro thru extensions. I'd prefer to buy the lens and then add the body that's needed. The only thing is the new body has to be AF, not Nikon, and of reasonable weight for extended carry. Weight at less then 4lbs would be nice.

 

[snapguy]

No get

No Nikon, huh? Sounds pretty silly to me.

 

[mopar_guy]

There's no law against using a Nikon.

 

[MartinCrabtree]

Nikon F5 and 80-200 2.8 AF-S and is what you're asking for whether you acknowledge it or not.

 

[JRoosa]

I picked up an F100 to run a 70-210 f4-5.6 af zoom I've had sitting around. I use the F100 only for tele stuff with my MF bodies running the normal, wide, and macro lenses. It's a relatively inexpensive combo that is fairly compact and works ok with 400 speed film in sunlight. The lens is a bit slow with clouds or dusk.

I got a screaming deal on the camera, but I'm really happy with it for the kids sports etc.

I assume canon has a similar product if you really hate Nikon.

J.

 

[John Koehrer]

OP "not Nikon"
four responses "get Nikon".
GEEZ!

That doesn't leave much, but IMO Canon. A lot of variety, both bodies and lenses available.
Don't mind the weight? Go with a pro body, weight a concern...Elan series.

 

[film_man]

If you haven't shot for a year or two it is not exactly like 50 years with different technology. What were you shooting before?

I suppose if you want fast AF and not a Nikon then you're stuck with the Canon 1V or 3 and one of the USM zooms. Not going to be that light. Not that Nikon would be much lighter, though you'd be stuck with either a F5 or F6 for proper AF, the F5 is a brick and the F6 is just silly money. Though I'd love to have either of them.

 

[Fixcinater]

EOS 3 (no grip/power booster for less weight) + 70-200L f/4 IS (or 2.8 if weight isn't that big of a deal) + Portra 400.

 

[Hatchetman]

EOS 3 (no grip/power booster for less weight) + 70-200L f/4 IS (or 2.8 if weight isn't that big of a deal) + Portra 400.

What he said. I have the 70-200 f2.8. Weighs a ton, but is a fabulous lens.

 

[cliveh]

Use a 50mm and think about the perspective.

 

[Dr Croubie]

EOS 3 (no grip/power booster for less weight) + 70-200L f/4 IS (or 2.8 if weight isn't that big of a deal) + Portra 400.

Or EOS 3 + 70-300L for that bit of extra reach, that's what I've got (of course you can 70-200L f/4 and 1.4x T/C, and the tests I've seen are almost exactly the same IQ, but the 70-300L doesn't have to be un-/re-mounted all the time, and it's smaller).

 

[waynecrider]

Well for those Nikon aficionados it isn't that I hate Nikon as do have a N80 and 2 Nikkormats; I'm just not interested in the N90 or F100. I did even have a 80-200 F2.8 zoom at one time but it was sold off because of weight. I actually was hoping to hear more from the Canon, Minolta and Pentax people on their zooms, quality and weight wise. I also have 2 older Minolta AF bodies as well but just a 50mm F1.7 which is more then covered in my Nikon stuff. Thought I'd mix it up with something different.

 

[waynecrider]

Or EOS 3 + 70-300L for that bit of extra reach, that's what I've got (of course you can 70-200L f/4 and 1.4x T/C, and the tests I've seen are almost exactly the same IQ, but the 70-300L doesn't have to be un-/re-mounted all the time, and it's smaller).

How's that glass?

 

[Dr Croubie]

How's that glass?

I can give some great d*l examples from my 7D, but maybe not around here.
I've taken a few with my EOS 3, but they were old Tri-X so kinda grainy as all hell. Can't really tell how sharp the glass is, but it easily outresolves TX grain. Still, it's mighty sharp.
As for focussing it's a 3 so it's nice and fast. With my Kenko 1.4x TC it also focusses in the centre at 300mm (420mm f/8) in really good sunlight, not the best in dim/shade.

 

[Dennis S]

One camera one lens is what I took on my trip to sunny Alberta over the X-mas season last year. I took my EOS 3 with Tamron 28-200 f3.8-5.6 LD lens. Was able to cover anything from the VERY cold outside as well as in around the tree. Went through 20 ish rolls with some very nice prairie snow scenes. Loaded with eneloop batteries and did not have a single problem in the COLD reduction in battery power. Was glad to get home where it was NOT -40 . Quite happy with a Tamron lens.

 

[Fixcinater]

I've used the 70-200 f/4 non-IS and the 70-200 IS and they're both fantastic. Easily the equal of any recording media, even wide open and at the extremes of the focal length range.

With the 2X TC, the f/2.8 suffered a bit wide open but was acceptable stopped down to f/8.

My EOS 3 is a great camera, but so is my recently acquired EOS 650 (the first EF mount camera released). AF is pretty quick, definitely accurate and it's lighter and definitely dirt cheap.

No experience here with the 70-300L or the 1 series.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Use a 50mm and think about the perspective.

Everglades. Wildlife. Gators. Feral pythons.
Yeah, 50mm sounds just right.....

 

[OldBodyOldSoul]

He can always "zoom with feet"!

 

[Alan Gales]

Everglades. Wildlife. Gators. Feral pythons.
Yeah, 50mm sounds just right.....

I agree. More like a 600mm on a Ries tripod with spikes extended and a shotgun by my side!

 

[E. von Hoegh]

He can always "zoom with feet"!

Hope he can 'zoom' faster than a hungry gator.

 

[waynecrider]

One camera one lens is what I took on my trip to sunny Alberta over the X-mas season last year. I took my EOS 3 with Tamron 28-200 f3.8-5.6 LD lens. Was able to cover anything from the VERY cold outside as well as in around the tree. Went through 20 ish rolls with some very nice prairie snow scenes. Loaded with eneloop batteries and did not have a single problem in the COLD reduction in battery power. Was glad to get home where it was NOT -40 . Quite happy with a Tamron lens.

I've actually come across some references to that lens as being pretty good. Something to think about, but image stabilization would be nice for some low light stuff.

 

[Russ - SVP]

Nikon F100 with grip and Sigma 70-200 f/2.8AF APO, is quite light in weight.

 

[analoguey]

Prosumer zooms arent heavy. You can get those and use them -since you already have a Nikon body that does AF - user a 70-300 or such with the n80 - and they dont weigh much. Use a converter + faster film to get more range. They're cheap too.

If you totally want a non- Nikon solution - I don't know if you get too many light-weight zooms. I mean, all that glass for zooming, there's got to be a weight addition! (or you could go to a P&S with zoom)

Sent from Tap-a-talk

 

[vsyrek1945]

It's coming into what I call shooting season down here in SE Florida, the time when Festivals come around more, more people, more boats in town, the sun doesn't burn holes into your brain and the weather is not always 90 degrees plus with 100% humidity. Then the Glades start drying out congregating wildlife into the sloughs and you get better opportunities for shots.
I've not really shot for over a year now, almost 2, and am itching to get back into the game with a good zoom package that will cover wildlife and events, portraits and some macro thru extensions. I'd prefer to buy the lens and then add the body that's needed. The only thing is the new body has to be AF, not Nikon, and of reasonable weight for extended carry. Weight at less then 4lbs would be nice.

A good two-lens Canon zoom set-up is the 28-105/3.5-4.5 USM and 100-300/4.5-5.6 USM with either an Elan 7e/7Ne or A2e body - I think the EOS 3 will bring the weight close to your 4 lb limit, and the difference between the 5 or 7 focus sensors of these two bodies and the 45 [IIRC] of the EOS 3 won't make a significant difference in your results. I used the lens pair with a first generation [single focus sensor] EOS Elan for more than ten years [before getting seduced by "the Dark Side"], shooting everything from family events to birds and butterflies, public garden and flower close-ups, and have many satisfying slides to show for it. I landed a couple of Canon achromatic close-up lenses 240D and 450D to shoot closer than the zooms' close-focus limits, and and lest I forget, I had a 540EZ Speedlite in the Elan's hot shoe no matter where or what I was shooting.

 

[kitanikon]

A bit late to the show, I know, but...here goes....
The Canon EF film cameras, yes the ELAN, and the 28-105mm 3.5-4.5 EF and the 70-210 F3.5-4.5 EF lenses would be your best combo.