Lens help please

[bmslavin]

I have finally taken the the plunge and bought myself a Canon eos20Dwith 17-85 IS lens.I want to develop an interest in bird photography.

I am a total newbie, and know very little when it comes to appropriate lenses. If you were starting out what would you regard as the essential lens to get, to start develoing your required kit. Cost is obviously an issue but would pay to get the right equipment for the job.

Many thanks for your help.

Attached are my first attempts with the camera. The original and cropped and sharpened image

[christineredgate]

I think the general opinion re lenses suitable for decent bird shots have to be 300mm min.One of the most popular is the Canon 100-400,also another reasonable lens is the 300F4 iS.You can use a 1x4 converter with auto focus ,and this lens can be obtained secondhand from dealers.Both lenses are quite easy to carry,and good pics are obtained .Obviously the 100-400 is the most versatile as it is a zoom lens,therefore if the bird is quite close an even sharper pic is possible.Another very acceptable lens is the new Canon 70-300 IS(not the DOS-that one is more expensive and heavier).I have taken a couple of quite passable images with this little lens,which I will eventually get around to posting.I have actually re sized them,so here they are.They were just quickly taken on spec as it were when I was walking the dog.this 70-300 lens is very light and the perfect all rounder to take anywhere at any time.Obviously not the quality of the 100-400,but a very passable,inexpensive little lens.

[pauliev69]

I have just purchased the 20D and the 100-400 ISM lens, I upgraded from the 300D and Sigma 100-300 c/w 1.4 TC
Only used the set-up once, very impressed with the lens, super sharp, lightweight and well balanced, seems ideal for bird photography on a budget. BWT wished I had bought the 17-85 IS with it, looks a nice lens ;)

[pauliev69]

I think the general opinion re lenses suitable for decent bird shots have to be 300mm min.One of the most popular is the Canon 100-400,also another reasonable lens is the 300F4 iS.You can use a 1x4 converter with auto focus ,and this lens can be obtained secondhand from dealers.Both lenses are quite easy to carry,and good pics are obtained .Obviously the 100-400 is the most versatile as it is a zoom lens,therefore if the bird is quite close an even sharper pic is possible.Another very acceptable lens is the new Canon 70-300 IS(not the DOS-that one is more expensive and heavier).I have taken a couple of quite passable images with this little lens,which I will eventually get around to posting.I have actually re sized them,so here they are.They were just quickly taken on spec as it were when I was walking the dog.this 70-300 lens is very light and the perfect all rounder to take anywhere at any time.Obviously not the quality of the 100-400,but a very passable,inexpensive little lens.Sorry to hi-jack the thread, but nice pics Christine ;)

[John M]

Hi,
Cristine has given very good advice, but if you find the cost of the Canon 100-400 IS prohibitive, then dont rule out the Sigma 50-500.
I use the "Bigma" just now, and I am very pleased with it.
That said, I do intend to get the Canon zoom and a Canon prime lens, at some point, as I think the IS is worth the extra cost. I just need to save up first.
I hope, whatever you choose, you are happy with and get good results,
Cheers,
John.

[Bill Atwood]

If you can't afford a new or used 500/4.5 (Canon or Sigma), I would look at the 300/4 IS, and 1.4x teleconverter. With the 1.6 crop factor you get 672mm at f5.6 with IS. Plus the 300 has a minimum focus of 5 ft or so, making it a great bug/plant lens as well (with or w/o the 1.4x).

[tommo]

Or may I suggest my Canon 400 L f5.6 . Sharp, light and works well with converters.

[vjack]

I think the general opinion re lenses suitable for decent bird shots have to be 300mm min.

This is surprising. I would have said that 400mm was the minimum unless we are talking about large birds. I'm finding that even 400 really isn't enough without a quite a bit of cropping.

[christineredgate]

I have taken a couple of quite reasonable shots with the Canon 70-300 IS lens,they are posted on another thread re lenses.A Grey Wagtail and a Sparrow high in a tree.Also Bill's comments re the 300F4 IS is also a very good light lens.I have been using it today,due to the fact the 100-400 is awaiting a repair jobbie.The images are of good size.I think it depends as to how you want to view the bird shots you are taking.If they all have to be full close up shots then ,yes a large 500-600mm lens.Very heavy to carry around,very expensive to buy.If cash is short and one has a scope,but feels the need to take close up shots then why not try digiscoping.A small light cam,if used correctly can produce excellent shots.
The norm these days seems to be to go for the biggest lens possible,but that is not always practical.I know ,I have tried.I bought a Sigma 800 from a BF member,could hardly hoist it onto the tripod.I had to take it out wrapped in a bin liner in my trike basket,carrying the metal case was totally out of the question.I also tried a 400 non IS lens,but it had to be used on a tripod,and when I compared my digiscoped Heron shots,there was no comparison,the digiscoped shots were far better quality.I guess it is what one feels comfortable with,what one can afford,and what one is able to carry around.Also how close one is able to be to ones subject.I would love to take a 600mm lens out with me,but it would not be practical.I prefer to enjoy birding ,but be able to take the occasional decent shot,without too much hassle.

[Ragna]

Vjack has got it dead right the 400 is by far the best option for bird photography with out to much expense.As good a lens as the 300 f4 is is it not long enough 95% of the time you would need a 1.4x teleconverter attached.You can find a review of both the Canon 300f4 with converter and the 400 5.6 at www.photozone.de the test with the converter was a bit disappointing.