k-h.a.w wrote:
The first 2 images sure look Ike a fight.
The last image looks to me like an adult feeding a young.
In any case stunning images! WOW!
Thanks, K-H.
If taken on its own merits then maybe but the beak tip is against the eye. Even though the lower one is a juvenile and the aggressor is an adult (I think) it certainly wasn't feeding. I have some more images with the beak jammed into the side of the body. It was pretty crazy to watch. The aggressor has been in my yard a lot recently and is so aggressive that it buzzes and chases other birds like finches. Usually hummers have no issues sitting in the trees with the finches, typically only annoying raptors and other hummingbirds.
I'll post up some more shots in the next day or two to show some more entertaining positions they managed to get into
arbitrage wrote:
If taken on its own merits then maybe but the beak tip is against the eye. Even though the lower one is a juvenile and the aggressor is an adult (I think) it certainly wasn't feeding. I have some more images with the beak jammed into the side of the body. It was pretty crazy to watch. The aggressor has been in my yard a lot recently and is so aggressive that it buzzes and chases other birds like finches. Usually hummers have no issues sitting in the trees with the finches, typically only annoying raptors and other hummingbirds.
I'll post up some more shots in the next day or two to show some more entertaining positions they managed to get into ...Show more →
Thanks for the explanations.
Incredible aggressive behavior.
I hope the juvenile survives this.
arbitrage wrote:
This was a pretty brutal fight on top of a poppy that went on for at least 30s. I've got another 25 images with all sorts of different interactions that I will work up and post later.
Awesome series, Geoff
I have been to this location twice previously and both times, based on the distance to the action, I reverted to the 200-600mm lens. But this morning, the falcons were quite far away. And this is one of the juvenile peregrine falcons from this morning. This was about as close as I could get to them and I had to crop the file by quite a bit, too. Thankfully, I had the A7r IV with me...
Hi all. I hope it's ok to ask this question on this thread.
I ordered this lens awhile back in hopes it would get here for a trip I'm taking to Yellowstone next week. It just shipped yesterday and will get here just before I leave. Not soon enough to ship up to where I'm staying. (I tried to change the address B&H was shipping it to but they would have had to cancel the order and reprocess).
Is it possible to take this lens as carry on? It would have to be a secondary carry on as I will have my regular camera bag. Or would it be better check in as piece of luggage perhaps in a Pelican Case? I would love to hear feedback from anyone who has traveled by plane with this lens.
Thank you! The images in this gallery are responsible for depleting my bank account
DuelingLenses wrote:
Hi all. I hope it's ok to ask this question on this thread.
I ordered this lens awhile back in hopes it would get here for a trip I'm taking to Yellowstone next week. It just shipped yesterday and will get here just before I leave. Not soon enough to ship up to where I'm staying. (I tried to change the address B&H was shipping it to but they would have had to cancel the order and reprocess).
Is it possible to take this lens as carry on? It would have to be a secondary carry on as I will have my regular camera bag. Or would it be better check in as piece of luggage perhaps in a Pelican Case? I would love to hear feedback from anyone who has traveled by plane with this lens.
Thank you! The images in this gallery are responsible for depleting my bank account
Brett, welcome to the club! I didn't know that you are into wildlife photography, as well.
At any rate, there is no way I would check my camera gear in. I would strongly suggest for you to carry that on with you into the cabin. I am using a regular roller carry-on bag, like a Samsonite or American Tourister or something similar. I put the lens in the center and I am using a lens cradle from on of my TT bags, like a Lens Taxi or so, to secure that. I put all other gear, including up to 3 camera bodies, both TCs, the 100-400mm lens and 24-105mm lens around it. Those individual items are inside TT padded pouches, bags or something similar.
Yes, it is heavy but even at my age, I do not have any problems lifting the carry-on bag up to the overhead luggage compartment.
I took a picture of my setup back then. Although the gear in that image is not the same but you get the "gist" of what I meant. Actually, the lens there was probably my adapted Canon 600mm Mark II from yesteryear.
DuelingLenses wrote:
Hi all. I hope it's ok to ask this question on this thread.
I ordered this lens awhile back in hopes it would get here for a trip I'm taking to Yellowstone next week. It just shipped yesterday and will get here just before I leave. Not soon enough to ship up to where I'm staying. (I tried to change the address B&H was shipping it to but they would have had to cancel the order and reprocess).
Is it possible to take this lens as carry on? It would have to be a secondary carry on as I will have my regular camera bag. Or would it be better check in as piece of luggage perhaps in a Pelican Case? I would love to hear feedback from anyone who has traveled by plane with this lens.
Thank you! The images in this gallery are responsible for depleting my bank account
I do not have the Sony 600mm GM. It would be nice, but I have the 200-600mm G. I would be extremely hesitant in packing my expenisve lenses and this would be an extremely expensive lens in the hold of the plane. I also suspect that in this environment, that you would have a problem in carrying the lens in a separate bag unless your regular bag was the size of a personal item instead of a carry on size. I have a number of Think Tank Roller bags and can suggest that one of these may fit the bill for you and you should probably be able to pack the lens and all of your gear in one of these.
Presently, Think Tank is offering a 20% discount on all of their products (through June 21) either through them or any of their authorized dealers. You have to use the code ThinkTank20 at check out.
As an example, for my last trip to and from Florida I used my Airport Advantage roller (the smallest in the Think Tank Airport roller series) and was able to pack my 200-600mm lens attached to my A7rIII. I was also able to pack my 100-400mm GM and an assortment of 4 other manual focus and the Sony 1.4X and 2X TCs stacked and attached and 3 other Sony A7r/A7rII camera bodies as well as my Markins 20i with Markins Bird head Tripod Ball head. This roller would be too small for you.
The new Airport Advantage XT may just fit your 600mm GM lens unmounted. This is the replacement for the recently discontinued Airport Advantage Plus roller.
Remember if purchasing from Think Tank to include the mentioned code at Check out. I believe that for B+H photo as an example offers the discount immediately.
Another and possibly better option may be to purchase the recently discontinued Airport Advantage Plus roller. I have one of these and I like it very much as I also like my smaller Airport Advantage roller. The Airport Advantage Plus roller should be large enough for your lens and I suspect mounted to one of your Sony bodies at 20.5" long for the internal dimensions. Amazon shows 2 of these as still available for $231.80. But, the 20% discount I would suspect would not apply as it has been discontinued.
Thank you Joshua. I always love to shoot wildlife when I go back home to Glacier. And I'm sure I'll do much more once I have this lens.
I wish I would have had it when I shot this guy last year. Adapted Canon 600mm. Heavy crop. The 1.4x or 2x extender would have been nice with the Sony.
I do not have the Sony 600mm GM. It would be nice, but I have the 200-600mm G. I would be extremely hesitant in packing my expenisve lenses and this would be an extremely expensive lens in the hold of the plane. I also suspect that in this environment, that you would have a problem in carrying the lens in a separate bag unless your regular bag was the size of a personal item instead of a carry on size. I have a number of Think Tank Roller bags and can suggest that one of these may fit the bill for you and you should probably be able to pack the lens and all of your gear in one of these.
Presently, Think Tank is offering a 20% discount on all of their products (through June 21) either through them or any of their authorized dealers. You have to use the code ThinkTank20 at check out.
As an example, for my last trip to and from Florida I used my Airport Advantage roller (the smallest in the Think Tank Airport roller series) and was able to pack my 200-600mm lens attached to my A7rIII. I was also able to pack my 100-400mm GM and an assortment of 4 other manual focus and the Sony 1.4X and 2X TCs stacked and attached and 3 other Sony A7r/A7rII camera bodies as well as my Markins 20i with Markins Bird head Tripod Ball head. This roller would be too small for you.
The new Airport Advantage XT may just fit your 600mm GM lens unmounted. This is the replacement for the recently discontinued Airport Advantage Plus roller.
Remember if purchasing from Think Tank to include the mentioned code at Check out. I believe that for B+H photo as an example offers the discount immediately.
Another and possibly better option may be to purchase the recently discontinued Airport Advantage Plus roller. I have one of these and I like it very much as I also like my smaller Airport Advantage roller. The Airport Advantage Plus roller should be large enough for your lens and I suspect mounted to one of your Sony bodies at 20.5" long for the internal dimensions. Amazon shows 2 of these as still available for $231.80. But, the 20% discount I would suspect would not apply as it has been discontinued.
Thanks Rich! I just sent Think Tank an email asking for their recommendation. I really appreciate the feedback. Hopefully will be posting some pics here soon
DuelingLenses wrote:
Thanks Rich! I just sent Think Tank an email asking for their recommendation. I really appreciate the feedback. Hopefully will be posting some pics here soon
Brett
Hi Brett,
Hope that helps. I forgot to mention, to be able to load so much gear- lenses and cameras into the Think Tank rollers, I load all or most of my Sony cameras in the vertical orientation since the Sony bodies are so small they fit within the depth capabilities of the rollers. Loading the bodies this way (even with my L Brackets on the camera bodies) takes up less space allowing more to be packed in the roller.
DuelingLenses wrote:
Thanks Rich! I just sent Think Tank an email asking for their recommendation. I really appreciate the feedback. Hopefully will be posting some pics here soon
Brett
Brett, I do like TT products but their roller bags are heavy , IMHO. I do have 2 of them and I just stopped using them now. I did compare them side-by-side and I couldn't believe the weight difference between any of them to the lightweight but non-photography designed options. That's the drawback of a sturdy design, I guess. I bought my 23-inch (including rollers) a few years ago. I took it twice to Costa Rica, once to Ecuador, several times to Bosque, several times to Europe (although without the 600mm lens) among others and it is still going strong.
AGeoJO wrote:
Brett, I do like TT products but their roller bags are heavy , IMHO. I do have 2 of them and I just stopped using them now. I did compare them side-by-side and I couldn't believe the weight difference between any of them to the lightweight but non-photography designed options. That's the drawback of a sturdy design, I guess. I bought my 23-inch (including rollers) a few years ago. I took it twice to Costa Rica, once to Ecuador, several times to Bosque, several times to Europe (although without the 600mm lens) among others and it is still going strong.
Yes the Think Tank rollers may be a little heavy. In the case of the Airport Advantage Plus, if it will do what Brett requires, it weighs 6.9 pounds. This roller probably weighs several pounds more than many standard off the rack 22" none photo rollers, but it probably has better (replaceable) smoother rolling wheels; better, stronger (replaceable as far as I know) collapsible roller handle; 3 handles (top, side, and bottom); plus better stronger zipper; business card slot; photo padding and dividers, etc.
Listed as Uncommon for Vancouver Island it is great that a nesting pair of Bullock's Orioles have setup shop at a local birding area and are actively weaving their nest. Finally got the male out in the open (sort of) this morning after many days trying for him.
, IMHO. I do have 2 of them and I just stopped using them now. I did compare them side-by-side and I couldn't believe the weight difference between any of them to the lightweight but non-photography designed options. That's the drawback of a sturdy design, I guess. I bought my 23-inch (including rollers) a few years ago. I took it twice to Costa Rica, once to Ecuador, several times to Bosque, several times to Europe (although without the 600mm lens) among others and it is still going strong. 
