You don't need a big lens for wildlife.

zombiesniper · Jan 30, 2020

Decided to brush off the 70-200 today.

dxqcanada · Jan 30, 2020

Yes, if you skilled at understanding your subject ... I regularly used a 200mm fixed focal length lens shooting 35mm film with wildlife at Algonquin Park ... though many times you just can't get that close.

Jeff G · Jan 30, 2020

Nice, glad you decided to dust off the 70 -200, both shots are very nice.

Derrel · Jan 30, 2020

If you can get close...

zombiesniper · Jan 30, 2020

Thank you.

Yes having the right subject that'll allow for a decent distance or just doing environmental images are the only real easy ways to do it. The last two ways are to take your time and get the animal in the area to not see you as a threat, or be stealthy enough to get close enough.

I've done all four and I'll say carrying the big lens is by far the simplest.

I'm thinking this spring/summer I'm going to to a "From the car" series where I can't leave the car to get a shot and see what I can come up with.

Jeff15 · Jan 31, 2020

Nice shots......

zombiesniper · Jan 31, 2020

Thank you.

K9Kirk · Jan 31, 2020

Nice shots! My opinion of the 70-200 mm is it's fine for something within a medium distance and a breath of fresh air to handle compared to lugging my "gargantuan in comparison" 150-600 mm Tamron. It's a wonderful sized lens, I think. It's light & maneuverable but not too twitchy if it has VR or if using a bipod. Long distance ... forget it, you can crop in all you want but it doesn't have the detail of a 150-600 mm. It's a tough choice deciding which lens to take out sometimes for fear I might miss something really nice that's at a long distance.

Winona · Jan 31, 2020

Nice shots. A snowy was spotted near here (within an hour) but I am carting kids around all weekend. Hmmm-I will have one of them practice driving while I look.