quick lens ?

[brunop]

i just got a new camera and am a complete novice. the camera is a canon eos 50 d. is the ef 70-300mm f/4-5.6 a good lens for bird photos? i guess my main question is what is the minimum size for good pictures?

and related--what is the maximum size for handheld (no tripod) shots?

thanks from a complete beginner!

[tjsimonsen]

What do you mean by the maximum size? The size of the photo, or the length of the lens?
I think that the 70-300 would be a fine starter lens, but you will soon be wanting something bigger. Size does matter ;-)

Thomas

[Cactusdave]

It's a personal opinion, but If you want to tote the camera and lens around ready to shoot, as opposed to needing to lug around a tripod, then a 300mm plus a X1.4 converter or a 400mm is the best bet. Sometimes you get opportunities that you have seconds to respond to. Having your setup ready to capture the moment is worth its weight in gold.

[citrinella]

i just got a new camera and am a complete novice. the camera is a canon eos 50 d. is the ef 70-300mm f/4-5.6 a good lens for bird photos? i guess my main question is what is the minimum size for good pictures?

and related--what is the maximum size for handheld (no tripod) shots?

thanks from a complete beginner!

If your pockets are reasonably deep, then for that camera I would say No, that is not a very good lens for birding. Buying a lens to get you started, usually just means wasted money - you very quickly want something better, which you could afford more quickly if you never bought the first lens.

The biggest lens I would recommend for hand holding would be 400mm if a Canon, though some third party 500s may be reasonably manageable. I have, and handhold sometimes, a 500 Canon, but it gets laid aside for any hand holding situation which requires more mobility.

As a thinking prompt, perhaps start with the following selection from Canon :
400 f5.6 (only real drawback no Image Stabilization - "IS")
100-400 IS zoom (you get a little advantage from the flexibility of the zoom)
400 f4 IS (not !! cheap)

I use a 300 f4 IS with a 1.4x teleconverter (TC). That gives me 420mm f5.6 with IS. I'd guess that combination is very slightly inferior to the 400 f5.6 in all respects except having IS which I reckon I need.

If you want more reach than 400mm and handheld then of the above three only the 400 f4 will take a 1.4x TC with no side issues. In a similar price league there is a 300 f2.8 which can take a 2xTC ... IIRC a little heavier but much more popular - the 400 f4 has never really taken off perhaps because inital reports were mixed. Newer versions of the 400 f4 seem to find universal favour with their owners.

So, how deep are your pockets ? If not _that_ deep, investigate Sigma or Tamron. If you have a steady hand and good technique, and can stretch that far, a 400 f5.6 has a fantastic reputation for the money - for many it would be their dream lens.

Mike.