Canon 300d - what to put on front....

[advid]

... just recently got a Canon 300d (with kit lens 18-55mm -nice - but not much good for birding....)

Can anyone suggest a good all-round lens to put on for 'everyday' shooting including birds/wildlife..... can't afford the 'L' stuff tho'......

also Tamron & Sigma would be OK if there's a good lens to recommend...

[gene]

You can get a Sigma 50-500 for around $800-$1000. It is a pretty sharp lens, though it is big and heavy and you would need to use a tripod most of the time.

Gene

[advid]

thanks Gene..... I agree it looks good ... BUT I'm really (at this moment in time) after an 'everyday' go anywhere lens - no tripod etc.....

I'll definately look at these more specialist super zoom lenses at a later date - right now I just want something that's more versatile than the kit lens for birds/wildlife/landscape/people/etc

You can get a Sigma 50-500 for around $800-$1000. It is a pretty sharp lens, though it is big and heavy and you would need to use a tripod most of the time.

Gene

[gene]

thanks Gene..... I agree it looks good ... BUT I'm really (at this moment in time) after an 'everyday' go anywhere lens - no tripod etc.....

I'll definately look at these more specialist super zoom lenses at a later date - right now I just want something that's more versatile than the kit lens for birds/wildlife/landscape/people/etc


Well, birding is sort of specialist. You need 300mm or more, really at least 400 in my opinion. For no tripod you will probably want IS as well. If you haven't already you should go to a local camera store and try out some telephotos. If you haven't tried one you may be suprised how little reach they actually give you, even with the 1.6 crop factor of the 300d.

A versatile and pretty decent consumer grade zoom is the Canon 28-135 IS, for about $400, which will give you people, nature (some close-up macro and flora), but limited landscape and no birds. The wide-angle kit lens should be good for landscape WA landscape. Then you could get a telephoto later for birds.

[Michael W]

I just bought the 300D and have a Vivitar 100-400mm f/4.5-6.7 on the way. It should get here either tomorrow or the next day and I'll be able to tell you how I like it after I've tried it out.

[Michael W]

I forgot to mention that I have the same view as you do about lenses (I think it's the same). I am getting something to start with and get good practice with before I spend all the big bucks on a good lens later on. I'd also prefer not to always be using a tripod.

Michael

[advid]

..... let me(us) know what you think of your Vivitar lens ----- how much was it ? (£)

I forgot to mention that I have the same view as you do about lenses (I think it's the same). I am getting something to start with and get good practice with before I spend all the big bucks on a good lens later on. I'd also prefer not to always be using a tripod.

Michael

[James]

How about using my lens (for sale at any reasonable price)

Sigma 175 - 500mm Canon fit.

James

[rogerscoth]

Originally Posted by Michael W
I'd also prefer not to always be using a tripod.
___________________________________

Some photographers who use a large lens get by without using a tripod!!!!

Roger

[Michael W]

Hi Advid,
The lens was about $220 American. That would be approximately 184.537 pounds according to the Universal Currency Converter. The lens should come in today - I can't wait! I'll be sure and let you know how I like it!

Hi Roger,
That's funny! I hope that he has a steady back!

Michael

[Michael W]

Hello Advid!

Well, the lens came in yesterday, and I tried it out a bit then, plus about 300 pictures this morning. With it being my first lens, I don't have anything to compare it with, but to me, it is awesome. The focusing is fairly good, but it often searches all the way in and back if it doesn't recognize that the focus point is over an object (does that makes sense?). The zoom is activated by sliding the main part of the lens back or forth. Also, the focusing is external (not a problem for me). The quality of the pictures is very good. If it is cloudy outside, you might need a tripod or other solid object because of the relatively small aperature, but I found that when the sun came out, I could hand-hold it with no problems, other than a shaky image. Another thing to mention is the fact that you can't zoom out very far, but the 18-55mm lens should work fine for whatever this lens can't do.

I would highly recommend this lens for something to get started on. You will get what you pay for, and I don't know how long this lens will hold up.

I hope that this helps!

Michael

[advid]

Michael....

sounds like you're pretty pleased with your lens.... I've just made my mind to go down the 'safe' route for now and have just ordered a Canon 75-300 USM III.... should get it Monday....I've also got my old Olympus B300 (1.7x magnification) lens that I can also put on the front (if it's bright enough) this will take the 75-300 with the Canon 300D's 1.6 magnification up to 816mm - will post some shots when I get some birds.... (very grey days now in UK this time of year)....

Hello Advid!

Well, the lens came in yesterday, and I tried it out a bit then, plus about 300 pictures this morning. With it being my first lens, I don't have anything to compare it with, but to me, it is awesome. The focusing is fairly good, but it often searches all the way in and back if it doesn't recognize that the focus point is over an object (does that makes sense?). The zoom is activated by sliding the main part of the lens back or forth. Also, the focusing is external (not a problem for me). The quality of the pictures is very good. If it is cloudy outside, you might need a tripod or other solid object because of the relatively small aperature, but I found that when the sun came out, I could hand-hold it with no problems, other than a shaky image. Another thing to mention is the fact that you can't zoom out very far, but the 18-55mm lens should work fine for whatever this lens can't do.

I would highly recommend this lens for something to get started on. You will get what you pay for, and I don't know how long this lens will hold up.

I hope that this helps!

Michael

[sjprg]

Sorry guys, I think you are in for a disapointment. Quite a few of us have been down the same road and have a closet full of these lenses.
For birds don't even think of going less than the Sigma 50-500 @about $800.00, next step is the Sigma 300 f/2.8 with the 2.0TC @ about $2400.00, after that is the Sigma 800mm. Or if you are rich the Canon lenses which start at about $5500.00 up to about $70,000.00.

[Ragna]

You could try a Sigma 400 5.6 apo len no longer made but sometimes come for sale on e-bay or a/p it may not auto focus on a digital camera but some one on here said that Sigma may be able to convert it to auto focus,worth a phone call to Sigma to find out.

[Adey Baker]

The Sigma 400 will auto-focus but it'll need 're-chipping' by Sigma first. They'll do it free if you buy the lens new (1 or 2 places may still have them in stock in UK) and have receipts for lens and camera, otherwise they charge for it (not sure how much but i think it's not too expansive)

[nigelblake]

While it is necessary to use longer lenses most of the time, don't think that bird photography is not possible with shorter focal lengths, of course it will require a bit of planning and care, plus some tollerant birds, but shorter lenses put a whole new perspective on the shot.

[Geoff Brown]

Advid
I have a Canon 28-135mm IS lens which is great for everyday use and for birding have just acquired a Sigma 135-400mm zoom, brand new but at a half price discount here in the UK which makes me wonder if it will shortly or has already been discontinued. Nevertheless it is a good but very heavy lens best used on a tripod, and of course considerably less than comparable Canon L models. To me these two lenses cover all my photo needs especially as they are now mainly used on a Canon EOS 10D with the slight magnification over regular 35mm. If anything further is needed perhaps a Sigma 1.4 teleconverter and in the distant future more wide angle say 16- 35mm but thats not yet.

[RonL]

Michael....

... I've just made my mind to go down the 'safe' route for now and have just ordered a Canon 75-300 USM III.... should get it Monday....I've also got my old Olympus B300 (1.7x magnification) lens that I can also put on the front (if it's bright enough) this will take the 75-300 with the Canon 300D's 1.6 magnification up to 816mm - will post some shots when I get some birds.... (very grey days now in UK this time of year)....

Advid-
I find myself with a similar setup - just bought Canon 300D and 75-300 III (not USM) and already had a B300 lens for our Oly 720. When I read your thread, I wondered if you have tried this setup yet. I ran upstairs to see if the B300 would fit the threads of the Canon but found it did not... so what adapter are you aware of to make this connection (55mm to 58mm)?

Also, is the IS USM feature required for birding on the Canon 75-300 III lens? We took this Canon setup out over the weekend and found it equal to the zoom of the Oly 720 (8x zoom) with the B300 attached. The Canon had far less noise in darkened areas making the output after cropping good. But I thought it could be a little better so I wonder if the IS (and USM) would give the extra sharpness.

Lastly, is the Olympia UZI 2100 still the best of all for birding - even better than the Canon setup? (I have wondered about getting one of these for birding.)

[advid]

reply to 'Ron'....

....the B300 put on the front of the 75-300 is a bit of a monster - the front of the lens rotates as it focuses and I feel it puts too much strain on the motor/drive/focus mechanism....will work in manual and auto focus OK BUT not recommended.....

I've since been out and brought a x2 converter and this now takes the 75-300 (with x1.6 on the 300d) up to 600 (x1.6) = 960mm... the camera won't auto focus all the way (about 200mm max) because of aperure/light etc. BUT put it into manual focus and the 7 leds will light individually when in focus in the viewfinder when focus is attained....

The IS (image stabilised) lens is 'probably' better overall but if you're on a tripod it's probably not worth it....

The good old Olympus 2100uz (UZI) is still a classic and worth all the 'birds' in china :-) BUT Panasonic have a FZ10 coming to UK soom (12x zoom - image stabilised - 4 meg) - this looks like it 'could' become another classic camera for birding.....

Advid-
I find myself with a similar setup - just bought Canon 300D and 75-300 III (not USM) and already had a B300 lens for our Oly 720. When I read your thread, I wondered if you have tried this setup yet. I ran upstairs to see if the B300 would fit the threads of the Canon but found it did not... so what adapter are you aware of to make this connection (55mm to 58mm)?

Also, is the IS USM feature required for birding on the Canon 75-300 III lens? We took this Canon setup out over the weekend and found it equal to the zoom of the Oly 720 (8x zoom) with the B300 attached. The Canon had far less noise in darkened areas making the output after cropping good. But I thought it could be a little better so I wonder if the IS (and USM) would give the extra sharpness.

Lastly, is the Olympia UZI 2100 still the best of all for birding - even better than the Canon setup? (I have wondered about getting one of these for birding.)

[pdackerman]

I have the Canon 28-135mm IS and the 70 - 300IS and I am very pleased with them. I have been able to get some good photos of birds with the 300 lense see:-
www.watchingbirds.co.uk
It is always nice to have a longer lense, but it will cost more, way more and may need a tripod.
I would always go for an IS lense, it is just great.
I am thinking of getting a 100-400 IS now.

[RonL]

I decided (thx to the help of BF members) to go with the Canon 75-300mm IS lens. It seems to be the best 'compromise' between cost, weight and quality of images, at least from what I am reading here and elsewhere. Although we use the tripod some, yet so many birding photo ops are fleeting and the IS feature will surely give us the much needed edge.

I'm returning the standard 75-300mm lens to the camera store that originally sold it to me and having them put me on the list for their next shipment of the IS lens. Apparently this lens is a hot item and they (and several on-line stores) are out-of-stock. I'll try to return with my experience with this new lens.

[yellow_belly]

Hi - I have the Canon 75-300 IS on my 300D, I like the lens but find that it is quite heavy, it does not have a tripod mount so you have to use the camera's when conecting to a tripod which makes it a bit unbalanced. I sent an email to Canon asking if there was a tripod mount adapter for the 75-300IS and interestingly got this answer back only yesterday.......

A tripod mount is not available for the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. Further, it is not recommended to mount the camera/lens on a tripod with the ImageStabiliser switched on.

... I do not have the IS turned on when tripod mounted but wonder *why* - all I can think of is that you may get very small vibrations when the lens is 'rigidly' mounted because of the operation of the gyros ?

Terry

[pdackerman]

You want to try one of the "L" lenses, then you will know what heavy is :-)


Hi - I have the Canon 75-300 IS on my 300D, I like the lens but find that it is quite heavy, it does not have a tripod mount so you have to use the camera's when conecting to a tripod which makes it a bit unbalanced. I sent an email to Canon asking if there was a tripod mount adapter for the 75-300IS and interestingly got this answer back only yesterday.......

A tripod mount is not available for the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. Further, it is not recommended to mount the camera/lens on a tripod with the ImageStabiliser switched on.

... I do not have the IS turned on when tripod mounted but wonder *why* - all I can think of is that you may get very small vibrations when the lens is 'rigidly' mounted because of the operation of the gyros ?

Terry

[yellow_belly]

You want to try one of the "L" lenses, then you will know what heavy is :-)Hi pdackerman - I have never tried any 'L' lenes so cant compare :) so I will just have to clarify my post to say "heavy-ISH" - LOL :)

Terry

[Peter Galbavy]

Hi pdackerman - I have never tried any 'L' lenes so cant compare :) so I will just have to clarify my post to say "heavy-ISH" - LOL :)

Story time; The first "big" prime I bought was the 200mm f/1.8L - still my favorite lens, no doubts. Now discontinued, shame. This weighs 3kg, and with practice I can now handhold this at the zoo, but having a monopod is a good idea.

I then got a very good deal on a 400mm f/2.8L (MK1) - which is 6kg. Ouch. Handhold is just out of the question - and I am built like the proverbial brick lavatory - even a monopod is hard unless there is action and light. For birding, a solid tripod is needs. Another 6kg for the one I have (with head). This is not hiking equipment...

[Paul Rule]

If you don't want to carry such a heavy weight lens around, have a look at the 400 f5.6L. Somewhat slower than the f2.8 & f4 versions and does not have IS. but it is 4x lighter and 6x cheaper than the f2.8, 50% lighter and 4.5x cheaper than the f4. Optically it is superb, and can be carried around all day in a Mini Trekker Backpack, You cant do this with any of the big primes.

Paul

[Paulyoly]

If you don't want to carry such a heavy weight lens around, have a look at the 400 f5.6L. Somewhat slower than the f2.8 & f4 versions and does not have IS. but it is 4x lighter and 6x cheaper than the f2.8, 50% lighter and 4.5x cheaper than the f4. Optically it is superb, and can be carried around all day in a Mini Trekker Backpack, You cant do this with any of the big primes.

Paul

Finally someone mentions the best birding lens out there if money and weight are your two most important considerations. I love this lens, it's outstanding, $1,000 new. the only other lens i would even consider is the 100-400L IS and that's because i'd like to try the IS and see if it's really worth it. You don't need a tripod for the 400 f5.6L, it only weighs 2.8lbs, if that's heavy to you then you should probably be working out more. If you plan to print large pictures this is the lens for you, a 13x19 print on my epson 1280 of this picture.

http://www.pbase.com/image/25029662

or this one

http://www.pbase.com/image/23297916

will scare the cr@p out of you, it looks that real, i know these aren't birds, but it was more dramatic as birds aren't scary, well a 13x19 print of a mocking bird is kinda scary.

check out my rebel galleries for examples with this lens.
http://www.pbase.com/paulyoly/root

[Paul Rule]

And just to prove you dont need perfect lighting conditions to use this lens hand held, I have just uploaded a recent shot I took of a Long Tailed Tit, taken in woodland in the rain and 100% cloud cover.

http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showphoto.php/photo/19550

[pdackerman]

I have just bought a 100-400L and it is great. Also getting good results with it and a x2 adapter

Phil

Finally someone mentions the best birding lens out there if money and weight are your two most important considerations. I love this lens, it's outstanding, $1,000 new. the only other lens i would even consider is the 100-400L IS and that's because i'd like to try the IS and see if it's really worth it. You don't need a tripod for the 400 f5.6L, it only weighs 2.8lbs, if that's heavy to you then you should probably be working out more. If you plan to print large pictures this is the lens for you, a 13x19 print on my epson 1280 of this picture.

http://www.pbase.com/image/25029662

or this one

http://www.pbase.com/image/23297916

will scare the cr@p out of you, it looks that real, i know these aren't birds, but it was more dramatic as birds aren't scary, well a 13x19 print of a mocking bird is kinda scary.

check out my rebel galleries for examples with this lens.
http://www.pbase.com/paulyoly/root

[Paulyoly]

And just to prove you dont need perfect lighting conditions to use this lens hand held, I have just uploaded a recent shot I took of a Long Tailed Tit, taken in woodland in the rain and 100% cloud cover.

http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showphoto.php/photo/19550

That's a great shot Paul, what shutter speed? what aperture? I normally don't use my tripod unless i'm shooting around my house, but i always bring it with me. This pelican was shot handheld at 1/320th at f7.1, i didn't realize my shutter speed was so slow because it was a pretty bright day, but the bird was dark and filled up most of the frame. The pic wasn't as sharp as i normally get, but it still came out good considering the rocky slope i was standing on and my shutter speed.

http://www.pbase.com/image/26080867

next time i might try shooting in shutter priority, i find this lens is just as sharp at f5.6, but i like to stop down to gain more dof. My entry in this months photo contest was shot wide open at f5.6. The best $1,000 i ever spent.

[Paul Rule]

F5.6 @ 125sec, although I have to admit I was leaning against an oak tree for support, and really I should have used ISO 800 rather than 400, but I got away with it.
I like the Pelican, this lens does give you rather wonderful out of focus backgrounds, and its pin sharp at max ap. The trouble with buying one of these is that it makes your other lenses look somewhat average. Not having a working mid range zoom for the 300D (My Sigma 75-300 does not work on this camera). I have now purchased the 70-200f4 L. This is a stunning lens and am looking forward to spring to use it for insect photography. Now saving for a good W/A zoom.

[stevo]

Currently I am using the Sigma 135-400mm APO lens(f4.5-5.6) which cost me £299 for the money it`s a brilliant lens.Coupled with the fact that use it with the EOS10D & given this camera has a 1.6 crop factor I get 640mm.When used in bright sunny conditions I get shutter speeds as high as 1000th of a sec.So for anybody on a budget this is a great lens.
Regards Steve.

[Jay Turberville]

While it is necessary to use longer lenses most of the time, don't think that bird photography is not possible with shorter focal lengths, of course it will require a bit of planning and care, plus some tollerant birds, but shorter lenses put a whole new perspective on the shot.

Because he showed quite a bit of interest in using my digital camera when we visited, my wife and I helped purchase a 2MP digital camera (a little Nikon) for our nephew who is , I think 8 years old. I had to smile when he quite innocently marched outside with camera in hand, stood about two feet from our hummingbird feeder and waited all of a couple minutes before a Costa's Hummingbird dutifully flew in for a sip. He got some surprisingly good feeder shots.

[martinrobinson]

Has anyone seen or heard any reviews for Sigma's new 80 - 400 image stabilising lens. It has a similar specification as Canon's 100 - 400 IS but is priced at £850.

Before I rush out and buy one though I'd liked to know what I'm getting.

I would ideally like a longer faster lens but can't afford to spend that much money.

[Paul Rule]

Hi Martin

Try Here (http://www.photographyreview.com/PRD_145261_3128crx.aspx)

[martinrobinson]

Thanks for that. Seems like it should be a good buy. Might invest in one shortly unless i hear any bad reports in the near future.

[RonL]

I finally received my 75-300 IS lens about 1 week ago and have had some opportunities to see how it works. Sometimes it seems soft - other times quite sharp. When shooting Sandhill Cranes flying in to roost close to sunset yesterday at Jasper-Pulaski in Indiana, I shot the attached picture (heavily cropped) of crane flying overhead - maybe 100 to 150 feet up. I was pleased with it - maybe not publishable, but not bad. We get a lot of satisfying pictures with this lens and we are pleased with it as an 'all-purpose' lens. I'm still comparing it with my digiscoping setup which is still better for long reach. But we get a lot of good pictures with this lens.

I just read the review of the higher quality Sigma 80-400 lens (and the comparison with Canon 100-400L). I'll be looking at (and saving for) one of these in the future. But I think I found what I was looking for to put on the front of my Rebel for now.

[Icebird]

Good afternoon,

I 've read below that you need at least the Sigma 50-500 for birds.
This ens is within my budget and should be my first zoom for EOS 300D.
Best price in Belgium is 1.150 Euro.
Are the US-version identical (Rebel vs. 300D).
How save is buying lenses on the internet. Prices on the net are much
lower.
Reading forums all around the net is only confusing a rooky in bird-photography.

BR,
Icebird

[RonL]

Good afternoon,

I 've read below that you need at least the Sigma 50-500 for birds.
This ens is within my budget and should be my first zoom for EOS 300D.
Best price in Belgium is 1.150 Euro.
Are the US-version identical (Rebel vs. 300D).
How save is buying lenses on the internet. Prices on the net are much
lower.
Reading forums all around the net is only confusing a rooky in bird-photography.

BR,
Icebird

Icebird
Since my last post, I traded in the Canon 75-300 IS for the Bigma (Sigma 50-500). And I was glad I did - I sold the Canon lens. I'd be interested in other comments on this - whether others might consider the Sigma 80-400 IS better because of IS. I use a tripod quite a bit with the Bigma and I generally get good shots. When I need the extra reach, I will put on a Tamron 1.4x converter.

Best price in US was about $850 USD 5 months ago at deltainternational.com (reputable). Don't know what the best deal is now over there. Yes, Rebel = 300D. I have the Digital Rebel.

The Bigma is big but it gives me the reach that so many others can't quite get.

Good luck,
RonL
http://www.pbase.com/rlah