I really enjoyed your video. It was clear, well paced and you have a great speaking voice.. Which longer lens did you finally settle on and are you happy with the glass upgrade? What do yo like most and what don’t you enjoy the most out of the longer lens? Keep shooting…and talking about it. It’s almost like we were in Florida with you. Good luck! Will
Thanks! I ended up getting the Sony 200-600. I do like that lens but it’s so heavy. I always need a monopod with it and when walking trails it becomes annoying. The 70-300 is so much smaller and lighter. But I still use the 200-600 because of the reach. I can see why some wildlife photographers choose to do a micro 4/3 system instead of full frame because they can get something like a 200-600 without the lens being so big. Also I typically don’t take my 200-600 out that much because it’s so big. But the image quality is great on it. I’m still glad I have it.
its so much fun to watch the video, and i think the focal le nght looks amazing in your style. whats the brand of it? #9 looks outstanding while #2 brings in so much peace by catching the flight.
I honestly really like the images here. 70-300mm isn't enough for a classic tight-cropped wildlife portrait but you did make some fantastic environmental portraits. Great use of negative space as well with the alligator head crossing the water at 4:40.
Great live demo and showing settings on the camera screen. Im still wondering how you manage to set everything so quickly, nature has moved on by the time im set up 😂
Yeah I do miss some shots because I’m not fast enough but most times I leave ISO and aperture where I set it and only change shutter to make it faster. Sometimes that means shooting at higher ISO just to have that flexibility. I could probably put that on auto but I’ve never tried that. I like having full control.
amazing photos, 300mm is hard for waterfowl but very doable I used a 100-300 on my 12mp Canon camera years ago and I have many keeper photos but obviously I also had many photos get tossed after cropping due to it being too low res.
for i would say city wildlife, zoo it is ok. i have a 70-300, 450 en video and you get nice shot. For full wildlife, i bet you need minimum 600, or 800.
Hi very nice..... I'm learning photography...i want to ask you one thing that you are not bothering about the exposure meter which is most of the time -3 or -7 while clicking pictures..... I always try to keep setting the exposure meter to 0.0 in each and every shot....which is annoying at times....pls advise is this necessary to keep exposure 0 all the time??
@@JayMacroPhotos I’m thinking of probably doing that. The only thing is would I be missing out on much below 150mm in terms of telephoto landscape photography (240mm on my camera)?
I tend to lean toward more reach because I like wildlife a little more than landscape but if you are the opposite and you like landscape more, then I could see using the 100-400 as a good mid ground. The reason I would go with the 150-600 is because the 70-300 just didn’t reach enough for me with wildlife so I got a 200-600 and I really like that lens.
I’ve owned one canon L lens before switching to Sony and it was great quality. I’m not sure the quality of the 150-600. You’ve probably already tried this but Dustin Abbott does really great reviews on lenses and You could probably find both those lenses on his channel. But if you are doing landscape then you’ll more than likely be around the f8 range which most lenses look good at that aperture. I think the L glass really comes into play if you shoot at the lower end like f2.8 for edge sharpness. So you might not need that kind of quality doing Landscape at f8. But that’s just my opinion though. Others might say differently.
I really enjoyed your video. It was clear, well paced and you have a great speaking voice.. Which longer lens did you finally settle on and are you happy with the glass upgrade?
What do yo like most and what don’t you enjoy the most out of the longer lens?
Keep shooting…and talking about it. It’s almost like we were in Florida with you.
Good luck!
Will
Thanks! I ended up getting the Sony 200-600. I do like that lens but it’s so heavy. I always need a monopod with it and when walking trails it becomes annoying. The 70-300 is so much smaller and lighter. But I still use the 200-600 because of the reach. I can see why some wildlife photographers choose to do a micro 4/3 system instead of full frame because they can get something like a 200-600 without the lens being so big. Also I typically don’t take my 200-600 out that much because it’s so big. But the image quality is great on it. I’m still glad I have it.
@@JayMacroPhotos or you can get a 50-400 with a 61mp camera to shot apsc mode and even crop further to 8mp. The photo should be still very good.
@@CC-gt3ro yeah I have considered upgrading to a higher mp camera. I might do that during end of year sales.
Awsome shots bro, i recently bought a 70-300mm too and now searching some cool shots on youtube just like you did
its so much fun to watch the video, and i think the focal le nght looks amazing in your style. whats the brand of it?
#9 looks outstanding while #2 brings in so much peace by catching the flight.
@@stefanstefan566 thanks! I’m using Sony brand. A7iii for camera
I learned that as well, so I bought a 150-600mm still love my 70-300mm EF tho.
I honestly really like the images here. 70-300mm isn't enough for a classic tight-cropped wildlife portrait but you did make some fantastic environmental portraits. Great use of negative space as well with the alligator head crossing the water at 4:40.
Thanks for the encouragement!
I really like #4! Great photos!
Thanks for voting!
Sick photos dude! Doing our Everglades wildlife some justice with your photography. I'm also looking at grabbing a 70-300 for my Panasonic
Thanks!
Great live demo and showing settings on the camera screen. Im still wondering how you manage to set everything so quickly, nature has moved on by the time im set up 😂
Yeah I do miss some shots because I’m not fast enough but most times I leave ISO and aperture where I set it and only change shutter to make it faster. Sometimes that means shooting at higher ISO just to have that flexibility. I could probably put that on auto but I’ve never tried that. I like having full control.
amazing photos, 300mm is hard for waterfowl but very doable I used a 100-300 on my 12mp Canon camera years ago and I have many keeper photos but obviously I also had many photos get tossed after cropping due to it being too low res.
for i would say city wildlife, zoo it is ok. i have a 70-300, 450 en video and you get nice shot. For full wildlife, i bet you need minimum 600, or 800.
Oh definitely city and zoo are good environments for this lens.
But it is long enough if you take a full frame 70-300 lens and put it on a APS-C camera, then you get 450mm
Yeah that’s definitely better
Thats what i will do
What do you think about mft sensor camera like olympus?
@@mees8211 I haven’t tried those but I would think they have some good reach
You can use apsc on full frame camera too. My a7c still give me 10mp more than my 32 inch 4k screen and print very well at 8x11 and 5x7
Hi very nice..... I'm learning photography...i want to ask you one thing that you are not bothering about the exposure meter which is most of the time -3 or -7 while clicking pictures..... I always try to keep setting the exposure meter to 0.0 in each and every shot....which is annoying at times....pls advise is this necessary to keep exposure 0 all the time??
Actually I do that on purpose. I typically expose it around -1 and then do post processing later. It’s for highlights.
#1 and #10 for me. Greetings
Thanks for voting
But remember tho on apsc cameras it has a 1.5x crop or 1.6x canon crop so it would be about 105-450
That’s true. Much better on a crop sensor.
I have a canon crop. Between the 70-300 L, a sigma 100-400, or a 150-600mm - which would be the best option for landscape and wildlife?
I personally would go for the 150-600 and then also have one wide lens just in case you want a drastic wide view for landscape.
@@JayMacroPhotos I’m thinking of probably doing that. The only thing is would I be missing out on much below 150mm in terms of telephoto landscape photography (240mm on my camera)?
Also is there not much benefit of the 70-300mm L in terms of IQ and stuff compared to the other two?
I tend to lean toward more reach because I like wildlife a little more than landscape but if you are the opposite and you like landscape more, then I could see using the 100-400 as a good mid ground. The reason I would go with the 150-600 is because the 70-300 just didn’t reach enough for me with wildlife so I got a 200-600 and I really like that lens.
I’ve owned one canon L lens before switching to Sony and it was great quality. I’m not sure the quality of the 150-600. You’ve probably already tried this but Dustin Abbott does really great reviews on lenses and You could probably find both those lenses on his channel. But if you are doing landscape then you’ll more than likely be around the f8 range which most lenses look good at that aperture. I think the L glass really comes into play if you shoot at the lower end like f2.8 for edge sharpness. So you might not need that kind of quality doing Landscape at f8. But that’s just my opinion though. Others might say differently.
Very nice video!
Thanks
You have the lens in the title but what's the camera ? Thank you
I’m using Sony A7III
@@JayMacroPhotos thank you!
Nice one my friend.
what camera didnyou use?
Sony A7III
No #2 and No#8
Thanks for voting!
What Camera did you use?
Sony A7III
Were the photos taken in manual mode?
No these were autofocus
@@JayMacroPhotos But I didn't just mean focus, I also meant shutter speed and aperture
@@pitthe7676 oh sorry, no I shot in manual so I set all of that myself.
Please…it’s Heron. Not herring.
Oh haha thanks! I didn’t realize I said it wrong.
camera name?
Sony a7III
2 and 6
Hi Polly, thanks for voting!