Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
Hi all
Needed peoples opnions and recommendations for a wildlife/birding lens please. I realise this could be a totally subjective choice as people have thier own lenses and biases.
I am basically looking for a lens that will give me good results and range for wildlife and birding with my budget been no more than 1500 pounds (ZAR 19000)
I was considering the "Canon 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 L USM IS Lens" but have seen various reviews say that getting this lens is much like entering the lottery with regard to image quality and also that it damages easily.
I previously owned a Sigma 70-400 (or was it 500) which I bought before the 50-500 came out and was VERY unhappy with its sharpness.
Anyone got any recommendations for the 1500 BGP budget for alens to be used with a 500D would be great.
Thanks
John
Quote: I previously owned a Sigma 70-400 (or was it 500)
It was a Sigma 150-500mm f5-6.3 Lens I previously had.
Its hard to beat the Canon 400mm f5.6L. OK it does not have IS, but add a monopod for a bit of extra stabilisation and you have an excellent wildlife lens at a very reasonable price. you certainly won't get anything that can get near the sharpness this lens delivers wide open in your price range.
Alternatively get the 300mm f4L and a 1.4 converter. That combo is does not quite have the sharpness of the 400mm, but it does have IS, gives you a small amount of extra reach, and has a shorter minimum focus distance.
A zoom might be a little more flexible, but it very likely you will be working at the long end 98% of the time anyway.
Thanks Cam, I was busy looking at the photos PRoberts (http://www.ephotozine.com/u17818/gallery/p-0) takes with his 50-500mm Sigma and he seems to get good quality out of it. I know hes a pro and would probably not get shots like him but I tend to use members photos to get an idea of a lens.
So its going to be a toss up between the Sigma 50-500 and the one you suggested unless anyone else has any comments/suggestions.
Thanks again.
Hi John.
I use the canon 400 f5.6 and find it a very good lens for the money. I tend to use it on a tripod most of the time. I fine it sharp at all times and easy to handle. I was able to try the sigma 50 -500 and the canon 100-400 and i went for the 400 5.6 . Most of my pictures on this site were taken with it.
Nick.
Thanks Nick.
Ouyt of interest with the 400mm what would be the "working distance"/range to the subjecty be to get a decent image?
300mm Sigma photo I took of a weaver from about 40m resulted in a photo that had a bird looking very small and therefore loss of detail.
This subject has been extensively discussed vey recenty John
see here
I advised on the Canon 400mm 5.6 which is well within your budget.
I use it a fair bit with a 1.4x converter(Sigma).
However,as with the OP on the link thread your camera will not support AF with the converter,unless you tape the contacts.
It is only the "d's" that do so.
I might add that I too had a Sigma 50-500 but once I invested in my 1d Mk III and could use the converter with AF,I ran a series of tests and the 400mm +1.4x came out on top of the Sigma 50-500,plus the fact I was/am acheiving 560mm instead of the 500mm.
It is used with a tripod some of the time,but always when the converter is attached
Hope this helps
Adrian
Just a point - but the sigma super zooms are just like the 100-400mm canon in the "lottery" sense and I would also say that with sigma (on those lenses) you might even run a slightly higher risk that you do with the canon these days.
Its something to consider - though of course you can get either lens from either company fixed/replaced but after spending that much idealy you don't want ot have to then wait ages for it.
If you need to focus closer than normal with the 400 f5.6 then use extention tubes. These greatly reduce the minimum focus distance and because they are just tubes, the lens is as sharp as without them. You'll just lose a stop of light as you would with the 1.4x converter.
I did a few trial shots using the 400 f5.6, a Kenco 1.4x converter and Kenko 300 pro extention tubes to photograph dragonflies in flight. Apart from losing auto focus, the test was very successful and the IQ was extremely good. If you use ex. tubes you'll find the lens doesn't focus to infinity, so you'll need to take them off every time to photograph birds.
I spent 6 months searching reviews on the internet before buying the Canon 100-400L IS. The positive comments vastly outnumbered the negative ones. I have seen some remarkable pictures taken on this lens.
The IS is fantastic - I bought this lens to take to the Galapagos as I knew I would be taking a lot of photos bobbing around in a dinghy. Out of the 4-500 pictures I took (all hand-held), less than 20 were binned. I've also had pinsharp results hand-holding this at 1/15th (100mm) and 1/50th (400mm) - it's also sharp throughout -even at F5.6.
It won't outperform the 400 fixed lens on a tripod but I valued the flexibility of the zoom higher. As for easily damaged ? I dropped mine10feet from a boat while climbing into a dinghy - fortunately it bounced off the side of the dinghy and fell inside it otherwise it would be on the bottom of the Pacific now -and it still woks perfectly..!
Another vote for the 100-400L IS from me. It does'nt in my experience damage easily, the build quality is solid. I bought it to upgrade from the Sigma 50-500mm which was an excellent lens but does'nt have the sharpness of the 100-400L, by cropping you will get a shaper photograph than with the extra 100mm
I use it for wildlife and find I do have occasion to use it at the 100mm end.
In answer to your query about the working distance/range, I find within 25 metres is acceptable.
A lot is written on this topic, but if it helps I found that the 100-400 is sharper than the Sigma 15-500, with the biggest difference being when the lens is wide open. If you only need a prime and can use a monopod/tripod, or are in good light a lot, then the 400 prime is hard to beat, and is optically excellent. Otherwise the 100-400 is a reasonable compromise.
And yes 100-400 lenses vary copy to copy. So it is best to try before you buy.
At a talk recently given by .Mark Sissons (pro wildlife tog) and he said he uses the 100-400mm lens for many of his shots
Add a Comment
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
Login or Join Now
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Join Our Free Newsletter
Awards
Current Competitions
foliopic 'Movement' Competition
1st May 2012 - 31st May 2012
This month's competition theme is 'Movement' which can be interpreted in a number of ways. You could photograph an animal running, a person walking or a car speeding...Featured e2 Photo
Featured Directory Listing
May's Photo Month
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
Interact
Photography Gallery Photography Forums Recent Forum Activity Members' Meetings Members' BlogsSearch ePHOTOzine
Having trouble or would like to make a suggestion? Create a report
Calibrate your monitor so you can see 16 different shades.
ePHOTOzine © 2001 - 2012 Magezine Publishing | Contact Us | Site Map | Top