FZ28 to DSLR ...The saga continues ... (1 Viewer)

OK .. so its looking like I would like to dive into the world of DSLR photography .

and my poor bank account ...

Having asked around a few different places as well as here, the general opinion seem to be that if I wanted to maximise my potential to get some nice, sharp shots of birds either perched or in flight I need to be looking at something like a 50D or something along those lines due to the 50D and the like having a much better AF than some other models .. It would be nice to be able to get some good shots of birds in flight as well as just perched so I'm guessing that a fast AF is an important aspect.

I can get a 50D body for £785 from Simply Gadgets (just in case anyone has dealt with these and has any feedback regarding service etc) or if anyone else knows of anywhere better of course .. I don't want to go too crazy with the body price so that I can put more towards a good lens ..

I can buy second hand but I think that at least buying new you know what you are getting ..

I'm still bearing in mind here that my current FZ28 setup will give the equivalent of 826mm focal length and so I,m hoping that I can get somewhere near to that by purchasing the correct lens/teleconverter to stick on the 50D body.

Weight .. A major concern I have is weight as I will be carrying the new setup for quite a few miles on occasion .. I held a Nikon with a heavy telephoto lens last weekend and it weighed an absolute ton !! Mind you it was a £4000 lens so I,m guessing that it had plenty of glass in there .. I also held a 550D with a 100-400 Canon lens and this was far better ..

At this point I am now open to any suggestions which anyone may have regarding my wise/unwise choice of body (up to now) and any suggestions regarding a good lens to be able to maximise the potential of the 50D .. I would be looking to spend around £1K or so for the lens. (A bit more if necessary) Ultimately my kit will be used for birds/wildlife, birds in flight and distance work wherever necessary ..

Would I need to buy anything else .. I'm thinking here of any particular kind of memory card for instance ? Are there fast ones and slow ones ??

I obviously still have lots to learn when it comes to DSLR work as opposed to the more simple bridge camera stuff so any advice here would be very welcome in order to try to ensure that I dont 'cock-up' when making my final choice ..

Thanks guys ..

Dave ..

If you want birds in flight consider a used EOS 1D Mk 2 - around £450. Lightning fast. See my friend's cuckoo: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_DJgT7EnoV...W8DFRMk/s1600/2010-05-05+Cuckoo+in+flight.jpg

Sean

Well for lenses that part can be easy or complex

You've basically 3 options from Canon in your rough price range:

1) Canon 400mm f5.6 L - the longest prime lens in this price range and a really stella performer. This lens is often a choice favoured by bird photographers for its long, sharp reach and fast AF. Its only drawback is the lack of IS - however a good monopod can easily get around this limitations when walking and a beanbag can do for ground levels. Tripods are also an option for when more static.

2) Canon 300mm IS f4 (+1.4Teleconverter) - another really great performer; this has the bonus of having the IS to help stabalize the lens image. This helps allow a photographer shoot at slower shutter speeds whilst hand holding and not suffer as much blur form their body movements and it also helps to remove those from the viewfinder image, giving a smoother view through the viewfinder (this can really help when composing moving animal shots. Remember though IS won't counter subject motion so shutter speeds still have to be fast for that.
The use of a 1.4TC makes this lens a bit more expensive, but gives you the option of getting 420mm worth of reach out of it, a feature you might well come to need for bird photography and in this the combo provides a good image quality.

3) Canon 100-400mm IS L f4.5-5.6 - this lens has the lowest image quality at the 400mm mark of the three; however its image quality is still pro standard and very good for what you get in the lens. The power of this lens its of course, its zoom ability which gives it a wide range of uses and can be an ideal option for the walk around photographer.
It has a push-pull zoom however and some find that this is a feature they either like or dislike. Another fact to consider is that this lens (along with similar options from Sigma) can suffer from a "soft copy" problem. This is most often because these super zoom lenses are complex to construct and have a slightly wider manufacture tollerance level - which increase the chance of getting a bad lens+camera body combo (ie neither is broken, but when used together they give less than ideal performance). This can be corrected (under warranty) though requires the lens to be sent away (ideally with the camera body as well - doing so without is again entering back into the lottery as the lens might come back calibrated right or it might not and the "fault" can also be with the body and not the lens).


I will say that the error margin on the 100-400mm is significantly improved over what it was when it was released, but it can still occur today and is something to consider with this kind of lens. It is still pro and a quick look around will show many photographers using this lens and I know quite a few who shoot with the super lenses (300mm f2.8 - 500mm f4 etc...) who keep a 100-400mm on hand for when they need a smaller lighter lens.


As I mentioned sigma also have some options on the market, but its been a while since I looked at them and I can't recall which is which now in the quality order; but suffice to say some of their zooms can get as good as the 100-400mm.

I am going to mention an in between camera you may not have considered. I just got the Pana GH2, and even though it should be less of a performer than the canons you mention especially for flight photos, it has the definite advantage of a lower weight lens (pana 100-300 with IS) which due to the crop factor has a reach a little longer than the 400 mm canon lenses. A very definite step up from your fz28; only you can decide if it is far enough.

Niels

Hello Dave

Be aware you need to get close for good photos with a DSLR + 400mm combo compared with your superzoom (bridge) camera. Most people when switching from a superzoom are surprised how little reach 400mm will get you on a DSLR.
Next time you are out with your superzoom see how close you are to the subject, 10m or less is required for a small bird.
BIFs are more interesting as you tend to be photographing larger birds through clearer air and hence the distance can be much larger. BIFs is an area where the DSLR is head and shoulders above a superzoom.
The otherdown side of the DSLR is lens changing, want to take a BIF then on goes the long lens, want to take a close up, then you need to stick a macro lens on. Want a landscape then on goes a wide angle lens. Pretty tedious.
To some degree the 100-400mm alleviates the lens changing issue but it is a jack of all trade and master of none so you are making compromises on image quality and size.
Still the 100-400 is my preferred lens for general walkabout due to its flexability and relative compactness.
For mainly BIFs the 400 F5.6 is good, though in low light for static objects the 300 F4 + TC would be my choice.

For the body spend the minimum you need as they depreciate in value fast but the glass lasts for years (and keeps its value).

Cheers
Aidan