Preparing a photo-tour in Iceland : AF tracking tips on SL

[Bohns]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello all

 

I saw wonderfull shots of birds and eagle with the SL and 90-280 made by Tina Manley. It seems that AF face recognition setting was used for tracking. It’s surprising : I was thinking that this AF configuration was needing a «human» face to locate eyes, noze, mouth for initiating the tracking.

 

I would really appreciate that Tina Manley or anybody detail a little more the AF setting which could be used used for such shots : I assume AFc mode was selected. I already read the « Auto (face recognition) » AF mode selection. But which burst drive mode was choosed : « slow », « intermediary », « full speed » ? I know this choice could either help or be detrimental to tracking capability and results.

 

I am preparing a photo travel to Iceland. I may have opportunities for shooting sea birds and other wildlife. But I need to decide between bringing the SL with both zooms and some M primes or my Canon gear (1DX2 + 24-105 v2 + 100-400 v2 + extender). I am not necessarily concerned about loosing reach, but more about lacking speed (Canon lenses) vs. limited AF tracking capability for birds or wildlife. I will need to trade off for weight reasons. My first choice would be SL kit, but I fear loosing some opportunities due to AF tracking limitations.

 

Any thought or advices ?

 

Thanks, and regards,

Stef.

 

P.S.: I sent as well a private message to Tina Manley, but I think that other than just me may be interested by the answers.

[jaapv]

I moved back to Leica from Canon’s long lenses for image quality reasons long ago. Manual focus never held me back for wildlife. AF is often the inferior choice. Leica’s AF should suffice, although Canon’s is arguably faster. Birds, especially in flight, is an entirely different matter.

[thighslapper]

We all end up taking more gear and gear with more potential capabilities than we realistically need for 'fear of losing some opportunities' ....... 

 

I have far more often cursed the amount of stuff I am carrying and the irritation of changing lenses in bad conditions than the occasional 'lost' shot due to lack of 'better' equipment. 

 

If your trip is for pleasure take the gear you enjoy using and the minimum required to cover 90% of what you anticipate...... trying to cover the other 10% will just cause more trouble than it is worth. 

 

Whatever you do you will end up with the same depressingly high percentage of crappy shots ..... but the memories and the few % of good ones will make it worthwhile  

 

ps. my personal choice would be SL, 24-90, sub 21mm wide angle, decent tripod ....... plus the 90-280 but be prepared to leave it in the car or hotel unless I thought I would really need it on the day. That's worked fine for me on all my recent landscape/holiday trips. 

Edited March 17, 2018 by thighslapper

[Bohns]

Thank you Jaapv and Thighslapper.

 

I clearly now prefer using my SL and my M240 than my Canon gear. It’s true that at least 80% of the photos I may catch in Iceland will be static (landscapes). My fear is more on the birds and wildlife side : I will probably have very few occasions in my remaining life to see Atlantic puffins, whales, seals or Arctic foxes. The choice of the camera will of course not affect the event, nor will it affect the souvenir. But it can affect the materialization of the event and its souvenir.

 

This is the reason of my questioning. But I agree : fast and reliable AF tracking is just a tool and a « security ».

[LocalHero1953]

AF with face recognition defaults to multipoint when it can't see a face.

 

I think that, although you will always find some who make a success of it, the SL is not as well suited to fast moving small creatures as a Nikon DSLR or Sony A9. So if I was going to Iceland and birds were one of main ambitions for shooting there, I would not take a SL. I went to Iceland with a M240 and a few primes, and I was surprised that I got a few shots of BIF that were acceptable - by taking a vast number that were not. The SL's tracking AF would probably have increased that proportion, but I doubt I'd get many that were publishable (I use the SL's tracking AF for dancers, but they are bigger and slower than puffins). I simply recognised that, with the kit I had, I was not going to get good BIF shots. No camera is good at everything, and there's plenty of other stuff to shoot in Iceland!

Edited March 17, 2018 by LocalHero1953

[jaapv]

As I understand, Puffins are fairly static and easily approachable, Whales will benefit by  O.I.S. as the boat will be moving, Seals are easy and Foxes a matter of luck. My advice would, taken from non-Arctic wildlife experience, be not to try and look like or compete with BBC wildlife photographers but take the gear you are comfortable with and can easily carry.

Your mind and memory are the best camera you have with you. Your photographs are meant to toggle your memory, and should one or two be good enough to interest others, all the better.

 The best advice I was ever given by a well-known wildlife  photographer (Ian Michler, now turned photojournalist for NatGeo and conservationist) was: "Sit back, enjoy and only bring the camera to your eye when you understand and anticipate what is happening."

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Puffins are small and fly fast close to the ground or cliffs. On the ground they live in burrows; at the surface they like keeping their heads at grass tip level.

Not easy to photograph with a M or with AF, though possible if you pick your moment. At the main puffin-viewing sites in Iceland, you are kept back by fences from approaching them, though I guess there are likely to be locations that are uncontrolled.

[jaapv]

As I said, birds in flight is a different ball game , especially small and fast ones . It does need training even with all focus aids, especially small birds. If I were interested, I'd use a camera that wil do long 30 fps 4K bursts and has fast tracking autofocus. That would mean Olympus or Panasonic.

 

Big birds are easy, using manual focus:

 

M8, Tele-Elmar 135:

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

DMR, Vario-Elmar 105-280+1.4x

 

 

 

 

 

 

[LocalHero1953]

Agreed.

My point about puffins flying close to the ground is that they compete for AF with the grass/rock/sea background - you rarely see them against a clear sky background.

[jaapv]

Yes - in that case manual focus only As so often with wildlife.

[scott kirkpatrick]

Puffins like cliff edges, and can be approached from the side.  Here's an example:

 

http://www.pbase.com/skirkp/image/151834036/original.jpg

 

Taken in 2013 with early Olympus 16 MPx gear.  Our puffin lens was the 75/1.8.  This was a family trip, so no time for stalking critters.

 

The same applies to puffins flying to and from the sea:

 

http://www.pbase.com/skirkp/image/151834037/large.jpg

Edited March 18, 2018 by scott kirkpatrick

[thighslapper]

The main problem here is that we expect to end up with images comparable to wildlife photographers who spend days at a single location in hides or in a wet bivvy bag for a handful of decent images.

 

For the average general photographer luck plays a much greater part ...... so I think taking realistic expectations is more important than the gear you pack ........

[LocalHero1953]

The main problem here is that we expect to end up with images comparable to wildlife photographers who spend days at a single location in hides or in a wet bivvy bag for a handful of decent images.

 

For the average general photographer luck plays a much greater part ...... so I think taking realistic expectations is more important than the gear you pack ........

Exactly - which is why I don't really try wildlife photography - I just look.

[jaapv]

The main problem here is that we expect to end up with images comparable to wildlife photographers who spend days at a single location in hides or in a wet bivvy bag for a handful of decent images.

 

For the average general photographer luck plays a much greater part ...... so I think taking realistic expectations is more important than the gear you pack ........

I don't think it is luck.  In my case an interest in Nature led to photography.  I am quite happy with my results

[RoySmith]

I understand the dilemma. Last summer I did a 16 day self supported kayak trip in Haida Gwaii with 2 buddies. I wanted a kit that would fit in a pelican case on the deck of the kayak so I would have access while paddling. Even if had the 90-280, it would have been too large so sadly I left the SL at home and took a Canon 7D MkII with a Canon 17-55 2.8 zoom and the Canon 100-400 II zoom. Did get some BIF photos of eagles and a great blue heron, and some good photos of oyster catchers. Saw one puffin zooming just over the waters surface but did get a photo. Photographing puffins is still on the bucket list. The photos are here:

 

https://roywsmith.smugmug.com/Travel/Gwaii-Haanas

 

Roy

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[meerec]

I understand the dilemma. Last summer I did a 16 day self supported kayak trip in Haida Gwaii with 2 buddies. I wanted a kit that would fit in a pelican case on the deck of the kayak so I would have access while paddling. Even if had the 90-280, it would have been too large so sadly I left the SL at home and took a Canon 7D MkII with a Canon 17-55 2.8 zoom and the Canon 100-400 II zoom. Did get some BIF photos of eagles and a great blue heron, and some good photos of oyster catchers. Saw one puffin zooming just over the waters surface but did get a photo. Photographing puffins is still on the bucket list. The photos are here:https://roywsmith.smugmug.com/Travel/Gwaii-Haanas

Roy

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Hi Roy, that Canon 100-400 lens isn’t any smaller than 90-280 in my humble opinion. And is not as good.

[tritentrue]

I moved back to Leica from Canon’s long lenses for image quality reasons long ago. Manual focus never held me back for wildlife. AF is often the inferior choice. Leica’s AF should suffice, although Canon’s is arguably faster. Birds, especially in flight, is an entirely different matter.

 

Regarding AF vs MF, I agree totally.  Also about big birds being easier to nail in flight.

 

Puffins have a consistent but fast flight, and at first look easy to capture.  The problem I had with them, using AF, was that they were flying either directly towards or directly away from my vantage point, rather than across my view.

 

There are plenty of other equally photogenic birds in Iceland, some of which are more accessible.

 

Not from Iceland, but from my neighborhood, shot last week with the 280 f/4 APO+1.4X, cropped at about 40% . . .

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

[helged]

My best advice, for birds, would be to bring a 300mm - or longer - lens. I do not find the Leica SL af appropriate for unpredictable bif. For static bird photography, however, the SL is excellent and possibly one of the best options around due to it's magnificent evf.

 

If I was going to Iceland today I would be prioritising according to the following:

• Very compact gear for general photography: SL + SL 24-90. This combo should serve me well for most shooting. A brilliant combo. Add 1-2 batteries and some memory cards, and I would happily cross the country for weeks...
• Extending to wider focal length(s): SL + SL 24-90, plus WATE (16-21mm-M)  or  Voigtländer 15mm version III. Yes, I am quite sure that I would bring with me a wide lens for water falls, beaches, wide mountain ranges, glaciers, dramatic sky scenes, etc...
• Extending to longer focal lengths: SL + SL 24-90 plus SL 90-280. This combo will also serve for some bird photography, including puffins (similar focal length to this one). For static bird photography, the CL+90-280 give you 420mm. Yes, I am quite sure that I would bring with me the CL if I bring the 90+280, particularly since Leica doesn't offer SL extender(s). Yet.  .
• If bird photography was part of the mix, but not the most important ingredient: SL + SL 24-90, plus Nikon D500 + 300mm f4e PF (fresnel) + 1.4 TC III extender. The D500 is the smallest, lightest tele-combo with outstandingly fast and reliable af I can think about. I guess Canon has something similar. Note that D500 has cropped sensor, so the 300mm will give you a 450mm reach (or 630mm with the extender).
• If bird photography was the main activity, I would start with a 400mm f2.8 (alternatively 500mm f4) on a state-of-the-art body (in my case Nikon D5, possibly Nikon D850), and then add on bodies/lenses depending on practical constraints.

I think the first and last points are worth an additional comment: If bird photography is only part of the mix, I would build the gear around SL+24-90. If bird photography is the major part of the trip, everything will be focussed around a body with fast and reliable af and a long-ish lens. Plus a tripod. For the latter, Leica SL is not the starting point.

 

Lots of options... But if I was travelling with friends that was not that photo nerdish that I happen to be, I would bring SL+ SL 24-90, plus WATE (16-21mm-M)  or  Voigtländer 15mm version III. This is a small package, very well suited for landscape and environmental photography, and something I can bring with me day and night without interfering with the interest of the rest of the group. For static bird photography, I would likely add SL 90-280 and the CL. This eliminates additional chargers and batteries, and 420mm is quite ok. 

 

For all but the extreme bird photo gear, I would bring with me a smallish (but sturdy) tripod for long exposures and static bird photography. Plus a few filters.

 

Remember that Iceland can have a lot of weather, so the weather sealing of the SL-system (body+lenses) can be useful to have...

 

And regarding carrying e.g. SL+24-90 or SL+90-280 for some time, I highly recommend to use a sling-type of strap. I use the Magpul-sling coupled to the Really Right Stuff QD-mounts, the latter integrated in many (most) of the RSS plates. More comfortable straps are available, see this thread, or the slings offered by e.g. BlackRapid, although I am not 100% happy with the screw fastener/fixation. Actually, if I carry two bodies with large lenses, I use two Magpul-slings. In this way, I can quickly switch between the two.

 

Enjoy...!

[LocalHero1953]

......................................................

 

Remember that Iceland can have a lot of weather, so the weather sealing of the SL-system (body+lenses) can be useful to have...

..................................................

Not just weather. You can get some great shots close to the big waterfalls (and Geysir) as long as you don't have to worry about spray.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[tritentrue]

And don't forget your 21mm SEM. But leave the tripod at home; these ain't the "cotton candy" kind of falls (done to death already, anyway) . . . 

 

M240 & 21 SEM . . . 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!