Lens for Polar Bear

[jacky8087]

I am going to a cruise tour to Arctic Circle for polar bear but I dont know how far will they gonna be, the guidance suggests to bring 10x to 25x binoculars. And I just realized I dont have any long focal length lens for my 6D mark I. My original thought was to buy a canon 100-400mm II paired with the extender 2x, but after I did research found out that this combination is not practical.

I would like some sugguestions for new lens and probably extender, also is the tripod necessary as I never use these large lens before?

Thanks in advanced.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@Waddizzle wrote:

---

@jacky8087 wrote:
HAHA I will. Do you think tripod is necessary? if so which one should I have?
Now I have Manfrotto befree.

---

Not enough tripod for shooting wildlife with a super telepphoto lens, IMHO.  It could work if you do not raise the center column.  That lens and camera combo would be top heavy with the center column fully extended.  It will almost certainly topple once you start moving the camera/lens [ 6D & 150-600 ] around. ...

---

Waddizzle often makes the (perfectly valid) point that raising a tripod's center column raises the center of gravity of the camera/tripod assembly and makes it less stable. But that effect can be compensated for by hanging a weight, such as a bag of sand, from the bottom end of the center column. (Most center columns have a hook or ring to facilitate that.) The weight, if it's heavy enough, lowers the COG back to where it should be to restore the necessary stability.

[Waddizzle]

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

---

@Waddizzle wrote:

---

@jacky8087 wrote:
HAHA I will. Do you think tripod is necessary? if so which one should I have?
Now I have Manfrotto befree.

---

Not enough tripod for shooting wildlife with a super telepphoto lens, IMHO.  It could work if you do not raise the center column.  That lens and camera combo would be top heavy with the center column fully extended.  It will almost certainly topple once you start moving the camera/lens [ 6D & 150-600 ] around. ...

---

Waddizzle often makes the (perfectly valid) point that raising a tripod's center column raises the center of gravity of the camera/tripod assembly and makes it less stable. But that effect can be compensated for by hanging a weight, such as a bag of sand, from the bottom end of the center column. (Most center columns have a hook or ring to facilitate that.) The weight, if it's heavy enough, lowers the COG back to where it should be to restore the necessary stability.

---

Yes, a sand bag could stabilize it, but who wants to lug a bag sand around. Not me.  A monopod is a great tool when you are on the move, especially with a big 150-600.  Yeah, those lenses can be handheld, but for how long?  Having support helps.

Besides, the real problem with the “BeFree” travel tripod is that it is only rated at 8.8 pounds load capacity.  No doubt, the head itself plays a large role in coming up with that figure.  In any case, 8.8 pounds is far too light for the camera lens combo.  The head lacks friction control, which is a must have feature with a ball head.

[ebiggs1]

"Do you think tripod is necessary?"

Personally I would not take one.  I might take my monopod. Some cruise lines do not allow tripods so check with yours if you decide to take one.  Monopods are almost always approved.

Check out the Tamron G2. It will work beautifully with your camera. It will be totally handholdable.  You might want to practice a bit before you go so it isn't a learn on the fly situation.   You should be shooting in reasonable lighting conditions.  Unless you try some dusk or dawn shots the SS and AF should be of no concern.

A close friend of mine just got back from Africa.  He took the Siggy S on a 1Dx Mk II and did not take a tripod.  His shots are fantastic.

You are gone too long to rent so forget that idea.  But you might want to take one of the better Powershot P&S cameras.  I always take one. I have a G1x.

[jacky8087]

Many Thanks for all your suggestions. I think I will get the Tamron G2 and monopod with a gimbal.

[Waddizzle]

---

@jacky8087 wrote:
Many Thanks for all your suggestions. I think I will get the Tamron G2 and monopod with a gimbal.

---

Personally, I have never used a gimbal, so my experience with them is observation and logic. Stick to a tilt head llike the Kirk MPA-2 with a monopod.  I do not think polar bears will be taking flight, nor moving very quickly.

Gimbals tend to run large, and require a stable platform to properly balance, something which a monopod many not give you.  Because of the way they need to be balanced, I would think that a gimbal would work better with a prime, than a variable length zoom.  As the length of a zoom changes, so does its’ CoG, Center of Gravity, which changes how well it balances.  You could balance it fully extended, and lock it down, though.

BTW, that is a pretty good choice of lens.  Get in some practice with it.  You probably want to use it mostly at f/8 aperture.

[ebiggs1]

"I think I will get the Tamron G2 and monopod with a gimbal."

You don't really need any head on a monopod.  You can get a ball head but it isn't necessary.  Just bolt the monopod to the lens.  Less is more sometimes.

[TCampbell]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"I think I will get the Tamron G2 and monopod with a gimbal."

You don't really need any head on a monopod.  You can get a ball head but it isn't necessary.  Just bolt the monopod to the lens.  Less is more sometimes.

---

I agree... since it's a monopod, you can tilt it as needed.  If you want to do some extreme tilting... then maybe a ballhead would be an nice addition.

A gimbal head is going to be big and take up a bit of space when packing for travel.  

The benefit of a gimbal is that when used with a tripod, you can adjust the gimbal to neutrally balance the camera at it's center of mass.  You do this, using arca-swiss type rails to slide the camera forward or backward to balance it (camera + lens).  Once you find that  balance point, the platform of the gimbal can be raised or lowered to find that balance point as well.  Now you've balanced it front to back and top to bottom.    At THIS point, you can point the camera anywhere you want and you don't have to snug down the axes ... the camera will just stay wherever you point it.  This allows the photographer to treat the camera "like a tailgunner" ... say you were shooting birds in flight.  You want stability but you don't want to have to lock it down because that would prevent you from tracking the subjects.  That's the major benefit of a gimbal.  You can "let go" and it'll just stay there.  Obviously you cannot just "let go" of a monopod (it would fall over and crash).  A gimbal doesn't offer the same benefit on a monopod.

When you're on a monopod without a head, you can also swivel or tilt as needed ... just not as extreme on the "tilt" side of things.  e.g. to point "striaght overhead" would require that you lay the monopod down on the ground.  That's the limitation.  But as you're unlikely to need to point to anything nearly overhead, that's usually not an issue.  If you want to be able to tilt it up or down to more extremes without having to lean the monopod so much, you can add a ballhead to it (I use a ballhead that has a "tension" know in addition to the brake knob.  This allows me to apply some friction so I can push it around without needing to lock it in place and it still gives me support.

[kvbarkley]

Did anyone look at the link I provided with Michael Reichman's discussion of gimbals above? He is talking about this exact situation - but penguins instead of polar bears 8^).

[Waddizzle]

---

@kvbarkley wrote:

Did anyone look at the link I provided with Michael Reichman's discussion of gimbals above? He is talking about this exact situation - but penguins instead of polar bears 8^).

---

Yeah, he is using the gimbal as if it were a tilt head.

[jacky8087]

Hello everyone

apart from manfrotto 685B, is there any alternative monopod as good as that one?

Jacky