Bird/Wildlife Photography in Costa Rica?

[amirm]

Having made the jump finally to mirrorless cameras, I am so impressed with how much easier they are to use than my DSLRs. Itching to put them in use in the field. Thought about going to my old stomping grounds in Florida and California for typical shore birds. But having shot those many times, I started to think of other places and Costa Rica keeps popping up.

I am not interested in going with any photo tours as I don't need the instruction, nor their astronomical rates. They seem to be booked a year in advance anyway.

Looking for a couple of lodges where I can stay and have an easy time shooting. Little interest in hiking through forests and such.

Was hoping to find a combo of a nice lodge with Wifi and AC so I don't have to rough it out too much. But so far, have not found one that has the right setup for photography.

The top option that keeps getting recommended is Rancho Naturalista. Seems to have nice easy setups around the lodge. No AC and Wifi is only in the main areas. But if there is nothing better, will go with it.

Plan is to go in November/December although I am flexible.

Looked at other areas in Central America and seems safety is not as good there. But do let me know if you live in these areas and think otherwise.

Appreciate any and all advice!

Thanks,

 

[Chester]

Good luck with the plans. Which mirrorless did you go for?

 

[amirm]

Canon R5 Mark II.

 

[BeeKay]

Did you change your lenses as well or did you opt for an adaptor?
I am a Nikon guy and kept my f/2.8 70-200 from the old SLR days, the rest are new Z-mount lenses for the mirrorless system.

 

[amirm]

Did you change your lenses as well or did you opt for an adaptor?

A bit of a mix. Bought a new RF 100m macro, and a 200 to 800 telephoto.

Debating what to do with my current large selection of EF (DSLR) L lenses. They do work with the adapter and actually perform better with the new mirrorless body than the DSLR.

Alas, my 500 and 600 F4 L lenses are way too heavy compared to current versions. Sadly, I can hardly get any money for them ($1500 to $2000) while the new versions have astronomically high prices of $14,000 to $15,000. All Canon has done is to glue the adapter to them instead of a redesign so likely there will be better versions in the future so not sure if I am going to get the new versions or not.

Worse part is that Canon has stopped supporting the EF lenses so you can't even get them serviced! (hence the large devaluation) I dusted up some of them and three of them had issues. My 70 to 200 F2.8 had something growing inside the front element. Took that apart and after a lot of cursing and guessing, managed to get to the front element to clean it. Then found out the diaphragm was stuck in my 24 to 70 F2.8L and 50 F1.4. Took apart the latter. Man, that was huge hassle. Eventually cleaned the blades and got that working, only to find that its auto focus motor doesn't work. Have not yet spent time on the 24-70.

All my telephoto lenses thankfully work. I have 300 f2.8L, 400 F4 DO, and the above 500 and 600.

 

[just1n]

Definitely going back to Costa Rica.

This was an amazing area. Small donation to enter the park, beautiful cove beach, and Hotel Yara is a small hotel we stayed at. There was a sloth hanging in the trees above the pool might as well have said saying “Welcome to Costa Rica”.

Only regret, not doing the night tour in the park. Miss on our part.

Manuel Antonio Park - The Best Experience in Costa Rica

Explore Manuel Antonio Park with guided tours, stunning beaches, and incredible wildlife. Book your adventure in Costa Rica today!

manuelantoniopark.net

Hotel Plaza Yara - Manuel Antonio Costa Rica

www.hotelyara.com

 

[BeeKay]

A bit of a mix. Bought a new RF 100m macro, and a 200 to 800 telephoto.

Debating what to do with my current large selection of EF (DSLR) L lenses. They do work with the adapter and actually perform better with the new mirrorless body than the DSLR.

Alas, my 500 and 600 F4 L lenses are way too heavy compared to current versions. Sadly, I can hardly get any money for them ($1500 to $2000) while the new versions have astronomically high prices of $14,000 to $15,000. All Canon has done is to glue the adapter to them instead of a redesign so likely there will be better versions in the future so not sure if I am going to get the new versions or not.

Worse part is that Canon has stopped supporting the EF lenses so you can't even get them serviced! (hence the large devaluation) I dusted up some of them and three of them had issues. My 70 to 200 F2.8 had something growing inside the front element. Took that apart and after a lot of cursing and guessing, managed to get to the front element to clean it. Then found out the diaphragm was stuck in my 24 to 70 F2.8L and 50 F1.4. Took apart the latter. Man, that was huge hassle. Eventually cleaned the blades and got that working, only to find that its auto focus motor doesn't work. Have not yet spent time on the 24-70.

All my telephoto lenses thankfully work. I have 300 f2.8L, 400 F4 DO, and the above 500 and 600.

Yes, can’t complain about the performance of the f/2.8 70-200 on the adapter either. And rather than replacing it I’d probably go for the the f/4,5-5,6 100-400. Plenty of stops for what I use such a lens, even when a teleconverter (1,4 or 2,0) gets added.
Same problem as you - no real 2nd hand value left for the old lens. Weight certainly is better with the new Z lenses.

 

[Chester]

A bit of a mix. Bought a new RF 100m macro, and a 200 to 800 telephoto.

Debating what to do with my current large selection of EF (DSLR) L lenses. They do work with the adapter and actually perform better with the new mirrorless body than the DSLR.

Alas, my 500 and 600 F4 L lenses are way too heavy compared to current versions. Sadly, I can hardly get any money for them ($1500 to $2000) while the new versions have astronomically high prices of $14,000 to $15,000. All Canon has done is to glue the adapter to them instead of a redesign so likely there will be better versions in the future so not sure if I am going to get the new versions or not.

Worse part is that Canon has stopped supporting the EF lenses so you can't even get them serviced! (hence the large devaluation) I dusted up some of them and three of them had issues. My 70 to 200 F2.8 had something growing inside the front element. Took that apart and after a lot of cursing and guessing, managed to get to the front element to clean it. Then found out the diaphragm was stuck in my 24 to 70 F2.8L and 50 F1.4. Took apart the latter. Man, that was huge hassle. Eventually cleaned the blades and got that working, only to find that its auto focus motor doesn't work. Have not yet spent time on the 24-70.

All my telephoto lenses thankfully work. I have 300 f2.8L, 400 F4 DO, and the above 500 and 600.

You’re a brave man, taking L lenses apart, I commend you.

I’m also eyeing up the R5. Don’t fancy the adapter thing though and as you say the new lenses are very expensive, so it keeps sitting in the ‘could do’ part of my brain.

 

[alvigg]

If you go to Costa Rica, read "Monkey's are made of chocolate". A collection of essays from a rancher turned environmentalist.

 

[Rja4000]

Debating what to do with my current large selection of EF (DSLR) L lenses. They do work with the adapter and actually perform better with the new mirrorless body than the DSLR.

Personnaly, I'm using an R5 for several years now, coming from a 5DSR and 1DX.
I mostly kept all my EF lenses.

I just bought the RF 70-200 2.8L IS, because of its size and weight (IS is the main other improvement).

I don't own any of the big whites:
I mostly use an EF 100-400 II with x2 for birds.
That's enough for my use.

My next RF will be to replace my aging EF 24-70 II and EF 24 1.4L II.
I still use the EF 851.4L IS more often than the RF 85 1.2L DS (second hand impulse purchased), since it's more flexible.
And the amazing EF 11-24L.

All Canon has done is to glue the adapter to them instead of a redesign so likely there will be better versions in the future so not sure if I am going to get the new versions or not.

The mirrorless shorter flange distance has no benefit for long focal lenses.
So redesign benefits would be from more advanced technology.
Or from a choice of other compromises - like relying more on on-board optical flaws correction, as Canon does with most RF lenses: they are optically redesigned to allow worse vignetting or CA or even distortion - all things that may be fixed by digital correction of the image - and better sharpness or other aspects.

 

[GD Fan]

It has been a few years since my visit, but Si Como No outside of Manuel Antonio was outstanding back then. Jimmy Buffett was a fan too.

 

[amirm]

I mostly use an EF 100-400 II with x2 for birds.
That's enough for my use.

I have the first and second generation 100 to 400. I actually use it for landscape use when I am out shooting with my long lenses! 2X converter would make it quite soft though.

I have yet to use the new RF 200 to 800 in the field but testing around the house yields incredible results. It is so sharp despite its massive reach of 800mm.

 

[Rja4000]

100-400 II with x2 III is still quite sharp.
Nowhere near as sharp as without extender, of course, but those zooms are incredibly sharp at the long end nowadays.

The RF 200-800 I need to try.