[tommo]

I own a 300d and use it with a Tamron 28-300 Ultra zoom xr lense.I just can`t seem to get really well focussed shots at the 300 end.While the results are ok ,they are not great. Would I be better off with a better camera or saving my money and buying a better lense.? I feel the camera is probably as good as I need at this time given my expertise and that I also do a lot of sports photography. Any ideas please.! Sorry if this is covered elsewhere.

[CJW]

Hi Tommo and welcome to Birdforum from all the Moderators and Admin. Staff.
My advice would be to get a better lens. I have a 300D (well, the wife does actually) and it's a cracking piece if kit. I recommend one of the Canon IS lenses and it's one of these that will be after in the near future.

[Muskrat]

Hi Tommo...I have a Canon 300D and I find it to be an outstanding Camera. When I first purchased it, I bought a Canon 75-300 zoom and found my pictures to be less than I was hoping for in image sharpness and color. I since have sold that lens and bought a Canon EF 100-400L IS lens. (Quite Expensive, though) With better optics, range, and Image Stabilization...I have found a distinct improvement in the qualities of my images. I'm not going to be biased and tell you that its the lens that you must buy...there are plenty of others out there as well....what I am saying, is that your camera WILL do the job...it's the lenses that will make a big difference. Check my gallery...most shots are with the 300D and 100-400L IS. Good Luck!!!
Muskrat

[Jay Turberville]

Do you have a good quality prime lens? If so, do those shots look good and sharp? They probably do. And if they do, then the problem is almost surely with your current zoom lens.

28-300mm is a very wide zoom range and unless that is a very expensive lens (and I suspect it isn't) you can bet that there are some significant optical compromises involved to get that range at a moderate cost. That is a 10x zoom range!! Note that the one lens recommended so far has a 4x zoom range. If you are going to purchase a budget price lens, then you are more likely to do well if it has a conservative design.

If you want to squeeze the most out of the lens you have, make sure you use a tripod at the longer lengths and also stop down to f/5.6 or f/8. Maybe even try f/11 and see if you can get better results.

I'd also bet that a good camera shop would let you try out a lens in shop on your camera body to snap a few comparison images to take home and compare. Then you can see for yourself what the difference in image quality would be.

[Jay Turberville]

Oh - one more thing. You might try increasing the in-camera sharpening if there is such an option. Its no replacement for better optics, but it may help some.

[tommo]

Thanks people--Muskrat,had a look at your gallery, very nice. Looks like a unanimous verdict is that the camera is great. I`ll dig deep and buy a better lense. After all A grand on a lense is cheaper than a new camera, well sort of.

[Muskrat]

A couple more points, Tommo....I have seen quite a few nice shots on these galleries from other Canon Primes and Zooms as well as some great Sigma shots ( I mention these as they would fit your camera) Check them out and see which are best for your situation. Also, as Jay has mentioned, once you have the equipment that will do the job for you, then TECHNIQUE becomes critical. (I'm still trying to master this) Manipulating aperture and shutter speed is very important for sharpness and depth of field. Stabilizing your camera, i.e. Tripod, Monopod, or Image Stabilizer helps tremendously....and at the top of the list in image quality is GET CLOSE to your subjects!!! Keep me posted on your progress...Good Luck.
Muskrat

[geedub]

Tommo, have a look at the Sigma 170-500 APO zoom - I use one with my 300d and the quality of the images at 500mm (800mm when used with 300d) is superb, but you will need a tripod/bean bag for support, and it's much cheaper than the Canon IS lenses (ca. £400-£450). I rarely use any other lens now!

[CJW]

I've got the Sigma 135-400mm APO and believe me, I regret not buying a Canon IS lens.
The difference between my flight shots and peteh's is purely down to the quality of his IS lens.

[digi-birder]

Originally Posted by CJW

I've got the Sigma 135-400mm APO and believe me, I regret not buying a Canon IS lens.
The difference between my flight shots and peteh's is purely down to the quality of his IS lens.

What you on about! You just made me buy that lens by saying how good it was!! You've taken some lovely shots with it.

I've found it to be an excellent lens, although I haven't checked my photos from my weekend in Wales yet! This was my first 'real' test of this lens and they look fine in the monitor - I can usually tell which ones will be OK and which are going to be rubbish. I think I have some good flight shots of the Red Kites at Gigrin Farm, but we'll have to see later when I have chance to download them.

My Sigma 50-500, which I have put up for sale, was also a good lens, but a little heavy and could definitely not be hand held. A friend of mine, who also moved from digiscoping to dSLR has the Canon 100-400 IS and he says he wishes he'd seen the Sigma 50-500 before buying the Canon. Admittedly, his photos are amazing, but I'm not sure if it's all down to the lens. He was getting some cracking shots with his digiscoping, but wasn't happy with them. I'd have done anything to be getting the results he was getting.

On the Canon Forum they sing the praises of the IS lenses, and everyone is rushing out to buy them, but there are some amazing shots taken by people still using Sigma lenses on their Canon cameras, both the 300D and the 10D. I, for one, can't see the differences, if there are any, between a Canon lens shot and one taken using a Sigma.

[CJW]

Originally Posted by digi-birder

What you on about! You just made me buy that lens by saying how good it was!! You've taken some lovely shots with it.

I've found it to be an excellent lens, although I haven't checked my photos from my weekend in Wales yet! This was my first 'real' test of this lens and they look fine in the monitor - I can usually tell which ones will be OK and which are going to be rubbish. I think I have some good flight shots of the Red Kites at Gigrin Farm, but we'll have to see later when I have chance to download them.

Don't get me wrong, the Sigma is unbeatable at the price (and very much more too) I just need an IS lens.....

[138mph]

Hmm,
I find the Tamron 28-300XR lens gives me sharper shots at 300 with my 10D than the Canon 28-135 IS lens, and am strongly considering getting the new Tamron Di 200-500 once the price comes down. However, I do prefer the usability of the Canon lens - especially its manual focus adjustment uder AF. I use my 300 f/4 Canon IS lens with a 1.4xteleconverter and find this usually gives sharp shots.
I also have a Tamron 19-35 lens which I find sharp as well.
Just thought I'd throw in a contra opinion, maybe its down to the individual lens?

[digi-birder]

Originally Posted by CJW

I just need an IS lens.....

OK, point taken!!

So, instead of me going out and paying full price, I could have had yours at a knock-down price once you get your Canon lens!

Had a quick look through the photos last night (all 200+ of them) and there are some really good ones. I'll try and get time to post some tonight. Flight shots, no less!

[rogerscoth]

Originally Posted by CJW

I just need an IS lens.....

Chris,
If it not too personal a question, just why do you need an IS lens?
Tell me to mind my own business if you want.

Roger

[Geoff Brown]

Have a Canon 10D with a Sigma 135- 400 mm lens and perhaps I am easy to please but I am well satisfied with most of the results from this combo. One of my pictures of the wildfowl on a frozen pond taken from Hagnaby hide was hanging up in the hide a few weeks ago and the warden thought it was pretty good so did not remove it. I can see where you are coming from with the IS lens as my above set up needs a firm tripod.In additon I also have the Canon 28-135 mm IS lens but believe me you don't always get razor sharp image stablized shots from this set-up especially at the tele end. Like everything else it is down to practice,practice and learn from mistakes you will make.

[christineredgate]

Originally Posted by rogerscoth

Chris,
If it not too personal a question, just why do you need an IS lens?
Tell me to mind my own business if you want.

Roger

Could it not be because as the name suggests,Image stabiliser.I have very shaky hands,but with an IS lens I can handhold the camera with lens attached and take a decent image.I have also taken a couple of reasonably acceptable ones with the camera held almost over my head.Swallow on a phone line,and Shellducks in flight.Albeit it has been said that the non IS lenses take much sharper images,but the whole point surely of using an SLR for bird shots,is to not have to set up a tripod as one would for Digiscoping,and to be able to take the odd quick shot,therefore an IS lens is perhaps the answer.I could be totally wrong,here,but that is my view of using that particular set up.

[Andrew03]

Hi,
quote
'Albeit it has been said that the non IS lenses take much sharper images'
- but IMHO is totally wrong, and also the opinion of most others. Most canon professional lenses of 300mm upwards have IS (not the 400 f5.6) and these are the most commonly used lenses for wildlife/sport photography and get superb results. I know of no evidence that IS reduces image quality. For flight shots you'd usually be panning, so should be using 'mode 2'. I'd say IS is most useful for still, not moving subjects.
Andrew

[paul goode]

Hi Tommo, I am another 300D user and was not over impressed with the results I was getting with the Canon 75-300USM. My route has been to go for the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX HSM which is a nice manageable size for hand holding and has the advantage that with the sigma 2x converter its an AF 140-400 f5.6. The other advantage of this combination was that the cost was a lot less than the Canon 100-400. See this month's Practical Photography for a review of the lens.

[redshift]

Another thing to consider is what sort of photos you are taking. I would strongly suggest that you consider switching to shooting RAW images instead of JPEGs and using something like Phase One's C1 SE to process them and sharpen them to perfection. I am far happier with the performance of my Canon 75-300mm IS since I made this switch.

[nigelblake]

Before you go spending a lot of money on new gear, and it is easy to blame the equipment, just take some time to check that the softness is not down to you! Check your exif data and make sure that the shutter speeds you use are fast enough to reduce the chance of camera shake, are you releasing the shutter softly, or excitedly stabbing at it!. This may seem like an 'egg sucking lesson' but I get lots of e-mails asking for advice on camera and lens choice, very often people buy a DSLR and long lens expecting to get awesome images straight away, it just do'nt happen like that..... Stick with what you have for a while and get used to using it, it is more than possible that it will give you the great results you want, without making a big hole in your bank ballance.
The best investment you can make is to get a good solid tripod ( yes I always use one, many people spend good money on expensive cameras and then get a cheap tripod that is little better than a 'jelly on springs' ) and a good bean-bag. Despite the fact that I own all IS lenses I do not shoot unless the camera and lens is properly supported.
Also I generally turn the IS off for flight shots and fast moving subjects as I feel that it is in conflict with the cameras movement. The old rule of using a shutter speed faster than the lens length i.e 1/400th sec or faster on a 400mm lens is still a good rule today.

[nigelblake]

I would also strongly suggest that you get the cameras focus calibration checked, there have been many 10D and 300D bodies that focus slightly forward or rearward of subject, my own 10D was slightly misfocusing, but is fine since Canon sorted it out.

[CJW]

Originally Posted by rogerscoth

Chris,
If it not too personal a question, just why do you need an IS lens?
Tell me to mind my own business if you want.

Roger

I need an IS for the same reason I need 4 guitars, a Land Rover, a £1500 telescope etc etc
Diane understands!

[digi-birder]

Originally Posted by CJW

I need an IS for the same reason I need 4 guitars, a Land Rover, a £1500 telescope etc etc
Diane understands!

Yes, and I still need one of those FlashTrax you had on the Oop North Bash!

[tommo]

Thanks all for info which I am now digesting.