Lenses!! (1 Viewer)

[Gaukur]

I recently did go for the Canon 400 mm f5.6 with my 20D even though it does not have IS. It is easy to carry and very sharp. My other option would have been Canon 300 mm f4 IS with a 1,4 converter. That combination is heavier, more expensive and not quite as sharp but of course easier to use due to image stabilation. 300 mm alone is just too small for bird photography in my opinion. So far I am very happy with my 400 as it has been sunny ever since I received the lens.... I have seen comparisons shots with 100-400IS and the 400 prime and the difference was big in favour of the prime lens.

 

[Khalid J]

Hi,

Well, I have Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 with 2x tele-converter, it works as an AF tele-zoom lens from 140mm to 400mm F5.6. And I'm quite happy with the final results. It's really an inexpensive way of getting an extra lens double the original focal length, with image quality higher than achievable by blowing up and cropping the frame. But with a slow telezoom such as the Tamron 70-300 F4-5.6 one gets a 140-600 F8-11 which requires stopping down one or two more stops to obtain better image quality. At 600mm the shutter speed should be at least 1/1000s to avoid blurring. Now, to shoot at 1/1000s (or preferably even faster) at F16 or F22 requires very bright light and fast, grainy films. Thus, the combination of a slow telezoom and the TC, although capable of producing images of at least acceptable quality, is highly impracticable.

Khalid