Larger lens uses

P

profiler

Messages
50
Name
Derek
Edit My Images
No
Hi Guys,
I've just returned from a safari, but found that my Canon 7D with 70-200 zoom just did not have the reach.
My question is apart from 'wildlife' what other uses could a 300mm or 400mm be put to?
Any guidance much appreciated.
profiler
 
300mm you can still do handheld, 400mm > not sure about as I've never had one but I guess at the longer reach things start to get quite wobbly, so you would need to be shooting off a tripod. Also, I think most longer reach lenses have a more closed aperture

Other uses. hmmmm. I would use the 300mm anywhere that I would normally use the 200mm - i think with a longer reach as well, you won't be getting F4 or F2.8, but more like 5.6 or 6.3 so not so open the longer you go....
 
I think the most common uses of our lenses in the 300+ mm range are:
* wildlife especially safaris (sorry!)
* motorsports
* aircraft
* field sports
 
Many thanks for your replies.
Carlh, good point about getting wobbly, as they do start to get quiet heavy. Might have to think about a monopod
 
Gary Coyle said:
How about keeping your 70-200mm and buy a 1.4x or 2x extender
Click to expand...

This is what I was going to suggest too. Plus it's a little more cost effective than a whole new lens straight up, particularly if you're not sure how often it will be used.
 
using extenders does loose you a couple of stops and the af isn't so fast. the 100-400 springs to my mind or sigma 150 - 500
 
I've used a 300 f2.8 and 200-400 f4 on a monopod and find that worked well - the Nikon 70-200 f2.8 + 2X TC also works extremely well ... sorry I can't comment on Canon.
 
wave01 said:
using extenders does loose you a couple of stops and the af isn't so fast. the 100-400 springs to my mind or sigma 150 - 500
Click to expand...
Yes, but if you're starting with a 70-200mm f/2.8 then you're starting with an extra couple of stops and faster AF compared to those lenses, so the extender just drags you back to parity.

I'd expect a Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 with an extender to perform comparably to a 100-400mm in terms of image quality and AF speed. It's bigger and heaver and it doesn't have the ergonomics, but it's £1000 cheaper (assuming that you have the 70-200 already and don't want to sell it).

On the other hand, if you're starting with a 70-200mm f/4, then the extenders route isn't so attractive. You couldn't get to 400mm without losing autofocus on your 7D.

@profiler : What is your current lens?
 
Thanks guys,
wave01 - I had thought about the 1.4 extender, but as you suggest loosing a couple of stops and in particular the 'AF' not being so fast.
Has anyone used the Sigma 150-500 and will it AF with a Canon 7D?
 
IMHO i would go and look at the canon 100-400 as you use L lenses now, get a black rapid strap and carry it that way
 
some weird advise being given here ,first off a 1.4 tc WILL NOT a/f with your lens ,in fact there not advised for any zoom lenses at all . a 400mm f5.6 is a good lens or a canon 100-400mm or even to keep costs down a sigma 120-400mm o.s . .a often overlooked lens is the canon 300mm f4 i.s that will take a 1.4 t.c and also give you good close up ability .
please note carefully all of the above mentioned lenses have been used at sometime by myself they are all hand holdable and versatile .personally i use the 400mm f5.6 for its outstanding i.q ,all the above lenses will work fine and fast on a 7D .the larger sigma 150-500mm o.s is also one that i have owned and while a good lens there are a lot of friday versions out there so its best to try before you buy .or if you really want to push the boat out reach wise theres lots of threads all over the net about the new tamron 150-600mm v.r that is starting to look good .still some bugs in the system on that one though with reports of a/f issues .
the choice is yours you have to equate use versus costs with this though ,if your not a wildlife shooter in general would it not be better to just hire a lens for safaris .???
 
the black fox said:
some weird advise being given here ,first off a 1.4 tc WILL NOT a/f with your lens...
Click to expand...

Jeff, the OP says that he has a 70-200mm f/4 so a 1.4x extender WILL give him AF but unless he's shooting with a 5DMKIII or a 1Dx, he'll lose AF with a 2x extender. :)
 
Carlh said:
i think with a longer reach as well, you won't be getting F4 or F2.8, but more like 5.6 or 6.3 so not so open the longer you go....
Click to expand...

I ahve a 400mm f2.8 (there are longer lens at f4) and unless your superman its deffo not a hand held lens:)
 
yep i stand corrected ,still not advised on a zoom lens though .they are really intended to be used on primes .
 
i have the 50-500 mm sigma you can hand hold it but it is a heavy lens next to your 70-200 f4 canon the sigma is 1970 g the 70-200mm f4 is 705 g the 70-200f4 feels like a toy next to the sigma my advice would be to go to your local camera shop and try a few lenses out to make sure your happy holding them also take into account the 100-400 canon is a push and pull lens and not every one can get on with it
 
hochy1, good advice to try out a few. As you say the 70-200 IS a light weight compared to the big boys

Thanks for all your replies
 
the black fox said:
yep i stand corrected ,still not advised on a zoom lens though .they are really intended to be used on primes .
Click to expand...

I must remember that next time I fit my 1.4 or 2x converter (Canon) to my 70/200 F4 IS L, especially when I compare the results to my 400 5.6L (no IS), despite being "not recommended" (by whom) they seem to work rather well, they certainly represent good value for money in terms of AF and IQ. Maybe I'm just lucky, either that or the 5Dmk3 reacts better than some other cameras or manufacturers.
 
the black fox said:
yep i stand corrected ,still not advised on a zoom lens though .they are really intended to be used on primes .
Click to expand...
And you're still wrong.

Canon have a very deliberate design policy of ensuring that lenses which are not intended for use with extenders cannot be used with extenders, and lenses which are intended for use with extenders can be used with exrtenders. Every Canon extenders has a protruding front element, and it will only physically fit onto a lens which has a recessed rear element. So for example the 70-300mm L series zoom does not have recessed rear element so it won't fit; whereas all flavours of 70-200mm zoom, and the 100-400mm zoom, all have recessed rear elements so they can be used. As I said this is a deliberate design decision by Canon.
 
the black fox said:
yep i stand corrected ,still not advised on a zoom lens though .they are really intended to be used on primes .
Click to expand...

WHAT????
OMG!!! I guess regardless of the great images I get with my 70-200 f4 and 1.4 TC, I'll have to sell then now and buy a sigma.

Wish you'd told me this before I wasted my money on quality canon gear.
 
StewartR said:
And you're still wrong.

Canon have a very deliberate design policy of ensuring that lenses which are not intended for use with extenders cannot be used with extenders, and lenses which are intended for use with extenders can be used with exrtenders. Every Canon extenders has a protruding front element, and it will only physically fit onto a lens which has a recessed rear element. So for example the 70-300mm L series zoom does not have recessed rear element so it won't fit; whereas all flavours of 70-200mm zoom, and the 100-400mm zoom, all have recessed rear elements so they can be used. As I said this is a deliberate design decision by Canon.
Click to expand...
Absolutly correct though i do question why Canon/Nikon make TC's that wont/cant work with some lenses when the Kenko ones do physically fit some lenses the Canon/Nikon TC's dont with outstanding results i might add
 
profiler said:
My question is apart from 'wildlife' what other uses could a 300mm or 400mm be put to?
Any guidance much appreciated.
profiler
Click to expand...
Anything where you don't want to intrude on the scene.

I once did an engagement shoot with my 120-400mm and was at 400 for most of it.

The reason it was great is that I told them for 20mins just to walk around and be themselves and because I wasn't in their space, they could do exactly that and provided some really nice, natural photos.
 
Phil Young said:
Anything where you don't want to intrude on the scene.

I once did an engagement shoot with my 120-400mm and was at 400 for most of it.

The reason it was great is that I told them for 20mins just to walk around and be themselves and because I wasn't in their space, they could do exactly that and provided some really nice, natural photos.
Click to expand...


I'd also like to try macro with a 500mm and extension tubes ;)
 
StewartR said:
And you're still wrong.

Canon have a very deliberate design policy of ensuring that lenses which are not intended for use with extenders cannot be used with extenders, and lenses which are intended for use with extenders can be used with exrtenders. Every Canon extenders has a protruding front element, and it will only physically fit onto a lens which has a recessed rear element. So for example the 70-300mm L series zoom does not have recessed rear element so it won't fit; whereas all flavours of 70-200mm zoom, and the 100-400mm zoom, all have recessed rear elements so they can be used. As I said this is a deliberate design decision by Canon.
Click to expand...

i stand double corrected ,thank you for clarifying it properly .hopefully now the bitching will stop and the poor O/P will get the answer he requires .
 
profiler said:
Hi Guys,
I've just returned from a safari, but found that my Canon 7D with 70-200 zoom just did not have the reach.
My question is apart from 'wildlife' what other uses could a 300mm or 400mm be put to?
Any guidance much appreciated.
profiler
Click to expand...

Most of the tele primes are metal bodied and will double up as a pretty good bludgeon.
 
Willid1 said:
I love using longer lenses for general photography, it makes you think about the detail of the world around you, particularly like this for architecture.

Quite a few examples on my Flickr page http://www.flickr.com/photos/25857109@N08/sets/72157624847009943/

David
Click to expand...
Great stuff. For a long while I had an idea of making a book of photos of London architecture with a 500mm lens. (This was long before I actually had access to a 500mm lens.) Then one day I found "my" book in Waterstones, only of course it was 10x better than I could have done, so that was that. But with photo books so easy to make these days, and with access to all the big lenses I could ever want, maybe I should give it a go. I've certainly found your images inspirational. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
I use a 7d with the 70-200 and a 1.4 and never had any issues except a very slight loss of IQ, saying that for wildlife, especially birds, its still not long enough
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top