camera dilemma! (1 Viewer)

postcardcv

Super Moderator

Staff member

Supporter

• Oct 19, 2005

• #61

Keith Reeder said:

decide whether you're happy taking the tripod approach (bearing in mind that you might end up having to lug two tripods around, one for camera, one for scope. It'd be a royal pain in the buttocks to have one tripod doing "double duty"), or whether you want a camera/lens combo you can use handheld.

If it's the latter (and as you know, it is for me), then a big prime is really not the lens for you - the "bean bag/leaning against the wall" approach would not do it justice, and you'd be much, much better off with one of the slightly shorter zooms mentioned already.

Click to expand...

While I agree that it's important to decide how you're going to use the lens before you decide which ones right for you... I don't find that using the same tripod for the scope and the camera is a problem. It might mean that I miss some shots because I'm not set up (as the scopes on the tripod), but I'm a birder first so woudl rather have teh scope ready than the camera.

As Sean has mentioned he uses the Sigma 500 prime handheld and gets some excellent results (makes sure you have a look at his gallery). I've tried the lens handheld, on a beanbag, with a monopod and with a tripod. My best results are with a tripod, but with a monopod or beanbag I get much better results than my 170-500 zoom gave.

That said when you look at some of the shots taken with the 170-500 and the 135-400 lenses (take a look at Keith's gallery, esp the recent goldcrest shots), you realise that less-expensive lenses can still deliver great results in the right hands.

 

SeanKP

Fledgling

• Oct 19, 2005

• #62

postcardcv said:

That said when you look at some of the shots taken with the 170-500 and the 135-400 lenses (take a look at Keith's gallery, esp the recent goldcrest shots), you realise that less-expensive lenses can still deliver great results in the right hands.

Click to expand...

Keith's recent Goldcrest shots are a great advertisement for the 135-400mm lens. The detail is stunning.

Sean

 

salty

geordie birder

• Oct 19, 2005

• #63

the 170-500mm sigma was looked at on sunday, i was surprised at how light it was, i thought it was going to be on the heavy side.

has anyone used this with the D50 or 350D? - let me know please.

to get this combo, and for it to cost around the 1k mark would be great.

 

rezMole

Well-known member

• Oct 19, 2005

• #64

Beanbags are great. I find them MORE stable than using a tripod - the actually seem to "deaden" the mirror vibration!

Should have let you play with my D70 Tamron 200-500mm combo when we met. If you get the chance, have a go.

I only have two lenses now - as your mate bought my others. Two lenses are quite enough to lug around, even though they are pretty compact. Bought the Tamron from WE on there buy now pay in nine months interest free option. If you go down this route, just remember to pay in time, to avoid the extortionate interest charge!

Also, i share the tripod if i need to with the Leica. It takes all of 5 seconds to change over - provided you have a quick release plate attached to scope and lens. Having said that, i do most of my shots hand held nowadays, without any problems - unless the light is particularly bad.

Canon or Nikon? Well, as i said before - get the one that "feels" better. A friend has a Canon, and the pics are great. I have a Nikon and the pics are great. You'll find no difference in quality.

Good luck mate.

 

Saphire

Christine

• Oct 19, 2005

• #65

Salty

Since I bought the 170-500 in May, I have only had it off the camera a couple of times. Three weeks ago I bought the 350d and again I have the 170-500 on all the time. check my gallery all of the photo's were taken hand held.

 

salty

geordie birder

• Oct 19, 2005

• #66

Saphire said:

Salty

Since I bought the 170-500 in May, I have only had it off the camera a couple of times. Three weeks ago I bought the 350d and again I have the 170-500 on all the time. check my gallery all of the photo's were taken hand held.

Click to expand...

great work.

looks like it can be an exellent performer, thanks.

 

christineredgate

Winner of the Copeland Wildlife Photographer of th

• Oct 19, 2005

• #67

On thinking about cams and lenses today,and Salty's query,could there not be a section ,say,in the Gallery,where members can list the equipment they use,then if anyone is looking to change/buy new cams and lenses they can easily check images which have been taken with the products in which they are interested.I know people do mention on the Gallery,which cam/lens etc they have used,but it is very difficult to remember who uses what and where to locate their images.there could perhaps be a separate link to the images,and then it would be easy for one to go and have a look.
Anyone think this idea could be viable,perhaps one of the Mods may come up with something similar.

 

Nigel G

Well-known member

• Oct 19, 2005

• #68

Hi Christine

You only have to type the equipment into the search parameters (eg Sigma 175-500)and then it does what you suggest, providing of course people have listed what they use.

 

postcardcv

Super Moderator

Staff member

Supporter

• Oct 19, 2005

• #69

No doubting that some of the cheaper Sigma lenses are worth serious consideration - I still rate this shot (taken with a 300D and Sigma 170-500 handheld) as one of my best since going over to a dslr, I was really pleased with it.

http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showphoto.php/photo/51350/sort/1/cat/500/page/4

 

salty

geordie birder

• Oct 19, 2005

• #70

postcardcv said:

No doubting that some of the cheaper Sigma lenses are worth serious consideration - I still rate this shot (taken with a 300D and Sigma 170-500 handheld) as one of my best since going over to a dslr, I was really pleased with it.

http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showphoto.php/photo/51350/sort/1/cat/500/page/4

Click to expand...

yep, very nice work mate!

 

rezMole

Well-known member

• Oct 20, 2005

• #71

Check out this months (Nov) Photography Monthly. It's got a "Which Digital SLR" pull out, with reviews of the following (overall scores in brackets):
Canon EOS 350D (90)
Canon EOS 20D (91)
Minolta Dynax 5D (93)
Nikon D70 (90)
Nikon D70s (93)
Olympus E-300 (85)
Pentax *ist DL (88)
Pentax *ist DS (86)
Sigma SD10 (69)

Avoid the Olympus due to it being full-frame.
I haven't listed the split scores for handling, features, performance and value - you'll just have to check out the mag. But, as you can see, not a lot in it really (apart from the Sigma).

 

salty

geordie birder

• Oct 20, 2005

• #72

im getting tempted by the 350d, i'll have to see it in the flesh again, and the sigma zoom.

 

mjmw

formally known as mw_aurora

• Oct 20, 2005

• #73

salty said:

im getting tempted by the 350d, i'll have to see it in the flesh again, and the sigma zoom.

Click to expand...

I am sure others have said this (I can't remember!) - if you think you are going to get more serious with DSLR, then invest in glass. Whatever body you buy today will be superceded pretty soon. BTW, all of the bodies on your short list have pros and cons, but all can give excellent results.

The downside is that good lenses cost more but can last 10+ years - get the right one and you won't want or need to change it. They also hold their value really well - e.g. 2nd hand Canon IS primes are like rocking horse dropppings - people don't change them and get good money when they do. Of course, you have to match the glass to the body, so Nikon or Canon may be the way to go.

However, as you are just starting in the SLR world, you may find you do not like it, so getting a cheaper alternative is a good idea to start. I would recommend looking for a secondhand Sigma zoom (rather than new) - there are a fair few about - more people 'upgrade' from these. You then don't loose that intial cash, just like a car

BTW, my original exploits with SLR (kit I sold 4 years ago after getting into digiscoping) were with an EOS 1000, then EOS 300 with a cheap 75-300...you can now buy this set-up for about £150 on ebay!

 

salty

geordie birder

• Oct 20, 2005

• #74

yep, good point.

im thinking of a D50 and sigma 170-500apo, £409 and £436 from warehouse express, a decent combo that i can learn from and still get good pics.

then maybe in the future, get a top-end camera and prime lens if i want to take things to another level, or get more into photography.

 

rezMole

Well-known member

• Oct 20, 2005

• #75

One good thing the Nikon has over the cheaper Canons is that it has spot metering - quite useful when the bird is very small in the centre of the image, or against the sky.

 

Keith Reeder

Watch the birdie...

• Oct 21, 2005

• #76

Hi Sean, Pete - I stand corrected re: handholding the Sigma 500mm prime - I thought it was one of those "bazooka" lenses, and indeed, wish I'd read that before placing my order for the new DG version of the Sigma 80-400mm OS lens.!

It (this one, yeah? http://www.warehouseexpress.co.uk/Images/sigma/500f45ex.jpg) still looks bloody big to handhold, mind!



Actually no, it's still way out of my price range - the new DG version of the 500mm prime is £2595 on Warehouse Express, whereas I'm getting the DG 80-400mm OS from Jacobs for under £800 - cheap enough that I could justify a Kenko 1.4x tcon to go with it...

Hopefully I'll be able to pick up the new lens tomorrow, in which case I'll do what I can with it to mess with Salty's head some more..!



Oh - and many thanks for the kind words about the goldcrests...

 

Last edited: Oct 21, 2005

H

Henry B

Well-known member

• Oct 21, 2005

• #77

I,m sure the Canons do have spot metering.

 

postcardcv

Super Moderator

Staff member

Supporter

• Oct 22, 2005

• #78

Keith Reeder said:

Actually no, it's still way out of my price range - the new DG version of the 500mm prime is £2595 on Warehouse Express, whereas I'm getting the DG 80-400mm OS from Jacobs for under £800 - cheap enough that I could justify a Kenko 1.4x tcon to go with it...

Click to expand...

A new DG one would have been way beyond me too - I was lucky enough to find a non-DG version secondhand in my local camera store. Having bought it a few months ago I'm still trying to justify buying a 1.4tc, it's now at the top of my Christmas list.

The 80-400 OS looks like a great lens, I'm sure you're going to be very happy with it. I know that Sean does very well handholding the 500, but I'm still not great with it, sometimes it's just a bit too much for me. Personally I think the best quality handholdable lens (without breaking the bank) is the Canon 400 f5.6 - though clearly it's no good if you use Nikon!

Salty - if you can get hold of the September issue of Practical Photography, it has a comparisson of the main DSLRs (not the new Minolta though). It rates the Canons (20d and 350D) best overall, however it the Nikon D50 is recommended as the best buy. The reviews aren't the most useful, but the quick guide table is handy for comparing specific features of the models. If you can't get hold of it let me know and I'll send you a copy,

 

Last edited: Oct 22, 2005

salty

geordie birder

• Oct 22, 2005

• #79

im pretty sure i want the D50.

but im still interested to know how people get on with image-stabilised lenses.

anyone use these for birding, and what models do you lot think are ok?

discuss!

 

christineredgate

Winner of the Copeland Wildlife Photographer of th

• Oct 22, 2005

• #80

Salty,I think it has to be an IS lens.Whether zoom or prime.If you suddenly spot a species on a branch or in the undergrowth,would you really have the time to be setting up your tripod.By the time you have everything in situ the bird will have moved on.A quick point and shoot IS lens makes everything far quicker before the bird has chance to spot you.