- This topic is empty.
Which lense…….any recommendations
-
Hi
I am currently using the kit lense (Canon EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 ) I got with my recently enough bought canon 400d. I like shooting marine mammals and wildlife in general and am looking for a faster, and probably longer lense. Any tips without breaking the bank completely
Dan
Breaking the bank is probably the biggest issue.
Some options –
70-200mm f/2.8 IS L
100-400mm f/4.5-56. IS L
1.4x or 2x extender for the 70-200mm or even your current lens.It really does depend on your bank balance. If you really want to spend – 300mm f/2.8 IS L or 400mm f/2.8 IS L
I have the 100 – 400mm lens and I thinks it’s super, IS is brilliant and I would be lost without it now. As mentioned by Paul above I’m thinking of getting a 1.4 extender for my own lens. As for cost the two zoom lens above are similar so I would go for the 100 – 400mm which gives extra reach. Unless you won the lotto recently I think you can forget the 2.8 primes. Another option you have is to buy second hand as I believe there are some good second hand lens out there,
Dave.
I guess I should have said – I own the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS L, the 100-400mm, and a 300mm f/2.8.
The 100-400mm is great, but not the best in low light conditions. Sometimes you really do need a faster lens. The 70-200mm is brilliant. Very fast, sharp, accurate etc.
I have a 2x extender, but don’t use it a whole lot.
Those are your best options.
You may find 2nd hand lenses out there, but I was searching weeks looking for a 300mm f/2.8 IS L 2nd hand, and couldn’t find one at a decent price, so ended up buying new (from HK).
Paul is correct about the 100 – 400mm capability in low light, I have plenty of images to prove that. For me the cost of the 300mm prime was way over the top for me, especially when photography is only a hobby. That said I would love the 400mm f2.8 prime lens.
Dave.
Hi guys
Ya I havent won the lotto but am prepared to spend a bit although I would imagine alright the two prime lenses are out of my reach. Besides I think Id prefer one with a variable zoom (if thats the expression) as my subjects may be quite close or indeed far away.
I was kindly let use a sigma 80 to 400mm (I think) over the weekend. This was my first try of a real ‘big’ high quality lense For a start I found it very heavy but obviously thats gonna be the case. Found it took a second or too to focus at the higher zooms at times. It had the same F values as my standard kit lense (I think) and my results with this in low lights do suffer I think.
Basically with the 100-400mm im going to get the same speed as i have with my kit lense ya but with extra reach.
And with the 70 -200mm f2.8L ill have a much faster lense yes without the extra reach?
Does the IS with the 100-400mm make up a little for the loss of speed? Im not sure if the sigma lense I used had IS, I expect it did.
Sorry for all my questions and ramblings, im learning
It’s only a hobby for me too … but, something I really enjoy. I’ve started shooting more sports events (Leinster rugby), so need a good low light lens. The 70-200mm just didn’t have the reach, so I decided it was time to splash out (in a big way) and buy the 300mm f/2.8. There was no way I could afford the 400mm f/2.8.
It really boils down to 3 things – your budget, your subject and light conditions. For good light, f/5.6 will be fine. For close enough subjects, the 70-200mm lens will be fine. And if you can really afford it – 300mm f/2.8 is brilliant.
Most likely, you’ll be looking at the 70-200mm (f/2.8 or even f/4) or else the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6. Shop around when you go to buy. You may save hundreds by ordering online from HK than buying from a shop in Ireland.
I would expect my subjects to be mostly sea mammals and birds so the distance can vary as well as the light day by day. Id also liek to take it along to a few munster rugby games with me too.
Paul what do you use it for at the leinster games. Snapping opponents tries???? :wink:
It’s a pity we didn’t meet last Sunday, as you could have tried my 100 – 400mm. I believe the IS does make a difference but I haven’t used that sigma lens. Yes the 100 – 400mm is fairly heavy and your arm will know about it at the end of the day. As for Ruby, I would think it’s the spectators expression thats captured at most of the games. Their even might be some in the peoples section.
Dave.
munsterman28 wrote:
I would expect my subjects to be mostly sea mammals and birds so the distance can vary as well as the light day by day. Id also like to take it along to a few munster rugby games with me too.
Paul what do you use it for at the leinster games. Snapping opponents tries???? :wink:
LOL … rich !!!
I didn’t get to capture the tries at last week’s game – I was too close to the action, or had a camera-man in my way. :(
But, looking forward to the game on Sat. Hopefully I’ll get some good shots, especially since it’s a day game and the light should be a lot better.
For what you are looking for – the Canon 100-400mm is probably the best. Not much good for Munster rugby though, since the lens is quite poor in low light.
Thanks Lads.
Am gonna step up the research and nail something down.
Seaview you should come out whalewatching some day on the boat with me. Its an experience I can tell you. You can teach me a few things too.
MM, might take you up on that some day. Looking at your photo’s I’m afraid you wouldn’t learn a whole lot from me, that said I think there’s always something to be learned when working with someone else.
Dave.
For some wildlife and such photography, some good examples on http://www.treknature.com/
You can also see the lenses used. A very common one is the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 IS L
I went whale watching in Canada earlier this year. Plenty of Orca, but I was unable to get any good picts. :(
Just remembered, the two deer posts (Red Deer and Tender moment) that I have posted in the nature and Wild life forum were taken with the 100 – 400mm lens. The red deer post was taken in fairly poor light and as can be seen it’s not too bad.
Dave.
Hi Dan. MM
The Sigma 80-400 that I lent you on Nic’s boat is about 300gms heavier than the Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS USM that I was using. But after five hours of photography it felt like a ton!!. I find that the Sigma is not too good in the low light conditions that we had in the late afternoon. Auto focus might have been a problem when you were using the lens ,as if you remember Nic was heading pack to the pier against the wind and tide at about 15-17 knots. Some of the pics I took with the canon could have done with a bit more reach, but I found that I did not loose too much quality when cropping the pics. I have a x2 converter and will try it the next time. If you want another try with the lens in better light give me a pm.
Charlie.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
