advice please

[djprest]

hello

i recently moved from digiscoping to a 350d with a 90-300m, as you would expect i am not getting good results,im just getting back into the slr,as i had one years ago.
i've looked through most of this canon forum,i know i need a better lens but with only a budget of £500 would i be better going for a new lens or a converter?(i know i should save up!)im not expecting to get stunning photos.
the camera will be handheld as i like to (try!) get flight shots.


darrell

[postcardcv]

If you shop around you could get a good lens for sub £500. As you've no doubt found a 300mm lens is often a bit short for birding so you probably want to look for a 400/500mm lens. The Sigma 50-500 is a very good birding lens, they often crop up secondhand for ~£450. It you save a bit more you could look out for a use Canon 100-400IS, image stabilisation makes hand holding much easier and it's a very good quality lens. Depending on your luck you could find a secondhand one for £650-£850.

[hollis_f]

I think your best bet is probably to go for the 70-300mm lens. You can pick it up for around £340 and the reviews are pretty good. A teleconverter isn't really going to help that much as the autofocus wouldn't work (or would work sometimes with taped pins).

[Paul Jarvis]

The sigma 135-400 might be a posibility and gets some good comments, have a look at some examples of shots in the gallery from the lenses mentioned above for some help.

[djprest]

thanks all for the advice and help,the sigma 135-400mm was an idea, like the thread says its whats behind the camera that counts

thankyou

darrell

[mike from ebbw]

Hi Darrel.I have been using the sigma 135-400mm lens for the past month or two.I think it is a great lens and excellent value for money.

[Tannin]

300mm is too short for birding. Teleconverters only work well on very, very good glass, and even then there is a quality loss. In short, you need a decent 400mm lens, or something else in the same class. Half measures will get you half results. I'd be looking for a Sigma 50-500, or one of the other lenses mentioned above.

[Modular]

I just got my Convertor Today ... A 1.4 TC Pro 300 DG (Kenko,)
I have'nt taped the Pin's as yet,
I tried it out on the Sigma 170-500mm ... The AF Work's a little and i did get
it to AutoFocus in certain Light and i'd want to try it more in better Light to see if i can "Normal" AF ... But it worked best in Manual Focus,

I then tried it on the Canon 75-300mm III USM and it worked a treat ... To
be honest i felt the Lens responded better than it ever has ... At first
when i tried it i thought the AF was'nt working but i had forgot how silent
the Canon is at AutoFocusing compared to the Sigma ... The Sigma is very
noisey ... That's either down to the Age of my Sigma or that they are just
generally noisey,

Not to Hijack the Thread but i would like to ask Mike From Ebbw a quick
question if He does'nt mind ...
Hope your well Mike ... My Question is this Sir ...
Let's say i take a Photo of a NutHatch at 250mm Without convertor ...
My Exif data will tell me it was took at 250mm ...
Now i add the Convertor with the same Zoom setting at 250mm ...
This make's it in my Book ... A Zoom of 350mm ( 1.4 x 250mm,) Right?,
But in my Exif it still say's 250mm ...
I just checked on my Sigma Exif that at full Zoom of 500mm with convertor
on it still say's 500mm on Exif but in reality it is 700mm by my Math's ...
Is this just purely down to the camera "Only" reading the Lens and not the
Teleconvertor or am i missing something here lol?,
Thank's for your Time and sorry for the Hijacking,
Take care,
John,

[postcardcv]

Now i add the Convertor with the same Zoom setting at 250mm ...
This make's it in my Book ... A Zoom of 350mm ( 1.4 x 250mm,) Right?,
But in my Exif it still say's 250mm ...
I just checked on my Sigma Exif that at full Zoom of 500mm with convertor
on it still say's 500mm on Exif but in reality it is 700mm by my Math's ...
Is this just purely down to the camera "Only" reading the Lens and not the
Teleconvertor or am i missing something here lol?

You're right the EXIF shows the focal length for the lens only as it doesn't 'see' the tc. If it did see the tc then the camera woudl know that the min aperture was greater than f5.6 and the AF wouldn't even try to work.

[djprest]

well after reading the comments and doing some research ive just ordered a sigma 50-500mm!

bit more than i wanted to spend but hey you only live once!!!!!

[mike from ebbw]

Sorry for taking so long to answer John but Peter has done it for me.

[ikw101]

I just got my Convertor Today ... A 1.4 TC Pro 300 DG (Kenko,)
.............I then tried it on the Canon 75-300mm III USM and it worked a treat ... To be honest i felt the Lens responded better than it ever has ... At first when i tried it i thought the AF was'nt working but i had forgot how silent the Canon is at AutoFocusing compared to the Sigma ... The Sigma is very noisey ... That's either down to the Age of my Sigma or that they are just generally noisey,


Thank's for your Time and sorry for the Hijacking,
Take care,
John,

John I'm surprised with your success using the Kenko 1.4TC with the Canon 75-300mm III USM. I was thinking about going the same way mainly because I'm after a relatively small and light setup. What had put me off was other posts suggesting the TC would be a stop too far preventing the camera from autofocusing in all but the brightest light. I'd appreciate it if you could let me know which camera you're using and whether the lens you refer to is the IS or non IS version.

Cheers

Ian