Newby type lens advice.

Messages
48
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
No
Contemplating buying a tele lens for nature/wildlife photography. I appreciate that for longer distance subjects I really need 400+mm even on a my crop sensor Canon but I don't have the money for that and realistically I'm envisaging most of my shots are likely to be in the garden or maybe closer subjects at a local bird hide. I'd narrowed it down to what seems to be a popular choice. A used Canon 55-250 IS STM or tghe Tamron 70-300 VC. Both are F4-5.6 lenses. I had pretty much decided on the latter. However scanning around the used items on MPB I came across a Canon 200mm F2.8 L ii USM and reading the reviews it looks an excellent performer in a very compact package. The question is in terms of image quality and resolution whether a cropped image with this lens would be better than a full image with the other lenses mentioned. The Canon 200mm does not have the flexibility of the zoom or stabilisation but F2.8 vs F4-5.6 is attractive. I could just about stump up the extra cash but would it be the better option?
 
Mmm that was one that I looked at and decided it was out of reach. I need funds for other things too so drew the line.
 
Could you run to, or save a bit longer for, a used Sigma 100-400 f/5 - f/6.3 DG OS HSM C? If so, then budget for getting the Sigma USB dock for it too (about £20 or so used) so you can ensure the lens has got the latest firmware (they improved both focus speed and image stabilisation in the viewfinder with updates - so bear that in mind if your read any test reviews from when this lens first came out), pus you can fine tune the focus (mine was a bit out, but it's spot on now I've calibrated it). I'd have loved the Canon 100-400 L Mk II, but just couldn't justify the cost for the amount I'd actually use it. So the Sig 100-400 was a good compromise for me. Plus it's lighter and smaller too. The downside is no tripod mount, but 3rd party 'unofficial' ones are available from eBay and Amazon if you feel you need one.

I find image Stabilisation is pretty much essential for hand held shots with lenses of around 300mm and above, also at 400mm even f/6.3 doesn't give much depth of field, so I wouldn't get too hung up about wider apertures, and remember that f/6.3 is only 1/3 of a stop less than f/5.6 when making comparisons and considering price versus value for money.
 
Its tricky . Canon L glass is generally pretty good, but I don't think it would be ideal for birds, unless there is an ostrich farm next door. You could check to see if it would accept a teleconverter - a x1.4 would bring it to a 280mm f/4 lens - but I always think a teleconverter isn't really an ideal substute for a lens of that focal length anyway.

The older 150-500 are comparatively cheap these days. Not as good as the 150-600 which replaced it, but may fit the bill.
 
Maybe look at the sigma 150-500mm used. I've not used it myself, but I doubt it is any less sharp at the long end than the Tamron you are looking at.
 
I would suggest an older Sigma lens, the 100-300mm f4, one of my fave lenses for wildlife when i had a Pentax K3, hideously expensive for Pentax but a bargain for Canikon
Found a great clean copy on Ebay
You can also add a tc fairly cheaply.
 
I would suggest an older Sigma lens, the 100-300mm f4, one of my fave lenses for wildlife when i had a Pentax K3, hideously expensive for Pentax but a bargain for Canikon
Found a great clean copy on Ebay
You can also add a tc fairly cheaply.

The same Sigma lens is also for sale on MPB for £10 more than the Canon 200 the original poster mentioned £354 v £344
https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/used-equi...m-f-4-ex-apo-if-hsm-canon-ef-fit/sku-1060265/
 
The same Sigma lens is also for sale on MPB for £10 more than the Canon 200 the original poster mentioned £354 v £344
https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/used-equi...m-f-4-ex-apo-if-hsm-canon-ef-fit/sku-1060265/

Hi Scott, many thanks for leg work on this. The Sigma 100-300 is a possibilty and I'm trawling through the reviews which so far seem fairly positive and I appreciate your endorsement of it too. From experience with another hobby its easy to get into a "paralysis through analysis" state so at some point I'll have to dive in. I've looked hard at the 400mm option but given where I am up to in this hobby I'm struggling to justify the cost in my mind, but never say never!

I expected some feedback about the Canon/Tamron choice, ie pros/cons both ways, especially given how popular they both are. Interesting.
 
Tamron 100-400 is a cracking lens for the price, I bought mine via einfinity.
You could also pick up a used Tamron 100-600 for a good price.
Again via a grey seller like einfinty you can get a Tamron 100-600 G2 (which I am planning on getting) for a reasonable price as well.
 
Tamron 100-400 is a cracking lens for the price, I bought mine via einfinity.

In terms of image quality I don't think you can put more than a cigarette paper between the Sigma and Tamron 100-400 lenses. From what I saw in the reviews when I was weighing up my options, it was pretty much swings and roundabouts with them. One review reckoned the Tamron focus tracked moving objects better, but I understand this was a comparison with a Sigma before they updated the firmware to improve AF performance. I've not seen a direct comparison of the two lenses after the Sigma firmware update, so don't know how they compare now. If you find a recent review then let me know.

In the end I went for a Sigma, as a used mint one came available at the right price for a trade in, and the zoom ring turns the same way as Canon lenses do. If I had a Nikon then I'd have probably gone for the Tamron, as I believe that turns the same way as Nikon zooms do? The Tamron has 'weatherproofing' too, but I don't usually use my camera in the rain. Other than that, I doubt you could go far wrong with either of them. I did find the Sigma USB dock indispensable for updating and fine tuning my lens, does Tamron have a similar facility to update firmware, etc?
 
Last edited:
In terms of image quality I don't think you can put more than a cigarette paper between the Sigma and Tamron 100-400 lenses. From what I saw in the reviews when I was weighing up my options, it was pretty much swings and roundabouts with them.

I found the same with reviews but the price with einfinity for the Tamron was too good to miss.


I did find the Sigma USB dock indispensable for updating and fine tuning my lens, does Tamron have a similar facility to update firmware, etc?

Yes Tamron have a USB dock available but I never bothered as it has been fine with my 80D.
 
I'm new here and I've come to your post late in the day, but there is another option... if you are intending photographing nature in your back garden, have you considered using your existing equipment and a remote control? My radio remote cost all of £30. Set your camoflaged camera up and maybe some bait in a good location, retire to your more distant observation spot (possibly to the comfort of indoors) and wait for the wildlife to come to you. If the wildlife is shy, try setting up a mock camera for them to get used to first. With ingenuity, you'll get some images that are more memorable than standard 'bird on stick with bokeh'. I do have a Sigma 400 under the bed, but its so unwieldy, I never use it. Chasing stuff around with a telephoto is so last century :)
 
As the previous poster said setting up as a remote camera works Below an example of one I took while I was in the house Camera hidden behind a pot plant


BCMRu3V.jpg


I used a Phottix WXD-188 remote trigger and receiver for this shot. It helped doing a few test shots first to check all was set up ok
 
Last edited:
Now I'm allowed to post images, here is an experimental shot I took a while back. I concede its more arty than standard wildlife photography for all sorts of reasons (the darn dried mealworms got everywhere and pointing a camera directly up is not ideal), but it was taken in my back garden with a GoPro which is about as far away from a telephoto as you can get.
 

Attachments

  • starlings.JPG
    starlings.JPG
    136.8 KB · Views: 16
Last edited:
I'm new here and I've come to your post late in the day, but there is another option... if you are intending photographing nature in your back garden, have you considered using your existing equipment and a remote control? My radio remote cost all of £30. Set your camoflaged camera up and maybe some bait in a good location, retire to your more distant observation spot (possibly to the comfort of indoors) and wait for the wildlife to come to you. If the wildlife is shy, try setting up a mock camera for them to get used to first. With ingenuity, you'll get some images that are more memorable than standard 'bird on stick with bokeh'. I do have a Sigma 400 under the bed, but its so unwieldy, I never use it. Chasing stuff around with a telephoto is so last century :)

Thanks for the post, you must have been reading my mind, well almost! I have come to accept that getting close up shots of geese some distance away with a long lens isn't going to happen but closer targets in the garden is with a modest lens and/or with a bit of subterfuge is doable. Still haven't decided on which tele lens, now currently considering the Canon 70-300 is usm ii nano.
 
Back
Top