I took it in Waterton National Park, Canada, which is just north of Glacier National Park, Montana. The mountain I was on is a popular tourist trail and I suspect this critter made an appearance in the hopes of scavenging a tasty morsel - its family has probably made a living at it for generations by now - consequently 120mm was more than adequate. They are fast, but quite numerous and rather friendly.Flew said:It looks like Chad on edge too. Cool shot. I'm surprised that you could get close enough to get such a good shot at 120mm. Where was this taken?
I hesitated even posting a "squirrel" image because the bar set here is so high - and considering I shot it with the much maligned 24-120 VR, I was even more reticent. I really like the shot, though I can't imagine having a poster of a squirrel on my wall - even if it was executed flawlessly (not saying that this one is, however).Gale said:Chad that is so perfect that it almost looks like a PS creation.
How lucky you were to capture this one in a lifetime image.
Beautiful country to.. The landscape aspect is beautiful also.
I love the lens, but I am getting the itch for a 17-55 as I type...must resist. I suppose I should keep both, but I really can't see me using the 24-120 much after getting a hold of another f/2.8 Nikkor. I have been holding off for a 24-70 f/2.8 DX, but I can't see Nikon endulging my request any time soon .Gale said:Chad
That 24-120 VR is a GREAT lens !!!!!!
That is true, but nearly everyone who upgrades to the 17-55 or the 28-70 seem to banish their 24-120 VR from their bag. I'll certainly keep mine for now and see what becomes of it. Thanks for the advice. At the zoo, I always find 280mm too short.Gale said:Chad,
There are many occassions to use the 24-120.
Light to carry around, fairly fast and hads a good range. Especially out with the family ..
I really like it for instance at the zoo or carring to work or the local fairs we often have.
It is a keeper.