Balls or Stupidity

[tlbradford]

Great Shots.  I would say stupidity, but then if I found a den like that I would be doing the same thing.  So, I'm in the same boat as you.

[Aneoakleaf]

Great pictures! I'd show Smokey but he hates snakes...( he doesn't know I have 3 in the freezer )...
I lived in Wapato as a kid and say lots of rattelers. I think they're cool. 
But realy...don't get bit.

[gramps]

Bone..you are crazy, but great photos.  I have been gonna go look for a couple so I can fix the skin for the grandsons...but I won't be 6" away taking pictures.

[swanny]

I vote for insane!

Hope I never stumble upon that...I would roll down the hill to my death!

Love looking at the pictures but freak out at the sight of any snake.

[huntnphool]

Cool pics Bone

[Armadillo]

Very cool pics, I like the forked tongue shot alot!

[Tom Reichner]

Great shots Doug, but can't you get us a few close ups?   You can borrow my 100mm macro lens if you need.  It'll focus down to 2" minimum focus distance. 

Doug, congratulations on a killer thread - it's only a couple days old and you're up to 6 pages of replies!

As for the lens, I'm curious to know what you were using.  Perhaps you mentioned it already, but I can't read thru all 6 pages to see if you did or not.

Shawn suggested (albeit tongue-in-cheek) the macro lens.  I've seriously considered getting one for rattlesnakes.  I've never been pleased with the minimum focusing distance of any of my lenses when it comes to the rattlers.  The 100-400 gets down to about 5 feet, which still leaves me wanting to get closer.   The big 400 2.8 focuses down to 10 feet - even worse.

Now let me tell you about a little trick I learned, quite by accident.  When I put a tele-extender on the big 400, it actually decreases the lens' minimum focusing distance.  Sounds like the opposite of what you'd think, but it's true.

Last spring when I photographed rattlers, I used the 100-400 instead of my big 400 simply because I thought I could get much closer with it.  I was wrong.  If I would have used the big 400 with a 1.4 tc, not only would I have been increasing the focal length from 400 to 560, but I also would have decreased the minimum focus distance down to about 6 feet.  560mm at 6 feet is actually closer than the 400mm at 5 feet.  The 2x tc does this, too, but I'm not sure to what extent. 

I only know about the 1.4 trick because yesterday I was shooting Blue Grouse, and the displaying males came right at me. I had the focus on AI mode, and kept shooting right up until the lens couldn't focus any more, which was astonishingly close - about 6 feet away.  At first I couldn't understand, for the lens has always stopped being able to focus at around 10 feet.  I figured it must have been the 1.4 on there that changed things.  Took it off, and sure enough, it couldn't focus closer than 10 feet.  I'm curious to see what happens with the 2x on there. 

Anyway, the point of all this is that you may be able to get much closer rattlesnake images without having to use a macro - and without having to get within a few inches of them.  If your lens is an f4, try the 1.4 and see if it works.  If it's a 2.8, try the 2x - it may be even better.

-Tom

[Craig]

Great pictures.

If you don't get bit then you have balls.
If you do get bit then you were stupid.

You can never have to big of stick when your messing with snake.

[boneaddict]

Neat trick Tom, I'll have to try it.  90% of these pics are full frame (no cropping).  I was using the 400.  I wanted the sharpness from it, but it was an absolute bear trying to get far enough AWAY from the snakes and still get the angle I wanted.  Then I was packing my P/S Lumix for the ones I couldn't get.  It has a pretty "decent" macro setting on it.  On it I was able to shoot right up in th esnakes face.  I wasn't shootin in RAW with it, so was concerned that about handling th ewhite light.  VERY BRIGHT and reflective off of those rocks.   ANother pisser in that slide was the use of a monopod or freehanding that 400, and doing it for 3 hours.  Great workout for the guns.  That and you can't just set it down anywhere.  
I haven't been that happy with my 1.4 (kinda soft).  I was thinking about trying another one.  I suppose I could send the whole kit and comboodle down to Canon to have it calibrated, but thats scary.

as scary as it is, I'd have LOVED to have been shooting a great Macro lens.  

[boneaddict]

By the way, THANKS GUYS! 

[jackelope]

By the way, THANKS GUYS! 

thanks for calling you stupid?

[boneaddict]

of course...I'm gracious and humble.

[Firing Pin]

First, your pictures are FANTASTIC....
Second you are F--King nuts!!

Are you kidding me, standing on some while trying to get pictures of another!!!! 
The sound of them moving around you while you take pictures!!!!  

To me the only good snake is a dead snake....  Yes, I know the do good but no way in hell would I even think about searching them out.

Screw That.

[Dipsnort]

Those things look way cuddly...NOT!  Bone, you're a crazy SOB and we love ya for it...until you die of multiple rattler bites and then we'll just stick with crazy SOB!

[boneaddict]

 
I've certainly killed my share.  This ammo crisis is pushing me to the brink.  Whats weird is after that many snakes and they do give a guy the creepy crawlies is that when you close your eyes, you still see snakes moving.    It always lasts for about 48 hours.  Some weird dreams.