Another 200mm or 300mm, but how much of a compromise?

DaveS2

DaveS2

Messages
486
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
No
I have an EOS 5D Mklll, and my longest lens is the Canon 70-300L IS f/4-5.6.

Having moved up from a 7D, I have of course lost the advantage of the 1.6x crop-factor, which of course gave me an effective focal length of 480mm.

The Canon 500mm f/4 L IS, is some £7749, and the 600mm version a stonking great £10222. Which makes them absolutely nonsense money for the enthusiast amateur photographer.

Two affordable alternatives are the Sigma 150-500 f/5-6.3 OS, and the new Tamron 600mm f/5-6.3 VC. These being £750 and £950 repectively.

However, after the pin-sharp image quality the Canon 70-300L, am I going to find that the Sigma or Tamron, too much of a comprise with respect to image quality?.

The fact that being f/6.3 at the long-end, both these lenses are quite slow. In fact reviews suggest they need to be used at nearer to f/10 to get the best from them.

This means that it would be necessary to use a high ISO, but then the 5D Mklll excels in low-noise at the higher ISOs, so this shouldn't be a problem.

The main concern is how much of a compromise on image quality should I expect to get from the Sigma or Tamron, bearing in mind that, "you get what you pay for", is often the case with many things in life.

There is of course a third option, and that is stick with the 70-300L and 'crop'. The IQ of the 5D Mklll does provide good amount of scope for this.

What are your thoughts/experiences?.

Dave
 
Or the Sigma 120-300 2.8 and a 2x converter for 600mm 5.6 and still sharp wide open, that's been my combination for the last dozen or so shots on my Flickr, have a look and judge for yourself.
 
An interesting approach Neil.

Its a pity that the Canon 70-300L doesn't support the use of a 1.4x or 2x converter, otherwise that is definitely the way I would go.

Dave
 
Neil, I note that one review of the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 states:

"With the lens set to its maximum aperture of f/2.8, there is significant light fall-off in the corners at both ends of the zoom range. Stopping-down to f/5.6 virtually eliminates this."

Example images showed this light fall-off quite clearly.

While stopping down to f/5.6 apparently overcomes this problem, it means with a 2x converter, its down to f/11.

Dave
 
DaveS2 said:
An interesting approach Neil.

Its a pity that the Canon 70-300L doesn't support the use of a 1.4x or 2x converter, otherwise that is definitely the way I would go.

Dave
Click to expand...

You could use a Kenko TC- that would work with it. Not something I have done myself as I don't have that lens but for around £150 or whatever they go for these days it's a relatively inexpensive way to see if it's acceptable in use for your purposes while being able to retain a good TC that can be used elsewhere or sold on for not much loss- or pick up 2nd hand one.
 
I did have a Kenko 2x TC for a while, which I used on another lens, but to be honest, I felt that it degraded the IQ. Not significantly, but a degradation all the same.

Maybe putting a budget TC in front of 'L' glass, is a bit like putting 2 Star petrol in a Ferrari ;).

However, thanks for the suggestion.

Dave
 
There are lots of options, but it depends whether you want a zoom or prime and willing to buy 2nd hand.

Canon 300mm f4 IS + 1.4x TC £700-900
Canon 400mm f5.6 £700-900
Canon 300mm f2.8 IS MKI + 1.4 or 2.0 TC £2000-3000

Sigma 100-300mm f4 + 1.4 TC £300-400
Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 + 1.4 or 2.0 TC £1100-1600
Sigma 300mm f2.8 + 1.4 or 2.0 TC £900-1000

Or sigma's budget offerings
120-400mm f4-5.6 OS
50-500mm f4.5-6.6 OS
150-500mm f5-6.3 OS

Which offer range at an affordable price but performance does drop off when the light conditions fad
 
pete.rush said:
There are lots of options, but it depends whether you want a zoom or prime and willing to buy 2nd hand.

Canon 300mm f4 IS + 1.4x TC £700-900
Canon 400mm f5.6 £700-900
Canon 300mm f2.8 IS MKI + 1.4 or 2.0 TC £2000-3000
Click to expand...

....I bought a Canon 400mm f5.6L for £725 (or thereabouts) from a TP member in the Classifieds. I absolutely love it and currently it's my most used lens (bird photography).

My Canon 1.4x III fits but I lose Autofocus and it becomes f8L, so I rarely use that combo so far.
 
I keep thinking about getting a longer lens than the 70-300VC I have. The cashback on the Sigma 150-500 is tempting, making it as low as £600 after sigma send the cheque for £100 out.
 
Unfortunately, I'm one of these silly people that only ever buys new Pete, even having bought a new car every three years for the past 25 years. :rolleyes:

As is the case with most zoom lenses, they never give the best at full aperture, usually having a 'sweet-spot' somewhere around mid-range.

With the Sigma 150-500, the best is around f/8 to f/11. Given the shutter speed required at 500mm, even with the IS, its really going to struggle with anything other than a very bright day. A review of the new Tamron 200-600 in the current issue of AP, highlighted this fact.

Ok, with the 5D Mklll, I can comfortably up the ISO to compensate, but there has to be a sensible limit.

Unless I'm prepared to spend £7k to £10k on 500mm f/4 prime, or 600mm f/4 prime, respectively, which isn't going to happen, then I have to compromise. Its just what compromise route I go down that is the question.

Winning the lottery is the ultimate answer of course, but as I gave up buying a lottery ticket years ago, that's not going to happen either. :)

Dave
 
Last edited:
Can't argue with that result Martin.

However, its always difficult to judge from a 'crop sensor' image, how well a lens would perform with a full-frame sensor, which of course uses more of the lens.

Dave
 
DaveS2 said:
I did have a Kenko 2x TC for a while, which I used on another lens, but to be honest, I felt that it degraded the IQ. Not significantly, but a degradation all the same.

Maybe putting a budget TC in front of 'L' glass, is a bit like putting 2 Star petrol in a Ferrari ;).

However, thanks for the suggestion.

Dave
Click to expand...

I really only meant the 1.4 DGX which is surprisingly good. I was running out the door so hadn't read properly and I see you really want to get to 600mm without image quality issues.
Putting a 2x kenko on it is I agree prob going to be less than satisfactory if you're after image quality- very much like running a Ferrari on 2 Star:D

Sounds like you need to drop some big bucks or accept limitations. Even buying a 300mm f2.8 to always have a 2x TC on it is probably going to be a compromise for you.

There's a manual focus 600mm Nikon on ebay for 650 just now with a day left- get a novoflex adaptor and your good to go-that's quite a saving:naughty:


Also saw a Canon but FD mount- not sure what that means in Canon world- only know EF mount.
 
I can echo your sentiments Dave. I have (and love) a 70-300L, and found I've missed the crop factor with my 5D3.

I was tempted to get a 300 f/4 and an extender, but in the end I went for a 400mm f5.6L. I have also bought a 1.4 extender, but at the moment have set that aside while I learn to use the 400. (This only allows autofocus with the central point on the 5D3). I've not had chance to give this lens a good go yet, but my first impressions are that it is not so easy to get such good results as the 70-300 - maybe because it's not image stabilised?
 
DaveS2 said:
Unfortunately, I'm one of these silly people that only ever buys new Pete, even having bought a new car every three years for the past 25 years.:rolleyes::)
Dave
Click to expand...

A real shame because there's a world of opportunity out there in the used market. My 2 major purchases canon 300mm f2.8 and just about to own 500mm f4 are both used, significant less than the current new models and I have continue to have many more years of use out of them.

If you buy new then sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS is probably the way to go, would definitely not rely on one review, and optically it's not far off the canon 300mm f2.8 MKI which was canon's best optical lens until the MKII came along
 
Bebop said:
I've not had chance to give this lens a good go yet, but my first impressions are that it is not so easy to get such good results as the 70-300 - maybe because it's not image stabilised?
Click to expand...

That is most likely the case, as hand-holding a 400mm lens without IS, is not an easy task. Especially if the available light restricts the usable shutter speed.

Dave
 
DaveS2 said:
That is most likely the case, as hand-holding a 400mm lens without IS, is not an easy task. Especially if the available light restricts the usable shutter speed.

Dave
Click to expand...
Yes I think that has been the problem. I've not had much opportunity to try it out in decent light, though the 5D3 is good at high ISO. For this and for using a macro lens I've been trying to get used to using a monopod.
I'm not sure if this will work, but here is a sample photo of a long tailed tit. This pic is cropped, but no other processing other than the standard sharpening applied by Lightroom
- didn't work!
 
Bebop said:
.........400mm f5.6L....... I've not had chance to give this lens a good go yet, but my first impressions are that it is not so easy to get such good results as the 70-300 - maybe because it's not image stabilised?
Click to expand...

The 400mm a great lens, fast focusing, very sharp, limitations are that's its an f5.6 lens but its very heavily used for bird photography. Getting the right camera settings is also important, especially handheld.

300mm f4 a great lens was my main sport / aviation lens until I upgraded to the bigger brother. The f4 works very well with the canon 1.4x TC, but you do need the light to get the best from that combo.

300mm f4 with 1.4x TC
IMG_3850copy1.jpg


300mm f4
IMG_2159_edited-2.jpg


So does the 300mm f2.8. This was taken with 2.0 and 1.4x TC stacked on that lens on a 20D
IMG_6378copy1.jpg
 
Last edited:
DaveS2 said:
Unfortunately, I'm one of these silly people that only ever buys new Pete, even having bought a new car every three years for the past 25 years. :rolleyes:
...
Unless I'm prepared to spend £7k to £10k on 500mm f/4 prime, or 600mm f/4 prime, respectively, which isn't going to happen, then I have to compromise. Its just what compromise route I go down that is the question.
Click to expand...
Start buying a new car every 4-5 years instead of every 3 years and you can afford a big prime lens. Simples!
 
After listening to what's been said here, on another forum, and some serious review reading, I've pretty much decided on the Canon 400mm f/5.6 L prime lens, and adding the L series 1.4x TC when needed.

This way, being used to 'L' glass, I know what IQ to expect from this lens.

This 'combo' won't cost silly money, which given my enthusiast/hobbyist approach to photography, I can sensibly justify it, and I can still have another new car in September. ;)

Thanks to one and all for your input, its much appreciated.

Dave
 
lol, good luck with the car- sounds like a good compromise all round(y)
 
StewartR said:
Start buying a new car every 4-5 years instead of every 3 years and you can afford a big prime lens. Simples!
Click to expand...
I was just about to suggest that!
Much more pleasure to be had out of 10k lens than a car at any price!

Buy a Kia with 7yrs warranty and get the prime!
 
pete.rush said:
The 400mm a great lens, fast focusing, very sharp, limitations are that's its an f5.6 lens but its very heavily used for bird photography. Getting the right camera settings is also important, especially handheld.

300mm f4 a great lens was my main sport / aviation lens until I upgraded to the bigger brother. The f4 works very well with the canon 1.4x TC, but you do need the light to get the best from that combo.

300mm f4 with 1.4x TC
IMG_3850copy1.jpg


300mm f4
IMG_2159_edited-2.jpg


So does the 300mm f2.8. This was taken with 2.0 and 1.4x TC stacked on that lens on a 20D
IMG_6378copy1.jpg
Click to expand...
did you use an extension tube between the extenders? Or where they not canon extenders?

What is the plane? I saw one a few weeks ago buzzing harwarden airport , aerospace,and wondered what it was.
 
Last edited:
DaveS2 said:
After listening to what's been said here, on another forum, and some serious review reading, I've pretty much decided on the Canon 400mm f/5.6 L prime lens, and adding the L series 1.4x TC when needed.
Click to expand...

....Are you happy to buy a 'previously-loved' Canon 400mm f5.6L? - I might be selling mine in the near future but it depends on whether I prefer another lens or not I'm considering.

I would sell via TP Classifieds.
 
Thanks for the offer Robin, but I have this unhealthy fetish for buying new, and if I were to go 'grey' I can buy one for around £860, as opposed to £1128 from the mainstream dealers.

I should add, that this can be purchased from a UK source, and with VAT paid receipt.

Dave
 
DaveS2 said:
Thanks for the offer Robin, but I have this unhealthy fetish for buying new, and if I were to go 'grey' I can buy one for around £860, as opposed to £1128 from the mainstream dealers.
Click to expand...

....No problem whatsoever, Dave :thumbs: - I'm by no means certain that I'll offer my 400mm for sale - It really is an excellent lens.

Personally, I haven't enjoyed using it handheld with my Canon 1.4x III (get the III version!) with no autofocus (I'm not fast enough focussing manually on birds). It's not an easy lens to use without lots of practice but it's stunning when you get it right.
 
pollie said:
did you use an extension tube between the extenders? Or where they not canon extenders?

What is the plane? I saw one a few weeks ago buzzing harwarden airport , aerospace,and wondered what it was.
Click to expand...

The Canon MKII 1.4x and 2x TCs can be stacked. The new MKIII TCs can't. The aircrafts a Hawk based at Valley.
 
pete.rush said:
The Canon MKII 1.4x and 2x TCs can be stacked. The new MKIII TCs can't.
Click to expand...

....That's interesting. However, would you want to stack them? Wouldn't you compromise quite a lot?
 
You need really good clean light (image taken in South Africa) and I was using the 300mm f2.8, plus the subject was stationary and lens resting on a beanbag, setup not great for moving subjects, hence just purchased 500mm f4.

TCs were stacked camera 1.4x 2.0x lens
 
Last edited:
Having read some reviews Robin, I will most definitely opt for the Mk3 version of the 1.4x TC.

I know that the 5D Mklll will AF with the 400mm f/5.6, using centre point focusing, and I believe it will also do so with the 1.4x inline.

My main use with this lens will be stationary wildlife, as opposed to birds in flight, and I'll probably use it with a monopod.

I saw an image taken by a member of my other forum, which was taken hand-held in woodland with the 400mm plus 1.4x TC combo, at 560mm f/8 1/500th, and it was impressively sharp.

The ISO was 2000, which of course was no problem with his 1DS, which should also be the case with my 5D Mklll.

So hopefully the 400mm f/5.6 plus 1.4x TC combo, should work well for me too, and using a monopod, should give a bit of leeway on shutter speed.

Dave
 
pete.rush said:
The Canon MKII 1.4x and 2x TCs can be stacked. The new MKIII TCs can't. The aircrafts a Hawk based at Valley.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info about the plane,it's not far from valley to Chester.

ref the extenders, Mine are mk3's, so that explains.
I nearly sold the 2x recently, but decided to keep it for times when reach was the most important factor.

With a 5DIII on a 300 2.8II the 2x isn't fantastic, but the 1x4 is.

Likewise on a 600f4 II 1x4 AF is great, but manually focusing with a x2 is not for me!

I have experimented using an extender to stack them just for fun.
 
Hi Dave
I know you are not keen on buying secondhand but if you bought from MPB or Mifsuds you get a warranty and l spec lenses are made to last plus most l spec lenses I have owned have lost very little money when I have come to sell them quality always costs a little more but it is normally worth it in the avenues faster lenses open up. A 300mm f2.8 i.s is around the £3,000 figure add in a couple of teleconvertors you would be set. Canon carry spares for their lenses for quite a time as well it is probably more than you want to spend but if looked after these lenses last a long long time.
 
Thanks your input guys, it has been much appreciated.

However, I have decided on which way to go, and have ordered the EF 400mm f/5.6 L USM, to which I will later add the Canon Series lll 1.4xTC.

Having spoken to a few 'birders', albeit birds aren't my prime interest, it seems that if the have IS, they tend to switch it off at these focal lengths, and rely on high shutter speeds instead. Upping the ISO when necessary.

At least sticking with L series lenses, I'm comfortable with the expected IQ, whereas I think if I went for the Sigma (150-500) or the Tamron 600mm zoom, I would have to accept some compromise in IQ, especially at the long end. Reviews that I have read seem to support this thinking.

Dave
 
DaveS2 said:
Having spoken to a few 'birders', albeit birds aren't my prime interest, it seems that if the have IS, they tend to switch it off at these focal lengths...
Click to expand...

I'm intrigued to know why they would do this. Did they explain?
 
digital said:
I'm intrigued to know why they would do this. Did they explain?
Click to expand...

The theory is that if you're using a fast shutter speed anyway to freeze subject movement, then that will also reduce camera shake to an imperceptible level so IS is unnecessary. And also, if you're following a bird flying erratically, that can sometimes throw the IS into a tizzy and it might make things worse. The flipside is that IS also stabilises the viewfinder, making accurate tracking with a long lens easier.

Personally, I would suck it and see. A good IS system on mode 2 should be pretty reliable. Best of all is probably a monopod - at least as good as IS, and foolproof (y) And of course a monopod takes the weight of a heavy lens.
 
Yep, they said that IS does nothing for moving objects, it is designed to alleviate hand induced camera shake, and as such is not a cure for motion blur. Only shutter speed does this,

To quote one guy:

"If you look at what you're usually photographing - birds - then IS is pretty pointless as you're subject is a fast moving beast which requires a fast shutter to freeze its motion, negating any benefit you'd get from IS combating camera shake. I think it's a perfect case of faster apertures being preferable to IS at this end of the focal length spectrum."

And another very experience wildlife photographer:

"You generally use a telephoto lens for sport, wildlife, or aircraft photography, all of which require fast shutter speeds which are higher than the reciprocal of the lens. Therefore, camera shake is not a consideration and it follows that Image Stabilisation is not required. Is IS of any benefit if you just happen to have it? No. I have owned/used lenses from 300mm to 600mm and they all had IS and handheld, my number of keepers increase if IS is turned off."

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top