Banff in March

[Always Looking]

Hmmmm, didn't think anyone ever visited NJ, except for visiting NYC or driving through to another state. On a serious note, the NJ shore has a few places worth photographing if your into wildlife. There are three public parks along the beach that I'm familiar with, all of them are worth seeing for a few hours a piece I guess. Sandy Hook occasionally gets whales off the beach and on cold winters seals will visit on the bay side. Lots of waterfowl comes through, most during migration times in the spring and fall. Island Beach state park gets lots of waterfowl throughout the year, I typically only visit during the late spring through Thanksgiving (when fishing inshore or offshore in a boat). Finally Cape May is known for whales and yet more migratory birds. I rarely visit Cape May as it's the farthest to me, but I gather it is one of the best locations in the state to see many types of ducks, a few types of owls and hawks and Monarch butterflies.

The Manhattan Skyline and Ellis Island are very easy to see from the NJ side of the Hudson River (splits NJ and NY). I would visit Weehawken or Jersey City to see the Freedom Tower, Empire State Building, etc Daytime really doesn't do justice, really need a clear cold night for the best photos. Lots of places to stop along the waterfront to get a decent shot.

Finally the top of NJ (High Point area) is pretty picturesque during the fall when the leaves are at their peak. That same area along the Delaware River is still pretty rural for NJ and nice year round (Dingman's Ferry/Delaware Water Gap area).

If your looking to come with a family I can offer other ideas, just ask. With regard to lenses, I'm leaning towards leaving the 35mm and I'm on the fence on the 100-400. It would be very convenient if I could get close enough to the wildlife that I could fill the frame using just the 200mm side or the 70-200, but I doubt the animals will be that used to humans. I do have (easy to pack) 1.4II and 2.0III extenders if that makes a difference.

[Kayaker72]

My company is headquartered out of Philadelphia. I am down there anywhere from 3-6 times a year. Usually brief trips, but occasionally longer. As for New Jersey, I work in environmental remediation. As you might suspect, with as much old industry as there is in NJ, there are reasons for me to visit.

With regard to lenses, I'm leaning towards leaving the 35mm and I'm on the fence on the 100-400. It would be very convenient if I could get close enough to the wildlife that I could fill the frame using just the 200mm side or the 70-200, but I doubt the animals will be that used to humans. I do have (easy to pack) 1.4II and 2.0III extenders if that makes a difference.

You could get away with 200 mm. Just understand, depending on how and where you see the wildlife, you may not be able to get close up shots. But, perhaps you just compose them differently, you take in the scene rather than trying to get the head shot. Often, these are as good or better types of pictures anyway.

So, Banff is one of those places where you may be close enough to get tighter shots of wildlife with 200 mm. Of the 4 times I saw elk this past trip, I needed 400mm+ for three of them to get close up shots, and the fourth, they were right by the road and I have good shots at 150 mm. All four of them, I could have composed the wildlife in a scene with 200 mm. Of course, safety comes into play, so do not get too close.

One more thought, if you really want to take the 70-200, maybe buy or rent an extender. I did this on one trip when I still had the 100-400L Mk 1. The 70-200 II plus 2x extender isn't that far off in IQ. The AF is a bit slower, but I did this for a trip that was primarily for family, so I really wanted the 70-200 II with occasional wildlife shots. But I still got a few of whales that I thought were pretty good.