Digiscoping to DSLR Photography

[DaveB]

I've been digiscoping for the past 2-3 years and have been very happy holding my Coolpix 4300 up to the eyepiece of my Kowa scope. Some very good shots have been taken during this time, but i now feel the time is right for a change.

I am now thinking of ditching my scope and going for a DSLR camera with a 500mm lens. I would like a silent shutter release, auto focus and as many automatic features as possible. I will be a novice at first but would like the oppertunity to play about with the various settings once I feel confident with the set up.

Cost will hopefully be as cheap as possible, but I wont mind paying the right money for the right gear.

Any help and guidance will be accepted with much gratitude.

[Tyler Vargo]

Well, with a DSLR you won't get silent shutter release, it's going to sound just like a 35mm SLR minus the film advance.

[DaveB]

I've just read a few reviews and the Nikon D70 looks as though it may be my best choice. I also like the look of the Canon 20D.

Lens wise, £5000 seems to be allot of money. I think my best bet is to try and find a one thats second hand or an ex-demo.

[postcardcv]

The EOS 350D is also worth a look, it's also a 8mp camera (like the 20D), gives comparable images and is a few hundred cheaper.

As for a 500mm lens, rather than paying £5000 for a Canon why not look at the Sigma 500mm f4.5 HSM. It's a fast, fairly quiet, lens and is significantly cheaper. The new DG version is about £2600, but you can pick up the previous version for about £1900 new, or even less if you can find one secondhand. I am not convinced that the new DG version is worth the extra money.

I'm using the EOS 350D with the Sigma lens and am getting some reasonable results - have a look in my gallery (not all with this set up) - http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/3294
Also have a look at SeanKP's gallery, he's using the same set up and getting excellent results - http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showgallery.php?ppuser=23697&cat=500

[birdeast]

I bugged a lot of people around here for a couple of months trying to decide if I would get started in bird photography with a digiscoping rig or a DSLR setup. I finally chose DSLR and I am very happy.

Since you mentioned 500mm and Canon 20D, sounds like budget might not be real tight for you. I went strictly entry level and purchased the Nikon D50. I get the impression a lot of people see this camera as extremely basic. I may be minus a few bells and whistles, but it is capable of taking exceptional photographs. If I as a photographer can fully exploit the potential of this camera, I will be very happy. I am 100% novice and have been shocked by some of the images I have been able to capture so far. Most important piece of advice I can give is to read as many reviews as you can get your hands on. Also, go to a camera dealer and ask questions, touch the equipment, etc. Everyone is different. I have a few decent images in my gallery if you want to see what the D50 is like with a Sigma 70-300mm lens.

As of yesterday, any dreams of digiscoping I might have had have been squashed for the foreseeable future. I purchased the Sigma 100-300 f4 lens. I am about 15 minutes from going out and testing it. In the next couple of weeks I will probably had a 1.4x teleconvertor giving me a 630mm f5.6 focal length equivalent (300 x 1.4 x 1.5 (crop factor). I guess everyone will always want more focal length for birding, but I think this as far as I will go. The rest will be left to technique and getting as close as I can.

Goodluck with your decision - Heck! Enjoy your decision process!

Scott

[DaveB]

Many thanks for the replies.

I've looked at a review for Nikon D70, which sounds good. I think that the next step would be to look at the reviews for the Nikon D50, the EOS 350D and the Sigma 500mm f4.5 HSM or DG lens.

Taking these into account, it looks and sounds better than spending the £5500 that I originally thought I would have to pay to get the set up that I want.

Thanks agian,

daveB

[limicole2]

Hi,
I use a canon 300d with the canon 100-400mm is lens. Great for birds in flight and the forest. But, for ducks and shorebirds, I use my slr for digiscoping with a canon 50mm 1.8 lens and my zeiss 85 fl spotting scope.
Since I use the slr for digiscoping, most of the time my coolpix 4500 stay in my backpack.
My next step will be to buy the next generation of 20d or 350d and to sell my coolpix.
It is not digi or slr. It digi and slr !


Claude
Québec, Canada

[DaveB]

I have thought about using both digiscoping and dslr, but I don't want loads of gear laid about the house. I get loads of good results from holding my Cooolpix 4300 to the eyepiece of my Kowa, but would like even better images (visit the Birds of Durham page for sample images at http://www.durhambirdclub.org/7.birdsofdurham/01.birdsofdurham_home.html) than what I am getting at present.

I must say that at the time of writing this, my thoughts are increasingly pointing towards the EOS 350D along with the Sigma 500hsm. Before going and trying it out, what is the best way to protect this set up against transport, rain, etc and how much does insurance cost?

If I purchased this set up and sold the scope, do you think I would miss the telescope? I simply dont want to drag all that gear around with me.

Thanks for all the info so far,

Dave B

[rezMole]

You won't be able to use the camera as a scope.

[Chuck A. Walla]

I must say that at the time of writing this, my thoughts are increasingly pointing towards the EOS 350D along with the Sigma 500hsm. Before going and trying it out, what is the best way to protect this set up against transport, rain, etc and how much does insurance cost?

If I purchased this set up and sold the scope, do you think I would miss the telescope? I simply dont want to drag all that gear around with me.

Thanks for all the info so far,

Dave B

Excellent choice. I started with a Nikon CP4500 and Meade 1250 scope. I got some decent shots but I was missing a lot also. I now have a DSLR with a 70-300 mm zoom. I do miss the scope but I don't miss the weight. Bird photography is a bit more like birdwatching now and the lost shots are more then made up for by the ones I do get. Even though I can attach the Meade to my camera at prime focus giving me the equivalent of a 2000mm lens on a 35mm camera, I don't usually drag it along.

I am currently lusting after the Sigma 50-500mm. Zooms are great for switching from that warbler in the bush to the raptor sailing overhead.

I would suggest an external flash with a flash extender. It will help with poor lighting situations which seems to be most of the time. Pesky birds like to stay in the shade of trees and bushes a lot. I have found that I can handhold a 600mm lens and get decent shots with a flash.

[limicole2]

Dave,
It's depend if you want birding and photography or...photography and birding!
I thing the 350d is a good choice for the price. I greatly suggest a is (or os) lens for best results. But, I known, it is expensive!

Claude
Québec, Canada

I have thought about using both digiscoping and dslr, but I don't want loads of gear laid about the house. I get loads of good results from holding my Cooolpix 4300 to the eyepiece of my Kowa, but would like even better images (visit the Birds of Durham page for sample images at http://www.durhambirdclub.org/7.birdsofdurham/01.birdsofdurham_home.html) than what I am getting at present.

I must say that at the time of writing this, my thoughts are increasingly pointing towards the EOS 350D along with the Sigma 500hsm. Before going and trying it out, what is the best way to protect this set up against transport, rain, etc and how much does insurance cost?

If I purchased this set up and sold the scope, do you think I would miss the telescope? I simply dont want to drag all that gear around with me.

Thanks for all the info so far,

Dave B

[postcardcv]

I must say that at the time of writing this, my thoughts are increasingly pointing towards the EOS 350D along with the Sigma 500hsm. Before going and trying it out, what is the best way to protect this set up against transport, rain, etc and how much does insurance cost?

If I purchased this set up and sold the scope, do you think I would miss the telescope? I simply dont want to drag all that gear around with me.

I think that the 350D with sigma 500hsm is a good set up, however it's a big lens so make sure you've got a good tripod to use with it. The best way of transporting it would be to get a Lowepro bag, I use an Omni Trekker and carry, this camera and lens, along with three other lenses and my digiscoping camera. It is a good bag and is comfortable to carry when out for a days birding. I have covered my camera and lens on my house contents insurance (did not cost me to add them as named items).

Assuming you use your scope a lot I am sure you'd miss it.
A camera with lens will not replace a telescope, birding and bird photography can be very different ways to spend time. Personally I take my camera kit out in a bag and have my scope set up, when I want to take photos I switch them over. Yes it is a lot of kit to carry out, but I'd rather have both with me than miss a bird because I don't have my scope.

I thing the 350d is a good choice for the price. I greatly suggest a is (or os) lens for best results. But, I known, it is expensive!


IS lenses can be good for hand held shots, but the Sigma lens on a tripod will do just as well. Personally I would not pay the extra for one, as I don't think that they give you enough extra.

[DaveB]

Listenning to the advice given, I am in no doubt that that the Canon EOS 350D is the camera for me, but am still unsure as the lens.

My idea was to get rid of the scope, but have decided that this would not be in my best interests (again on the advice given).

So, I am now looking for advice on a lens that would capture moving/flying birds. The Sigma 500 F4.5hsm would be my preferred choice after reading the articles/advice given on these pages, but would a 400 do me. How far is say a Starling, when it fills the frame using either the 300, 400 and a 500 lens and at what level is the quality?

The more I read the reviews, the more I am looking forward to getting in to DSLR photography.

Dave B.

[rezMole]

Listenning to the advice given, I am in no doubt that that the Canon EOS 350D is the camera for me, but am still unsure as the lens.

My idea was to get rid of the scope, but have decided that this would not be in my best interests (again on the advice given).

So, I am now looking for advice on a lens that would capture moving/flying birds. The Sigma 500 F4.5hsm would be my preferred choice after reading the articles/advice given on these pages, but would a 400 do me. How far is say a Starling, when it fills the frame using either the 300, 400 and a 500 lens and at what level is the quality?

The more I read the reviews, the more I am looking forward to getting in to DSLR photography.

Dave B.

You'll find that your pictures won't bring birds anywhere near as close as you may be expecting. A 500mm will magnify only about 15 times.

Having said this, you don't have to fill the frame to get a good picture. I often crop to about a quarter of the actual image, and the results are usually still good enough for an A4 print. For example, take a look at this flying Eider http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showphoto.php/photo/47401/sort/1/cat/500/page/2. This is actually about a sixth of the original image and still retains a fair amount of detail. And this was taken with a Tamrom 200-500 zoom - not the best lens in the world! (It's pretty damn good for the price though - i can't afford a four grand lens, unfortuately).

[christineredgate]

Dave if you ever change your scope to a Sawrro,I have for sale an adaptor you can attach to a Canon SLR for digiscoping.not the magnification one has with the 4500,but it does take very clear images.£50 is the price,to buy new £270.

[compa]

Listenning to the advice given, I am in no doubt that that the Canon EOS 350D is the camera for me, but am still unsure as the lens.

My idea was to get rid of the scope, but have decided that this would not be in my best interests (again on the advice given).

So, I am now looking for advice on a lens that would capture moving/flying birds. The Sigma 500 F4.5hsm would be my preferred choice after reading the articles/advice given on these pages, but would a 400 do me. How far is say a Starling, when it fills the frame using either the 300, 400 and a 500 lens and at what level is the quality?

The more I read the reviews, the more I am looking forward to getting in to DSLR photography.

Dave B.

FUN FUN FUN ... spending someone else's money ;)

Please reconsider the 350D - for birding the 20D is wonderful. It is on and ready to take a photo in less than a tenth of a second from its sleep mode - just touch the shutter button. This lets you catch those pop-out-the-bush birds. Focus is fast fast fast (with the right lenses).

At high ISO speeds (up to 3200!) it is very clean - little noise. That means you can take photos in lower light.

It is a very good camera overall - give it a closer look.

I have the 20D along with the Canon 100-400mm zoom. That lens is very good out to about 60 feet. Beyond that and the image seems to degrade. Even using a tripod. The primes 400 or 500 are much better at distances. But please, be very conservative in considering what you can carry around weight wise. Don't forget the weight of the tripod and head. That 500mm may sound nice but after you carry it a while ...


You won't be able to use the camera as a scope.

Ahh but you can! Look Here (http://wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/eph_build/index.htm)

Have fun!

[limicole2]

Hi dave,
I agree with Jim. 20D and canon 100-400mm IS (image stabilisation) is the best for you. Great for flying birds. No tripod!
But, It's depend on your Budget. A great mix but expensive $$$. 350D and a sigma or tamron lens can be a good compromise.
A 300mm lens with a 1.4 extender can be consider as a other compromise depending on your budget.

(I suggest to invest first on a great lens. These years, digital cameras change each 18 months. )

Claude
Québec, (French-Canada)

FUN FUN FUN ... spending someone else's money ;)

Please reconsider the 350D - for birding the 20D is wonderful. It is on and ready to take a photo in less than a tenth of a second from its sleep mode - just touch the shutter button. This lets you catch those pop-out-the-bush birds. Focus is fast fast fast (with the right lenses).

At high ISO speeds (up to 3200!) it is very clean - little noise. That means you can take photos in lower light.

It is a very good camera overall - give it a closer look.

I have the 20D along with the Canon 100-400mm zoom. That lens is very good out to about 60 feet. Beyond that and the image seems to degrade. Even using a tripod. The primes 400 or 500 are much better at distances. But please, be very conservative in considering what you can carry around weight wise. Don't forget the weight of the tripod and head. That 500mm may sound nice but after you carry it a while ...




Ahh but you can! Look Here (http://wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/eph_build/index.htm)

Have fun!

[DaveB]

Just when I thought i'd made up my mind :-C

I'm now looking at the possibility of purchasing a Canon 20D. To do this, I think that I would have to compromise on the 500mm lens. I like the idea of using one of these, other than the 2k price (Sigma) and the humping about. If I was to purchase a different lens, which would be my best option?

From the initial feedback, it sounds like the 100 - 400 zoom, but which one (Canon or Sigma)? Would the Sigma 75 - 400 zoom produce as good an image as the Canon 100 - 400 zoom? How big is the drop in quality when choosing the zoom as apposed to the 400 prime, i've heard that a converter could be used to increase the size to a 500?

The Canon 300 F4 with a 1.4 or a x2 converter (will the x2 allow AF with this lens) also looks to be a good choice. Choosing this option would allow me to buy a 20D camera and have over £500 to spare (enabling me to buy extra batteries and a larger card).

Lots more questions, but I want to get it right first time. I know that I wont have much to spend once the purchase has been made.

Thanks for all the help :t:

Dave B.

[compa]

I'm afraid that I'm not going to be much help on which lens to buy. While I have the Canon 100-400mm zoom, I'm not real happy with it for various reasons and plan on purchasing a 400mm prime soon. But which 400mm prime??????

Which lens to use depends greatly on your birding style, how much money you have to spend on fun and games, how much you plan to use your camera for other things besides birding and even your physical ability to carry the weight! No one here on these forums can really tell you which lens is right for you. We can only recount our experiences with various lenses.

Don't be fooled, nice sharp photos at any real distance require a tripod. In good light, with image stabilized lenses you can hand hold a 400mm lens and still get good images but they would have been better off a tripod! The point I'm trying to make, unless you are after really great photos, an 8-10x optical zoom point and shoot is a great option for 99.5% of the people. A 400mm lens on a DSLR only gives you around 12x of magnification.

DSLR photography is not cheap! Consider the versatility of the lenses. That 100-400mm lens is 3x to 12x - no wide shots are possible! You need to spend another $500 (or more) for a lens to cover that range. And you may find that you want to take some real close up shots of some insects - another $500 for a macro lens. One good point is that top quality Canon lenses (L series) maintain 80% or more of their value as used equipment and they will work with whatever camera body Canon is going to release in 2010!

I'm not trying to talk you out of SLR photography, just trying to help make sure you don't make mistakes! They can be expensive.

[compa]

Just when I thought i'd made up my mind :-C

I'm now looking at the possibility of purchasing a Canon 20D. To do this, I think that I would have to compromise on the 500mm lens.

The Canon 300 F4 with a 1.4 or a x2 converter (will the x2 allow AF with this lens) also looks to be a good choice. Choosing this option would allow me to buy a 20D camera and have over £500 to spare (enabling me to buy extra batteries and a larger card).

Lots more questions, but I want to get it right first time. I know that I wont have much to spend once the purchase has been made.

Thanks for all the help :t:

Dave B.


I still have more to say! 3:-)

In recommending the 20D I unwittingly caused a problem. With SLR's the real investment is in glass. Those lenses that cost an arm and at least a foot if not an entire leg. DSLR bodies come and go. They are improved upon every year or two and are designed to be replaced. It was the same with film bodies to some extent. Lenses are different.

The better lenses are made to last. 5-10 years is normal with some care. 20+ years if there are still bodies that support them! The Canon L series of lenses are very expensive, but as I said in my previous post, they maintain their value very well. Do not skimp on your lenses. You will regret it later.

If you have to get cheaper glass to afford the 20D - please go with the 350.

You will want to replace whichever camera body you get for one with the newest features in 2 years anyway. Those lenses last much longer. Buy the best lens you can afford!

I'm very sorry to keep you off balance like this but it is a very complicated subject. I hope my ramblings are at least somewhat helpful.

[Adey Baker]

If you have to get cheaper glass to afford the 20D - please go with the 350.

You will want to replace whichever camera body you get for one with the newest features in 2 years anyway. Those lenses last much longer. Buy the best lens you can afford!



Excellent advice - although a 20D and first class glass would be ideal!

I reckon you need at least a 400mm in this country - a lot of North American birds are much more approachable than ours so advice from 'over the pond' doesn't necessarily apply over here!

The Canon 400mmm F5.6L is a fine lens, praised by all who own it, and is hand-holdable with practice at fast shutter speeds.

The maximum aperture performance will be better than the zoom and there should be enough quality at its optimum apertures to use with converters.

Only when shooting large birds from within a hide would the rest of the zoom range on the 100-400mm come into play

[DaveB]

Some good info there.

I would love to get a 400mm or 500mm, but weight, cost and the lack of suitability to photograph flying birds has turned me off the idea.

The set up that I mentioned before sounds my best option for flexibility and cost. What do you think on the following:

The Canon 20D camera, the canon 300 F4 IS USM lens with a canon 1.4 or a x2 converter (will the x2 allow AF with this lens). Cost for this would be around £2000.

The Canon 20D camera, the Sigma 300 F2.8 EX DG lens with a Sigma 1.4 or a x2 converter (will the x2 allow AF with this lens). Cost for this would be around £2634.

For the latter, I could get an EOS350 and a Sigma 500 Prime, but this appears not to be appropriate for capturing birds in flight.

Dave B

[Art Thorn]

Hi Dave,
Thought I'd kick in my two cents worth. Others have already said camera bodies change every year and that is true. You have to pick one that meets your needs now and just enjoy it. I have the 1D MKII and it cost a lot. But I don't think I'll need more than that for a long time. The 20 D matches it except for kicking around, so I'd vote for that. The lenses won't improve though, so pick wisely. I went with a second hand Canon 300 f2.8 and it is HEAVY. No IS (couldn't afford it) but the lens is as good wide open as closed down so that helps. The Canons are low noise cameras so you can shoot ISO 1600 and get good results. With high speed lenses, high ISO, do you need IS? I always use a tripod. But the 400 f5.6 is highly rated and cheaper and lighter, and the 300 f4 more of all of that. I use the 1.4x and 2x converters too. I'd suggest if you picked the 20D and the 300 f4 and the converters you would be pretty happy with the results.

[DaveB]

Thanks for the last piece of info.

If I had to choose a converter, which would be the best? If it was the x2, would the AF still work?

Dave B.

[compa]

Some good info there.

The set up that I mentioned before sounds my best option for flexibility and cost. What do you think on the following:

The Canon 20D camera, the canon 300 F4 IS USM lens with a canon 1.4 or a x2 converter (will the x2 allow AF with this lens). Cost for this would be around £2000.

The Canon 20D camera, the Sigma 300 F2.8 EX DG lens with a Sigma 1.4 or a x2 converter (will the x2 allow AF with this lens). Cost for this would be around £2634.

Dave B

The Canon 300mm f/4 IS is fine. The camera's autofocus will work with a 1.4x teleconverter - The autofocus will be disabled with the 2.0x TC, but you can force it to work in good light with a minimum of seeking.

The autofocus is controlled by the camera. If it knows the lens/converter combo is less than f/5.6 it disables the autofocus. The trick to making a 2x TC work is to place tape over some of the electrical contacts so that the camera never knows that it is attached. This makes the camera misreport the focal length but it also makes the camera think the aperture is that of the lens alone!

I don't have any personal experience with the Sigma equipment but the same would apply to the Sigma lens and teleconverters. The lens may do the movement to put things in focus, but the camera is the boss telling it which way and how far to move. If the camera doesn't have enough light - it just doesn't work. The camera will try to autofocus as long as it thinks the lens/teleconverter combo is f/5.6 or better. So I'm sure the 1.4x would work with the Sigma and I think the 2x will work as well since the lens is f/2.8 to start with!

But I haven't tried it so don't listen to anything I say :'D

[compa]

And one more thing ...

Just so you can see the effect of the 1.4x teleconverter, here is a link to a page on my Blog website that shows the the 20D/100-400mm zoom/1.4x teleconverter combo in action:

http://www.jbs-blog.com/galleries/Canon_1.4_teleconverter/

[mjmw]

I recently went through a similar dilemma a couple of weeks ago, starting out wanting a 350D + Sigma 50-500mm or Canon 100-400 IS, but ended up with a 20D and Canon 400mm f5.6 prime. Here were my personal reasons:

Playing with the 350D and 20D - the 20D 'felt' much better in the hand...and 'seemed' faster on AF and frame rate. With the grip, the 20D feels just 'right' for me. Go and try them out at a camera shop. I do not think there is much difference in the quality of image from either of the cameras.

Zoom vs prime - for bird photography, I have never wanted to zoom out with an SLR...and the prime lenses should be sharper at 400mm, fully open, than a zoom.

What no IS? I decided that the majority of my photos would be on a tripod or monopod. I have found, however, that the 400mm is fine handheld for getting flight shots, even in evening light. This is a technique I have never mastered in the past and I think the combination of the very fast AF on the lens and good servo on the 20D has really helped (plus the very low noise on high ISO, allowing faster shutter speeds).

As an aside, I also purchased the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 and have found it to be a fantastic, reasonably priced, alternative to the Canon equivalents.

Cheers

Mark.

[mjmw]

Oh, I forgot to say the most important point - I am very, very pleased with the combination! Getting shots now that I never could with the Digiscoping kit.
:-)

[DaveB]

Looks like I will go and try the goods in the hand (if the local camera shops stock them).

My thoughts are on the canon set up (20d + 1.4 converter + 300mm F4 prime) and then the Sigma set up (20d + 1.4 converter + 300mm F2.8 prime).

I think the 400m prime is out of my price range, but will keep my options open. I will hopefully let you all know of the outcome, both here and as a new thread :t:

Thanks,

Dave B.

[Art Thorn]

Canon's web site gives MDF charts for their zooms and primes. If you don't need to zoom to wider angles, the primes are definitely the way to go. Good luck with pricing and let us know how you like your new set up.

[DaveB]

Art Thorn

Thanks for that, I will look it up.

I noticed your from Ontario, Canada. unsure where abouts, but I have a brother who lives in Acton, Ontario, Canada.

thanks again for the info, I will look it up now :news:

Dave Brown

[compa]

Looks like I will go and try the goods in the hand (if the local camera shops stock them).

My thoughts are on the canon set up (20d + 1.4 converter + 300mm F4 prime) and then the Sigma set up (20d + 1.4 converter + 300mm F2.8 prime).

I think the 400m prime is out of my price range, but will keep my options open. I will hopefully let you all know of the outcome, both here and as a new thread :t:

Thanks,

Dave B.

Of the two options you have things at now:

Canon lenses maintain their value very well over the years. If you don't like the lens you can always get most of your money back out of it.

The f/2.8 Sigma's speed is a great selling point - you always want more light specially if you will be using a teleconverter. I think that one feature more than offsets any loss of image quality between it an the Canon.

[postcardcv]

I think the 400m prime is out of my price range, but will keep my options open. I will hopefully let you all know of the outcome, both here and as a new thread :t:

The Canon 400mm f5.6L retails for about £850, it does not have IS and is not as fast as the more expensive Canon 400mm lenses, but does give excellent image quality - I'd say it's well worth looking at.

[DaveB]

The Canon 400mm f5.6L retails for about £850, it does not have IS and is not as fast as the more expensive Canon 400mm lenses, but does give excellent image quality - I'd say it's well worth looking at.


Could I use a 1.4 converter with this lens (EF400mm f5.6 LUSM), I am presuming that the AF wont work? Will the AF work in dull light conditions?

Wish I could get the Canon 400 F2.8 version :-C

Dave B

[mjmw]

Could I use a 1.4 converter with this lens (EF400mm f5.6 LUSM), I am presuming that the AF wont work? Will the AF work in dull light conditions?

Wish I could get the Canon 400 F2.8 version :-C

Dave B

Yes you can but the AF won't work with the 1.4x on the 400 f5.6, although some people tape some of the pins to force the AF. Also, the AF is still reasonably fast (without the converter) in poor light - it worked fine yesterday, 17:30, focusing on a Sparrowhawk in a tree at about 15m in very dull grey conditions.

I considered the Sigma 300 f2.8, but decided against it because of the weight for handheld use (twice that of the Canon 400mm f5.6).

Cheers Mark.

[hillie]

Dave,
I have the 400 5.6 L and a 1.4 Canon extender. I am well pleased with the quality of the lens. As Mark says the A/F is fast. I am still experimenting at the moment with the 1.4 extender, I have used the tape trick and it works reasonable in good light conditions. What I find is that it tends to seek if you keep your finger half on the shutter button, but if you just tap it works better. I have also just purchased a set of Kenko extension tubes which I am going to try out this weekend, weather permitting

Regards

John

[DaveB]

Looks like its down to three set ups now:

1. The Canon 20D camera, the canon 300 F4 IS USM lens with a canon 1.4 or a x2 converter (will the x2 allow AF with this lens). Cost for this would be around £2000.

2. The Canon 20D camera, the Sigma 300 F2.8 EX DG lens with a Sigma 1.4 or a x2 converter (will the x2 allow AF with this lens). Cost for this would be around £2634.

3. The Canon 20D camera, the Canon 400 5.6 L and a 1.4 Canon Converter. Cost for this would be around £1900.

Please vote and tell me your preferences and why?

Dave B.

[Neil]

Dave,
I had a look at your birds of Durham site and it looks to me as if most of the birds are at least 30 meters away so if you have anything less than 1000mm on a Little Grebe it's going to be small. If you go the 300/2.8 way you will have to work on getting closer, even with a 1.4 tele. Even the guys using 500mm Canon glass around me here wish they had the 600mm for birds smaller than Curlews. I would leave some budget to get an Olympus 7070wz and adapter to use on the Kowa for those long distance shots which are the most satisfying to get. Just my 5 cents worth.Neil.

[postcardcv]

Please vote and tell me your preferences and why?

For me it would have to be the Canon 20D camera, the Canon 400 5.6 L and a 1.4 Canon Converter. Cost for this would be around £1900.

Personally I'd rather have more reach than a faster lens. The 400 f5.6 is light enough to handhold and is a great lens. When looking make sure you budget for extra batteroes, memory cards adn a tripod too.

[mjmw]

If you hadn't already guessed, no. 3 for me - see previous posts for reasons!

Thats a good point about mem cards and batteries - a 1gb sandisk ultra II will cost you about £70. There is no point going for the quicker ones as the camera can't write any faster.

I asked a question on the forums recently about batteries and nobody reported any problems with the cheap, non-Canon ones (£50 for a Canon, about £10 for a non-branded). Another thing to think about is the battery grip...holds two batteries, is excellent for portrait shots and I prefer the balance of the camera with it on.

Finally, tripod - I guess you already have one from digiscoping?

[johnmoonie]

Dave,

Interesting debate and one I think most photographers have opinions on and no-one has the perfect answer.

I've not the experience of the Canon cameras but reckon I'd vote for 3) particularly if you do not envisage further additions to your set up in the relative short term. However long term and if you have the ability to get close at say feeding stations or nests you would probably want a 300mm and 500mm/600mm set up. However perhaps that's more for those with unlimited budgets. I'm sure you'll get plenty of use and fun with the 400mm and cover most situations well enough.

Make sure you have plenty of memory card capacity. It is amazing how many pictures you can take on a good day, and it is best to sort out the best ones back home on the computer.

Good luck

John.

[Ragna]

Its got to be 3. the 400 5.6 is one of the best L series lenses Canon make and at just over £800 its a bargain.

[Gauti]

Looks like its down to three set ups now:

1. The Canon 20D camera, the canon 300 F4 IS USM lens with a canon 1.4 or a x2 converter (will the x2 allow AF with this lens). Cost for this would be around £2000.
I have exactly this setup, i.e. 20D+300F4L+1.4xTC, and I am very happy with it. I've been considering the 2xTC but I don't have any extra money at this time. Further reach is always welcome but my pockets aren't that deep :)
The 20D is a wonderful camera, the batteries last forever and image quality is good. For best birding experience but the fastest CF card you can afford (+60x) and and a couple of spare ones. If you shoot raw (like I do) the cards fill up soon.
The 300F4L is a good telephoto lens. It's a bit on the shorter side for birding, esp for small birds, but it is light and easy to carry so you will take it with you whenever you can and not be too hampered with it. The 1.4x TC helps alot with the extra reach, without slowing the lens down too much.

For the 20D I would buy the Battery grip and a couple of extra batteries (non branded are just fine). Go for the kit lens (18-55 EF-S) it's good value for money and gives you a decent wide-angle as well.

[DaveB]

Hi all!

I promised that I would keep you informed of progress and I have now made my first purchase :hi:

Against all that has been said, I decided to go for the Canon EOS350D, which was purely down to available cash.

Jessops are selling these cameras at just over £550 with the standard 18 - 55 lens, 'a saving of at least £300'. I was looking at my 2 options and was still undecided whether to make the purchase. Very tempted with the offer that was on the 350D, I decided to ask the manager for a deal on some memory. A bit of haggling and the manager gave me a 1gig Sandisk card for £70 (usually £120). Once he said that, I had made up my mind.

My initial attempts at using the camera have been dissapointing but once I have got the hang of the camera, I will be looking for a longer lense. This will probably be one of the combinations already mentioned, but I could end up going for the Sigma 70-400 OS Zoom (once again it will be down to available cash).

Has anyone got any experience with this lense? I have read some good reports (beating the canon 100-400 (slightly)) on http://www.dpreview.com but as always, I want to make the correct purchase.

Thanks!

[postcardcv]

Against all that has been said, I decided to go for the Canon EOS350D, which was purely down to available cash.

My initial attempts at using the camera have been dissapointing but once I have got the hang of the camera, I will be looking for a longer lense. This will probably be one of the combinations already mentioned, but I could end up going for the Sigma 70-400 OS Zoom (once again it will be down to available cash).


I don't think you'll be disappointed with the 350D, I've been using one for about four months now and love it. The image quality is great, it's fast and hasn't let me down yet.

As for lenses there was a lot of discussion on the 80-400OS on a thread in the Nikon section, might be of interest - http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=40928

[Yelvertoft]

Against all that has been said, I decided to go for the Canon EOS350D, which was purely down to available cash.

Jessops are selling these cameras at just over £550 with the standard 18 - 55 lens, 'a saving of at least £300'. I was looking at my 2 options and was still undecided whether to make the purchase. Very tempted with the offer that was on the 350D, I decided to ask the manager for a deal on some memory. A bit of haggling and the manager gave me a 1gig Sandisk card for £70 (usually £120). Once he said that, I had made up my mind.
Thanks!

Good choice. I don't use Canon myself, but a good friend of mine has just bought a 350D and he's chuffed to bits with it. I had a play with it and also read the manual from cover to cover to help him out with some user issues. I recommend you do the same to get the most out of it. He got tempted by the Jessops deal too!

If you have this nagging doubt at the back of your mind that you should have bought the 20D then take a look at Romy Ocon's gallery. You will never be able to blame the camera for taking a duff shot after seeing what he can do with a 350D.

Duncan.

[Keith Reeder]

Dave,

I've been getting to grips with the Sigma 80-400mm OS recently.

Although it's proving to be a steeper learning curve than I'd first expected (I'd been getting some cracking hand-held results from the Sigma 135-400mm, and thought the move to the 80-400mm would be "invisible", but in fact I'm having to approach things slightly differently - it's not a problem though), it's as sharp as a pin when I get it right, the colour rendition is great, and the image stabilisation is an absolute wonder.

[DaveB]

I've gone through the first half of the book and tried the different settings as I was turning the pages.

Looking at the results on the PC, it definately appears that the manual settings give much better results than auto. I'll get back to the book later tonight and tomorrow afternoon.

Warehouse express have the Sigma 70-400 OS Zoom at £699, which is definately an attractive price. However, today I was thinking about looking at the canon 300 prime / converter again (unfortunately, £300 more). I am wondering if it is worth spending the extra cash?

[compa]

I've gone through the first half of the book and tried the different settings as I was turning the pages.

Looking at the results on the PC, it definately appears that the manual settings give much better results than auto. I'll get back to the book later tonight and tomorrow afternoon.

Warehouse express have the Sigma 70-400 OS Zoom at £699, which is definately an attractive price. However, today I was thinking about looking at the canon 300 prime / converter again (unfortunately, £300 more). I am wondering if it is worth spending the extra cash?

Hi, I'm going to chime in again.

Congratulations on taking the time to read the manual and try out the settings. You'll find it well worth the time spent. Even if you don't recall every setting, you will remember that there is a setting for some situation and that will prompt you to go look it up again.

On the matter of the lens ... I have the Canon 300mm f/4 and I love it. It is extremely sharp and works well with a 1.4x teleconverter. I also have a 100-400mm and several other misc lenses.

That said, I don't recommend that you get the 300mm unless you plan on spending a couple of thousand more on lenses in the next year or so. You will be much happier with a zoom for starters. Save your money and buy a 300mm or 400mm prime in a year or two if you feel you can make use of it.

[DaveB]

Warehouse express have the Sigma 70-400 OS Zoom at £699, which is definately an attractive price. However, today I was thinking about looking at the canon 300 prime / converter again (unfortunately, £300 more). I am wondering if it is worth spending the extra cash?

I had a look at the Sigma zoom over the past week. As suggested by keith, the lens was very heavy and needed allot of work. Many images were well below the quality that I was expecting (could have been me as 1 or 2 images were good). Anyway, I decided to return the lens today and am now going back to my original thoughts of either a canon 300 F4 (IS) or the Sigma f2.8 (without IS) and buy a 1.4 converter for the extra reach.

Apparently the IS is invaluable, but the speed slows down when using the 1.4 converter (Canon), but it does produce good photos. The sigma does seem the slightly better option, but weight and no IS appears to be pushing me towards the Canon.

I will be hand holding or using a bean bag most (if not, all of the time). Does anyone out there have experience of using either of these lenses with the 1.4 converters?

My order will be going in soon, so any help will be much appreciated. Thanks to you all.

[christineredgate]

Dave,I use the 300F4 Canon IS lens with the 1x4 .It auto focuses straight away.If you check around on my gallery,photos taken around Sept/Nov,you will see quite a few which are taken with this set up.

[DaveB]

Dave,I use the 300F4 Canon IS lens with the 1x4 .It auto focuses straight away.If you check around on my gallery,photos taken around Sept/Nov,you will see quite a few which are taken with this set up.

Christine,

Some excellent photos there :t:

I've looked at plenty of reviews for the two lenses mentioned and there seems to be plenty of good feedback with the canon 300 F4, plus 1.4 converter. Also good feedback for the Sigma 300 F2.8 with the converter, but it does include a few minor issues regarding the quality of the build.

I am tempted with the Sigma, if only for the extra reach. Has anyone had any experience with this lens? At the minute, it looks good for the Canon, but I would still like to hear from a few of the Sigma owners out there before I fully commit myself.

[tirc83]

I've just read a few reviews and the Nikon D70 looks as though it may be my best choice. I also like the look of the Canon 20D.

Lens wise, £5000 seems to be allot of money. I think my best bet is to try and find a one thats second hand or an ex-demo.

Dave

I use a Canon 20D with a Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L lens mostly. You can add a 1.4x teleconverter to get an extra 160mm out of it. I buy most of my camera stuff from the US and pay the duty as I find it works out cheaper that way.

Some of my bird pics can be viewed at http://www.pbase.com/tirc

If you decide on the 20D or have more questions about it, just drop me a line.

Regards
Gary

[mjmw]

Christine,

Some excellent photos there :t:

I've looked at plenty of reviews for the two lenses mentioned and there seems to be plenty of good feedback with the canon 300 F4, plus 1.4 converter. Also good feedback for the Sigma 300 F2.8 with the converter, but it does include a few minor issues regarding the quality of the build.

I am tempted with the Sigma, if only for the extra reach. Has anyone had any experience with this lens? At the minute, it looks good for the Canon, but I would still like to hear from a few of the Sigma owners out there before I fully commit myself.

Hi Dave, have you made the lens choice yet? I have finally got to play with my 400mm f5.6 with real light in Florida and I am now totaly hooked on this as a hand-hold lens...even with my shakes! I am still convinced on this rather than the 300 f4 IS + 1.4x TC...the 400 is very sharp - I dont think you could beat it at the price. I have a couple of recent shots in my gallery. The Tricolored Heron is as close to 'straight off the camera' as I will get (not cropped, only colour balanced and minor sharp after re-size).

Cheers Mark.

[DaveB]

Mark,

I have orderred the Canon 300 F4, which is out of stock at the moment. However, looking at your photos I may have to reconsider. That Heron is a cracker. :t:

I will let you know once I am sorted.

[Mike Penfold]

Check the following website of the Ontario Field Ornithologists for digiscoped and DSLR bird photographs, usually indicating the equipment used: http://www.ofo.ca/photos/

Mike

[DaveB]

Was struggling to get any of the Primes that have been mentioned and was about to throw in the towel when I mentioned my dilema to one of my students. Turned out that he was selling a 6 month old Canon, 100 - 400 IS Zoom for £700 and after a thread or two, I decided to give it a try.

First impressions of the lens is good.

Had a go with the flash, inside the house last night. Images were excellent at picking up the detail on the ornaments and my other half (she wouldn't let me post that one).

Tested it in the field today. Light was below average so this was going to be an issue. Got the chance to test it out on four Whooper Swan that were a surprise tick for Ramshaw (local patch). I think they are quite good, but could have been better with more practice and more light.

[salty]

Was struggling to get any of the Primes that have been mentioned and was about to throw in the towel when I mentioned my dilema to one of my students. Turned out that he was selling a 6 month old Canon, 100 - 400 IS Zoom for £700 and after a thread or two, I decided to give it a try.

First impressions of the lens is good.

Had a go with the flash, inside the house last night. Images were excellent at picking up the detail on the ornaments and my other half (she wouldn't let me post that one).

Tested it in the field today. Light was below average so this was going to be an issue. Got the chance to test it out on four Whooper Swan that were a surprise tick for Ramshaw (local patch). I think they are quite good, but could have been better with more practice and more light.

£700! - good deal......give you £701 for it?

i want that lens!