--- Julian Loke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> I've never been to Disney before, and I was
> considering taking a 28-135IS,
> but post worries me, especially if you have a
> shoebox full of blurry prints.

I shot last summer at Disney's Animal Kingdom (and Sea
World and Universal) with a 28-135, among others.  I
had no problem with blurry shots (except those caused
by operator error.  I've shot main Disney before with
(among others) a 28-105.

> 
> What are the shooting conditions like in Disney?
> Are most places in shaded, overcast, or with strong
> backlighting?

Yes.  You'll find all those conditions at Disney, as
well as indoor shots worth taking.

> Do you have to use flash?

Sometimes, especially if you want to shoot indoors. 
Personally, I used a flash for fill a lot.  If you're
shooting people anywhere near mid-day you can expect
terrible shadoes without fill flash.

> Did you need to use a hood? Or a polarizing filter?

Use of a hood is like any other situation.  Sometimes
you'll have the sun near the subject, and a hood will
help.  But if the sun's overhead, or behind you, it
won't make any difference.  Ditto with a polarizer: 
Sometimes you'll want one to get better skies, or to
paly with reflections.

> What film do you recommend (against)?

Slides or prints?  For family vacation kind of stuff,
I generally shoot prints, and found ISO 200 to work
well MOST of the time.  I generally prefer Fuji for
chemical print making, but find Kodak easier to scan
(primarily because there seem to be better profiles
available for Kodak neg film).

George's comment was "I regret I took only
> the 28-135IS with me. ..."  I suspect the key work
here is *only*.  I found ample use for a telephoto,
and some use for my 17-35.  Especially if you're going
to Animal Kingdom, you'll want a long lens, but even
at Magic Kingdom the ability to compress distance is
helpful.

The conflict I faced was between taking a really
versatile photo kit, or travelling light.  If you want
to try to do some serious photography, you'll want
more than just the 28-135.  If all you want is family
snapshots for the photo album, it's probably the
perfect choice (but do take a flash).  I decided not
to carry the weight of my 70-200 2.8, so I took along
a 100-300 USM instead.  If I had it to do over again,
I'd seriously consider taking the faster lens.

A word of warning about Disney's Animal Kingdom:  If
you're thinking the "safari" ride will be a great
opportunity to shoot pics of wild animals, you'll be
disapointed.  The trucks they drive you around in
NEVER STOP, and it's damned hard to get good telephoto
shots from a bouncing vehicle.  The 100-400IS, with
fast film, might work.

=====
Bob Meyer
Life is uncertain.  Eat dessert first.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
*  For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*    http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************

Reply via email to