Canon Lens Choice
- Thread starter StephyB
- Start date
- Messages
- 8,261
- Name
- Carl
- Edit My Images
- Yes
theres a huge difference between the 500 siggy and a 200 canon as far as reach, are you finding that you're not using the 500mm end of the siggy so much, hence prepared to do a drop on that?
I've got a 70-200 L 2 and boy is it lovely and sharp and bokeh at 2.8 is to die for. I cant comment on the 400mm as I wouldnt need that type of reach, but its more than likely to be a F4.5? as is the siggy 500mm?
The extra bokeh and light from a 2.8 makes it a very handy tool to get more light at a fast shutter speed, though it does weigh a fair bit. Having walked around for a few hours with that in your hand (full frame or crop), can be quite tiring. You might end up getting some extra muscles from the weight lifting.
I've got a 70-200 L 2 and boy is it lovely and sharp and bokeh at 2.8 is to die for. I cant comment on the 400mm as I wouldnt need that type of reach, but its more than likely to be a F4.5? as is the siggy 500mm?
The extra bokeh and light from a 2.8 makes it a very handy tool to get more light at a fast shutter speed, though it does weigh a fair bit. Having walked around for a few hours with that in your hand (full frame or crop), can be quite tiring. You might end up getting some extra muscles from the weight lifting.
OP
- Messages
- 932
- Name
- Steph
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yeah that is worrying me a little. I use the 500 end a lot, dropping back to 200 would be an adjustment that's for sure. The siggy has a sweet spot at f9-f10, I rarely use any aperture below that and when I do at 500mm the images are soft.
The weight could be an issue too, though walking around with the siggy all day is no easy feat.
A lot of what I do is birds and wildlife at a distance, so having the reach is rather important.
Edit: I think I just answered my own question haha.
The weight could be an issue too, though walking around with the siggy all day is no easy feat.
A lot of what I do is birds and wildlife at a distance, so having the reach is rather important.
Edit: I think I just answered my own question haha.
- Messages
- 3,717
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Another option may be the Tamron 70-200 vc or maybe tye canono 70-200 f/4 l is (much lighter) and a 400mm f/5.6. This is something I am considering. I have the Tamron 70-200 vc which I'm more than happy with and thinking of swapping the sigma 150-500 for the 400 f/5.6 L
OP
- Messages
- 932
- Name
- Steph
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I definitely want to have at least 400mm reach. Anything less and I won't get the shots I aim for (and I know that mine aren't always that great, but I enjoy it).
Now I'm torn between the 400mm prime or the 100-400. I don't have much experience with primes though.
Now I'm torn between the 400mm prime or the 100-400. I don't have much experience with primes though.
- Messages
- 3,717
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
One question, why are you looking to upgrade the 150-500? Reason I ask is that I don't know whether the 100-400 would give you any major benefit. Yesterday I spent the day at a local wildlife park and most of it was with the 150-500. After uploading last night I was pleased with how sharp most of the shots were. I was using it on a monopod for stability and turned the OS off. I still got sharp shots down to 1/320th f/8. (Photos are on the Nature zoos forum)
Moving to the prime would be my choice with a 1.4x for when you need longer or wait and see what the Sigma 150-600 is like
Moving to the prime would be my choice with a 1.4x for when you need longer or wait and see what the Sigma 150-600 is like
Last edited:
OP
- Messages
- 932
- Name
- Steph
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Honestly, because I'd like to be able to use a lower aperture without losing IQ and because the weight affects my ability to hold the camera steady after a while.
It will also be my first and likely only L series lens and I'd like one that I will use often. I guess there is a bit (ok more than a bit) of GAS coming into it as well.
For those who have the 400 prime, did you come from telephotos or did you always use primes? Do you miss the flexibility or does the increase in IQ make up for it?
- Messages
- 13,974
- Name
- Bill
- Edit My Images
- No
I am a Nikon user, I take bird and nature shots, my progression was
Nikon 70 300mm f4.5/f5.6 VR zoom …… new
Nikon 300f4 …… mint used
Nikon TC14Ell ………. new
Nikon 300mm f2.8VR ….. mint used
Nikon TC20Elll …….. mint used
Nikon AF-S 600mm f4 (non VR) - I could not/did not want to spend the money on the VR model …….. vgc used
I still have all the above and use them all depending on the circumstances … I use the 70 300mm on the river from a canoe
What would I also buy, maybe a Nikon 400mm f2.8VR ….. as it is just a sweet lens
I was thinking about the new 80 400mm VR Nikon zoom …… cost for lens only is up to £1,750 new ……… because I spend just over a month in S Africa each year and I want something that I can take as hand luggage with all my other kit, in the past I have taken the 300f4 and TC14 with tripod wise a light weight Redged or similar…. not my Gitzo,
BUT for that money I can get the Canon 400mm f5.6, the Canon 1.4TC and a Canon 7D body ….. which is very good, lightweight and will give me almost 900mm if I need it … OK the fvalue will be high but light is not usually a problem in summer in SA and I will have a tripod if needed.
I do not like zooms, just my opinion
It is a never ending "gear game" with Bird photography … tripods, gimbals, etc, etc, as well as lens ……. but IMHO these are as or more important than the body ….. provided you have a reasonable body ………. my D300 still takes great shots ….. but the crop factor of the D7100 is handy and the quality of the D700 can be appreciated
Go for a prime that you can carry around, if needed, to start with
Nikon 70 300mm f4.5/f5.6 VR zoom …… new
Nikon 300f4 …… mint used
Nikon TC14Ell ………. new
Nikon 300mm f2.8VR ….. mint used
Nikon TC20Elll …….. mint used
Nikon AF-S 600mm f4 (non VR) - I could not/did not want to spend the money on the VR model …….. vgc used
I still have all the above and use them all depending on the circumstances … I use the 70 300mm on the river from a canoe
What would I also buy, maybe a Nikon 400mm f2.8VR ….. as it is just a sweet lens
I was thinking about the new 80 400mm VR Nikon zoom …… cost for lens only is up to £1,750 new ……… because I spend just over a month in S Africa each year and I want something that I can take as hand luggage with all my other kit, in the past I have taken the 300f4 and TC14 with tripod wise a light weight Redged or similar…. not my Gitzo,
BUT for that money I can get the Canon 400mm f5.6, the Canon 1.4TC and a Canon 7D body ….. which is very good, lightweight and will give me almost 900mm if I need it … OK the fvalue will be high but light is not usually a problem in summer in SA and I will have a tripod if needed.
I do not like zooms, just my opinion
It is a never ending "gear game" with Bird photography … tripods, gimbals, etc, etc, as well as lens ……. but IMHO these are as or more important than the body ….. provided you have a reasonable body ………. my D300 still takes great shots ….. but the crop factor of the D7100 is handy and the quality of the D700 can be appreciated
Go for a prime that you can carry around, if needed, to start with
- Messages
- 3,321
- Name
- Peter Rushworth
- Edit My Images
- No
It depends what you want from a lens, do you like the versatility of a zoom? Do you use the full range of the zoom, or just tend to be at the maximum zoom. It also depends on your budget. The Canon 300mm f4 IS was the first long lens I bought and with the addition of the 1.4x TC it gave me a bit of flexibility, I've never had an issue with this lens and there's no noticeabile loss of IQs with the TC. Although I've not used the 400mm f5.6, by all accounts its the weapon of choice for bird photographer because its light, sharp and fast focusing. You have to be a bit more clever with a prime because you can't zoom in and out, but it makes you think more about how to compose the image. Another option depending on your budget is the sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS (not the sports version) which you should see on the secondhand market, versatile, fast focusing and works well with 1.4x and 2x TCs, although its probably as heavy or heavier than your 150-500.
- Messages
- 13,974
- Name
- Bill
- Edit My Images
- No
with birding you will never be near enough, (with exceptions), and always need more reach, you will use the lens at the longer end most of the time and the only thing a zoom gives you is the ability to spot a bird quicker, (for some), by using the short end of the zoom.
Think of how many times you will not use the lens at 400mm or whatever? .. so go for sharpness and IQ at that setting ……. zooms generally are below primes in these respects …… but usually more so at "the edges" of the frame ………. and as you will crop a lot, this may not be as serious as it is made out as long as the centre is sharpe
but I would still favour a prime, (for bird and wildlife photography, and close ups?)
Think of how many times you will not use the lens at 400mm or whatever? .. so go for sharpness and IQ at that setting ……. zooms generally are below primes in these respects …… but usually more so at "the edges" of the frame ………. and as you will crop a lot, this may not be as serious as it is made out as long as the centre is sharpe
but I would still favour a prime, (for bird and wildlife photography, and close ups?)
Last edited:
- Messages
- 4,399
- Name
- Bob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Where abouts are you steph, if near me you are more than welcome to have a go 300f4+1.4 extender, North Devon
For birding I can honestly say you could count on one hand the amount of times I would like to have been able to zoom out, it is usually the opposite.
I hired 100-400 for a week and a cracking lens it is but it did not suit me, I suggest if you can try it first even if it means hiring for a week
For birding I can honestly say you could count on one hand the amount of times I would like to have been able to zoom out, it is usually the opposite.
I hired 100-400 for a week and a cracking lens it is but it did not suit me, I suggest if you can try it first even if it means hiring for a week
- Messages
- 4,399
- Name
- Bob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
if ever I am passing will call in 