- This topic is empty.
Upgrade/Indecision
-
I’ve some money set aside for an upgrade of some kind and i’m struggling to make a decision.
I’m currently shooting with a 400D and the majority of my shots are landscape, for which I have a 10-20mm Sigma EX. So for this I am OK on the glass front. However birding is something I’ve wanted to get into, and my last attempt at birding with my 70-300 Tamron failed due to either my inexperience, or reach. (most likely a combination of both)
The child inside of me hates having an older body and is eyeing up the 40D which can be had for a reasonable price, body only, these days. However I guess I would be better off, still, investing in other items, such as some new filters (old ones got lost in the move), maybe a new piece of glass. I’m looking at getting into birding and torn over whether to go with the 150-500 sigma, or pick up the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 and a Kenko teleconverter for a bit more versatility and performance on shorter distances. (I’m interested in rally driving too, so I guess the 70-200 would be a better choice) I’m unsure whether the 400D will be able to produce decent shots on dull days when an 800/1600 ISO is needed.
Reviews and such of everything is available online, but I’m looking for some more first hand experience and advice here :)
Thanks!
If you’re interested in birds then a 40D may or may not be the way to go. The shutter is very loud on this camera, loud enough to frighten away birds believe it or not. I suppose it does depend on how close you are going to get to the birds for the noise of the shutter release to have an impact.
That being said… the 6 frames per second on the 40D is perfect for shooting birds… because sometimes an opportunity will come along that requires you to hold you finger on the shutter button and let it rip.
I was shooting with my 40D last Sunday and ended up swapping for my 400D which is much, much quieter and turned out to be far more effective in keeping the birds at ease.
You’ll also find that no matter how large a lens you have it’s never long enough for photographing birds. I use a 100-400 most of the time and for most common garden birds anything further than 10ft back and you’re looking at cropping and loss of quality to get a decent photo.
In my opinion the lens is more important than the body when it comes to bird photography, but they both have a say in the final product.
Few taken from last Sunday… from about 8ft back:
https://www.photographyireland.net/viewtopic.php?t=28438
J
PS. Personally I wouldn’t really bother shooting birds on dull days. Good light is important. High ISO will spoil the image and if you have to crop it’ll get even worse.
I wouldn’t worry to much about using high ISO. This was taken at 500mm (supposedly the weakest end) on the Sigma 50-500mm, at ISO800, 1/1000s. As long as you expose correctly the noise isn’t a huge problem. I have printed this fairly big, and any noise visible on screen isn’t reproduced on the print.
Have you considered a prime? The Canon 300mm f4 is nice.
Thanks for the advice guys. Sadly the budget doesn’t extend that high Stephen, if it did I’d probably look more towards the 100-400 L glass which is around that price mark. Wonderful shot there :)
I’ve a good bit to consider now and can make a more informed choice. Cheers!
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
