Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2016/09/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thanks, Rick. Yes; that is one of my favourites as well (and George picked it too - thank you George!). The shadings of blues to white were amazing, and it all changes continually. The amount of ice was very low. We had to actually go out of our way a bit to find the ice floes that were part of the ones we 'boarded'. The ones we saw with the bears on them we came across on our normal passage. https://www.ec.gc.ca/glaces-ice/?lang=En&n=542306E5-1 is a map depicting the sea ice in the whole of northern Canada and https://www.ec.gc.ca/glaces-ice/ is the portal to more detailed ice maps that we got to see on a daily basis The area that we were travelling through is still ice free over 90% of our route, and the area that has ice has at most 50% coverage right now. We didn't see or go into any area that had even 20% coverage. Some of the search expeditions that went looking for Franklin in the late 1840's couldn't progress more than 10 or 15km per summer for multiple years in a row before becoming ice bound again. Henning Wulff hjwulff at gmail.com On 2016-09-19, at 1:10 PM, RicCarter <ric at cartersxrd.net> wrote: > the most magical for me was : > P8241109 > > some really nice stuff in the set. > > Is there less ice thatn expected, less than in the pass , or was this as > normally expected for your destination? > > ric > > >> On Sep 19, 2016, at 2:41 PM, Henning Wulff <henningw at archiphoto.com> >> wrote: >> >> There are now 83 items in the 'Canadian Arctic 2016' album from our trip >> in August, including bear pictures. We saw quite a bit of wildlife, but a >> lot of it was fleeting or hard to identify unless you were watching >> carefully, as a lot of it was at quite a distance. We saw a couple of >> bowhead wales, some narwhal, walrusses, various seals, muskox as well as >> many of the infamous 'muskrocks' which look very similar at great >> distance. Also a large variety of birds. >> >> Most of my wildlife shots were taken with the 100-400 Panasonic-Leica >> zoom which was an excellent choice for this trip. My next most used lens >> was the 12-40/2.8 Olympus, then the 7-14 Panasonic and last, mostly >> because of insufficient reach, the 40-150/2.0 Olympus. I took about 7500 >> shots on this trip. A UV filter was kept over any lenses that were out >> when we were in the zodiacs, and the equipment was rinsed off in the >> shower after any noticeable salt water splashing. Everything worked >> perfectly. >> >> Contrary to Africa, where I have taken full frame shots of lions with a >> 35mm wideangle, I wouldn't try that on a polar bear. >> >> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/hwulff/trips/Arctic/ >> >> >> Henning Wulff >> henningw at archiphoto.com >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >