Do I need a new lens?

Briony

Briony

Messages
3,869
Name
Nicki.
Edit My Images
Yes
O.K. as some of you know I have been out shooting wildlife and they are very difficult to get near, so I have been using my 120 - 400 mm at full length. It has been pointed out to me that because I am doing this this is why I am not getting them sharp enough. Is this right? or what I am doing at present is putting into practice my techinque, is this right? I do so want to get this right and as the saying goes "practice makes perfect"

I have thought of getting a new lens for wildlife as that is where my love lies and I have great facilities, but don't want to waste the money if I am not able to shoot at full length and get rubbish results. Do you all when shooting wildlife shoot at full length or are you fortunate enough to get close?

Hope you can see where I am coming from on this one and can give me advice.
 
Briony, your kite pictures can be a bit soft but the birds also look quite small in the image and are perhps not close enough.

Sharpness is a difficult debate and can depend on the amount of pixel peeping.

To ensure your lens is not at fault you really need to test it on a stationary subject with camera tripod mounted and remote release.

Take a picture of a magazine containing text and images at various focal lengths and see what the results are. Brick walls with prounounced texture are good as well.

If sharp then it is your panning technique, but be aware that most zooms can be a bit soft at extremes and with the aperture wide open. so try changing those as well.
 
Yep hand held have a look at mey threads re the Kites and the Muntjac (sorry don't know how to put links on here )

039.jpg


110.jpg


035-2.jpg


Here try these.
 
andrewc said:
The trouble is, all the really good long lenses, both primes and zooms are a fortune - eg a 400mm f5.6 L is about £ 1000 and 500mm lenses are triple this.
Click to expand...

I know and can't do it:shake: so will just have to make do with what I have got I think.

Did the experiment with a cereal box and the results were that the Long lens came out top but it was not at full length so I think the problem lies with the lens at full stretch and will just have to live with it.
 
There are a few 400mm f5.6's knocking about for around £650 and they are awesome lenses as I love mine.
 
Sorry I mean the Canon 400mm f5.6 L I was saying that you can get them second hand for about £650.

Here is an image I have taken with mine, it was taken at Aston Rowant which is brilliant for photographing Red Kites as they come very close sometimes and there is hundreds of them.

IMG_5320cm-1.jpg
 
I know I live 1 mile from there this is why I have them here I feed them everyday and they get so so close.

|Perhaps try with my smaller lens and see what results I get.

039-1.jpg
 
Shouldn't be too bad even at full strtch - I think what you're experiencing is more to do with camera shake, which is more pronounced at longer focal lengths.
At 400mm the minimum shutter speed to attain sharp images is about 500th sec on a non-VR lens - personally I'd go even faster: 1000th or 2000th sec.
Any under/over-panning will result in soft images, so if you're moving the camera too fast or too slow relative to the subject, they'll also appear soft.
 
Arkady said:
Shouldn't be too bad even at full strtch - I think what you're experiencing is more to do with camera shake, which is more pronounced at longer focal lengths.
At 400mm the minimum shutter speed to attain sharp images is about 500th sec on a non-VR lens - personally I'd go even faster: 1000th or 2000th sec.
Any under/over-panning will result in soft images, so if you're moving the camera too fast or too slow relative to the subject, they'll also appear soft.
Click to expand...

^^^ I agree.

While really sharp long lenses are very expensive, and long zooms are often softer at the long end, the usual problem is a technique issue. They are just very hard to use, and both focusing and shutter speed are critical.

You are also shooting against a very bright background with BIF shots, and the underside of the bird is always in shade. That often equals contrast and flare issues, and exposure difficulties.

I would use centre-point AF, tracking the subject carefully in servo mode, and keep the shutter speed well up.
 
Briony

I use a 400d and a Canon 75-300mm lens, it has taken me a long time to get to know the lens and its capabilities. Once you know what it can and can't do then you can adjust the camera or the shot to suit.

The info from the first shot shows:
Focal Length: 400.0mm
Aperture: f/7.1
Exposure Time: 0.0005 s (1/2000)
ISO equiv: 1600
Exposure Bias: +2.00
Metering Mode: Spot
Exposure: shutter priority (semi-auto)

As others have mentioned you need to bring the ISO down alittle. On the 400D I don't shoot anything higher than ISO 400 or else you do get noise and if you have to sharpen slighlty in PS then the noise just gets worse.
Also bring the aperture down to its min. 5.6 this will help keep the shutter speed up.

I suppose the most important thing is to keep practicing. Keep up the good work.
 
The latest image you have posted looks flat, this is probably because it was taken at 3:30pm. Trying going out early morning or late afternoon when the light is at its best and not harsh.

Shooting in good light makes a massive difference in image quality and normally sharpness.
 
A good tripod and gimbal type head would help you out as well................:thumbs:
 
Whilst I have nothing longer than a 70-200 Briony the principle of all the advice given from everyone here stands firm with any lens imo. Even the picture Liam has posted looks soft to me ,so you also have to take a look at editing and how an image it is altered when posting up for web use, tbh I see nothing wrong with your shot that a bit of PP would not sort out :shrug: but thats just me ;)

039-1.jpg
 
^I agree

looks like a bloody fantastic shot, specially on a 450D, which in my experiences has pants AF! It's certainly better than I could do, which is why I stick to still subjects!
 
Hi Briony,
I'm assuming your 120-400 is the Sigma? If so I'm certain there are two OS settings on the lens similar to the Canon 100-400 L. Have you tried using the horizontal panning switch which might help when tracking birds in flight :shrug:

Paul
 
I don't think I have used that Paul as I am not sure where it is :shrug:
 
It would be a switch on the barrel of the lens with something like Off-1-2 on it.
Paul
 
I may be wrong, but looking back at your muntjac image, although it is quite sharp, there appear to be traces of smearing of fine detail caused by noise reduction. I suspect this may be losing you a little detail in the other shots as well.
If you are cropping substantially then getting the last ounce of detail from your images is essential, which means shooting raw. Raw images converted by something like Photoshop will show a little more detail, give you better dynamic range and will sharpen up more cleanly. Careful application of noise reduction afterwards can retain substantially more detail than jpeg originals straight out of the camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top