gdanmitchell wrote: artsupreme wrote: gdanmitchell wrote:
Some notable images, but…
If those are uncropped and the animals are wild (not captured)… some of those photographs were made from dangerously close distances. Seriously.
Nah, the wild animals come right up to the vehicle and use it for shade, spotting, preying, itching, etc. The most dangerous is not pictured here, the African buffalo. They charge vehicles, a long with an occasional elephant.
The 70-200 is a standard wildlife lens in my stable, always used as a supplement to a second body with a longer lens.
OK, you are shooting from a vehicle… Got it.
The most potentially dangerous wildlife I photograph are bears, most often black bears but occasionally brown bears. I don’t shoot from a vehicle, and I’d never get that close with that kind of protection.
Africa and India where Jason shoots are a very different shooting environments. Even on walking safaris, wildlife can be much closer and, for the most part, the animals are far more habituated to people and vehicles than a bear would be in North America.
That doesn’t mean they’re safe or predictable — buffalo, elephant, hippo, etc. are obviously extremely dangerous — but the access and behavior are very different. A 70-200 can be very useful there because you’re often working in much closer proximity, whether from a vehicle or sometimes even on foot with experienced guides.
May 10, 2026 at 03:14 PM
Notice: Undefined offset: 0 in /var/www/vhosts/fredmiranda.com/httpdocs/forum/viewedits.php on line 155
gdanmitchell wrote: artsupreme wrote: gdanmitchell wrote:
Some notable images, but…
If those are uncropped and the animals are wild (not captured)… some of those photographs were made from dangerously close distances. Seriously.
Nah, the wild animals come right up to the vehicle and use it for shade, spotting, preying, itching, etc. The most dangerous is not pictured here, the African buffalo. They charge vehicles, a long with an occasional elephant.
The 70-200 is a standard wildlife lens in my stable, always used as a supplement to a second body with a longer lens.
OK, you are shooting from a vehicle… Got it.
The most potentially dangerous wildlife I photograph are bears, most often black bears but occasionally brown bears. I don’t shoot from a vehicle, and I’d never get that close with that kind of protection.
Africa and India where Jason shoots are a very different shooting environment. Even on walking safaris, wildlife can be much closer and, for the most part, the animals are far more habituated to people and vehicles than a bear would be in North America.
That doesn’t mean they’re safe or predictable — buffalo, elephant, hippo, etc. are obviously extremely dangerous — but the access and behavior are very different. A 70-200 can be very useful there because you’re often working in much closer proximity, whether from a vehicle or sometimes even on foot with experienced guides.
May 09, 2026 at 06:54 PM
Previous versions of robert_in_ca's message #17035265 « The 70-200 2.8 As a Wildlife Lens? »
