• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

phoenix 100-400 telephoto zoom lens (1 Viewer)

2aperegrine

2aperegrine

Fly baby, fly--
phoenix 100-400 telephoto zoom lens

Hi
Just wanted to say hello-------just registered today, new member,--
Have a question for all or anyone, am looking at a couple new cameras, and have questions, does anyone have an opinion on or have used the phoenix 100-400 zoom telephoto lens, reviews seem to be better than the vivatar 100-400 zoom, want to use it on a Canon Rebel Digital camera, any comments or opinions, price is much less than Canon telephoto lens--
Thanks
Jimmie
 
Hi Jimmie

I maybe wrong but I think your find that Vivitar, Cosina, opteka and Phoenix are all the same lens made by Cosina with different lables on. The clue do all these lens have the same style ?

Basically they are budget lens so don't expect too much from them. If this is all you can afford and you need the extra reach then go for it. Otherwise you may find slighty better lens in the 75-300 range at a good price. The Canon 100 - 300 usm and Sigma 70-300 APO will give fair to good results and not too expensive. If your budget can stretch to a Sigma 135-400 it is a better lens which can be picked up at a good price.

The problem with buying very cheap lens is how long will it be before you regret the purchase.

Robert

PS - a warm welcome to bird forum.
 
Last edited:
robski said:
Hi Jimmie

I maybe wrong but I think your find that Vivitar, Cosina, opteka and Phoenix are all the same lens made by Cosina with different lables on. The clue do all these lens have the same style ?

Basically they are budget lens so don't expect too much from them. If this is all you can afford and you need the extra reach then go for it. Otherwise you may find slighty better lens in the 75-300 range at a good price. The Canon 100 - 300 usm and Sigma 70-300 APO will give fair to good results and not too expensive. If your budget can stretch to a Sigma 135-400 it is a better lens which can be picked up at a good price.

The problem with buying very cheap lens is how long will it be before you regret the purchase.

O.K. well, it is about cost, but still want a good camera, but want something to take photos at long distance, that will get a sharp image,
what is your opinion of the new Canon powershot 5mp, 12x zoom lens, for any long distance photography, have read great reviews, but that doesn't seem like it would have long reach like a 300-400 zoom, any comments
Jimmie
Click to expand...
 
Hi Jimmie

At the end of the day budget is the limiting factor with most of us. Photographic gear is more expensive in the UK :(. Having experience very cheap optics the results are like looking through a fog. The quaility does not improve as quickly as the price rises.

I don't know how prices match in the USA. In the UK for telephoto.

Lens under £100 = Bad.
under £250 = Use at f8 and put up with the low contrast are OK.
£250 to £500 now we starting to get results.
£500 to £1000 most of the time we have a smile on our face.
Over £1000 in 7th heaven.

A compact with a good zoom maybe a better answer to suit your budget.

This is where I have to hand over to somebody who can recommend some good compact cameras for birding as I am a DSLR man myself.

Good luck in your quest.


Robert
 
2aperegrine said:
O.K. well, it is about cost, but still want a good camera, but want something to take photos at long distance, that will get a sharp image,
what is your opinion of the new Canon powershot 5mp, 12x zoom lens, for any long distance photography, have read great reviews, but that doesn't seem like it would have long reach like a 300-400 zoom, any comments
Jimmie
Click to expand...

I'd agree with Robert's comments about the cheap zoom: they are cheap for a reason. Also, in my experience, digital SLRs show up lens faults more than film.

If you can afford it, I'd recommend you go for a SLR. Images are much better than with compacts and you can update your lens if you need to or when you come into some money. You can pick up a 70-300mm or similar zoom for a small outlay – even a cheap one on an SLR will be better than a compact. Then, when hooked and/or flush, you can buy a better lens if you fancy.

But, if you want low cost and good magnification, one of the 12x zoom compacts such as a Panasonic will give you a worthwhile camera that will take nice pics at the same range as a SLR+zoom for less money, but you would immediately see the difference from a SLR's images.
 
John Jackson said:
I'd agree with Robert's comments about the cheap zoom: they are cheap for a reason. Also, in my experience, digital SLRs show up lens faults more than film.

If you can afford it, I'd recommend you go for a SLR. Images are much better than with compacts and you can update your lens if you need to or when you come into some money. You can pick up a 70-300mm or similar zoom for a small outlay – even a cheap one on an SLR will be better than a compact. Then, when hooked and/or flush, you can buy a better lens if you fancy.

But, if you want low cost and good magnification, one of the 12x zoom compacts such as a Panasonic will give you a worthwhile camera that will take nice pics at the same range as a SLR+zoom for less money, but you would immediately see the difference from a SLR's images.
Click to expand...

Well, wanting a Canon EOS Rebel digital camera, but cost is about $800 here, then lens would have to come later, just cannot hardly buy both together, then have considered the Canon powershot S2 5MP with 12x optical zoom, $500 price here, reviews are great for this camera, but don't think it will give me closeup at longer range like telephoto lens I think one can get an adapter and use telephoto lens, some of friends use the Olympus with 10x zoom and then use the TCON 1.7 teleconverter, maybe a 300mm zoom
they seem to love this system,---
Well, may go for Canon Rebel digital first, lens afterawhile
Thanks for info,
Later
 
Can you find any user reviews of this product ? - It looks like the usual sales pitch from cheap optics manufactures - yes it will produce an image of the size they quote. What they don't tell you about is colour fringing, low contrast and poor edge definition. How important this will be will depend on how much the image is enlarged for printing or on the monitor screen.

If you only print to postcard size I am sure it will be OK but I expect my images to print to A4 or bigger therefore I require optics quaility that will provide this.

You may of noticed that the image quality standards in general on this forum are high and unfortunately that comes at a price.

Robert
 
Last edited:
Hi Jimmie,

I own a Vivitar 100-400mm lens and a Canon Digital Rebel. I've had the lens for more than a year and a half. The autofocus died after about 3/4 of a year or less, but manual works okay once you get used to it.

I really am happy with the quality of the images for the most part, but I've never owned one of the really good quality telephotos. I'm ready to move on, but theres the problem of $$$$ for me still! ;)

It was definitely worth the money I paid for it, and has given me a lot of practice time with 30,000 or so pictures with it. I don't know how it would compare to, say a 75-300 Canon lens. I find myself wishing for Image Stabilization a lot, but that lens is like $1,400!

Check out the pictures in my gallery (link is below), all taken with the Digital Rebel / Vivitar 100-400 setup (except right at the end).

Michael
 
Micheal

I notice your recent shots were down in sunny Arizona. An observation many of us brits have made is that you can get some good results with cheaper lens in good light. Comparing your results with my canon 75-300 I would say they were on par. What a lot of people mistake as slight camera shake in fact turns out to be lenses inablility to focus sharply. Shake would show as blur in a direction or double image. If you see signs of a blurred halo around objects then it is most likely poor optics. With all my lens I have done pixel level lens tests. I photograph the fine scale on a ruler so that the graduations are only a few pixels. The difference between cheap lens and Canon L is quite remarkable. Usually you can improve the results of a cheap lens in Photoshop by improving contrast and sharpness. But there is a limit to what can be achived.

A simple test carried out by Postcardcv illustrates the difference between a mid priced Zoom 170-500 Sigma lens to an expensive 500 Sigma prime.

http://www.birdforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=25214
http://www.birdforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=25213

As I said before it all depends if you blow up the image to pixel level.

Robert
 
Hi Jimmie

I don't have any experience of the zoom that you are talking about, but like many others I've found that cheap lenses are a false economy. Biggest danger is trying an expensive lens, then there's no turning back.

A decent compact camera may seem like a good decision as you can get a 5mp camera with a decent optical zoom for less than a digi slr. However if you've already started looking at the dslr's you'll probably find a compact too restricting, both in what it can do and in future expandability. If you go for a compact a future purchase will be a complete upgrade, with a dslr you can just buy more lenses (trust me they'll always be another lens that you want).

The EOS digital Rebel (300D) is a decent camera for the money, it's not as fast (start up time) as the more expensive models, but it's a 6mp camera and produces exellent results. The biggest limiting factor with dslr's is the lens on the front.
A quick look online and I found the 300d for $700 on B&H, they also do the Sigma 70-300 APO macro for $219 - this is a great lens 300mm gives reasonable reach and the lens is also decent for macro shots. So you could get a nice starting set up for just over $900, then you can always add a bigger (better) telephoto lens when you can afford it. If this seems a bit to high look at the non-APO version of the lens, not quite the same quality, but it only $139 (so full set up for $840).
 
Warning! This thread is more than 19 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

G
OM-1 with Panasonic Leica 100-400
2
Replies
20
Views
5K
Jim M.
J
M
Budget camera to pair with Olympus 100-400mm Lens
2
Replies
29
Views
3K
njlarsen
njlarsen
S
Yet another bridge camera thread...
Replies
4
Views
423
seawatcher
S
Steve Heath
OM-1 with Olympus M.Zuiko 150 x 400mm TC Pro
Replies
12
Views
3K
DCC1976
D
J
Brand new to everything at 68 - wanted to say hello…
Replies
13
Views
402
Jdilpkle
J

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top