• 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.

Which lens for bird photography? (1 Viewer)

Tammy 200-500 without a doubt. Superb value for money imho. Works best tripod mounted although I do regularly use it hand held both on my 7D and alpha 100. The manfrotto 393 gimble style head is ideal for this lens.

You can see the 200-500 with the 393 HERE and almost all of my bird photos (amongst others) are with this lens at http://www.denisg.co.uk/gallery/. Exif is present in most pics or just click details. Worth noting the shutter speed;)

Hope this helps |=)|.

Denis.
 
Thank you for your answers! Tamron 200-500 seems to be *the* birding lens for Sony. And to judge by your excellent pictures Denis, not a bad choice either. I'm asking for a friend with a Sony body, and an old 300mm Sigma lens, and she wants to improve her bird imaging. Personally I'm using Canon, but seeing the results of your Sony/Tamron setup Denis, I don't think I will persuade her to switch, but to stay with her camera, and buy the Tamron.

Thanks again,
Ulf
 
Another question: Is there a teleconverter usable with the Tamron 200-500 and a Sony body, with acceptable results? I'm aware of the loss of AF.
 
I live in Canada, is there different versions of the Tammy 200-500, & can it connect directly to the body or is an adapter needed. Is a brace of some kind needed to keep this big lense on.
 
Last edited:
Another question: Is there a teleconverter usable with the Tamron 200-500 and a Sony body, with acceptable results? I'm aware of the loss of AF.

I would personally say no. It's hard enough grtting a fast enough shutter speed in England at f6.3, but Africa..............maybe better. However, I personally find the loss of quality too high a cost. The Kenko 300pro 1.4x does work and may still give A/F on good days in your part of the world. The 2x (I have both) is a definate no from me on all counts except sheer desperation.

Denis.
 
I live in Canada, is there different versions of the Tammy 200-500, & can it connect directly to the body or is an adapter needed. Is a brace of some kind needed to keep this big lense on.

The Tamron 200-500mm (300-750 effective on the Alpha 100) comes with a full Minolta/Sony mount permanantly fixed. No adapters are needed.

There is no need for additional braces and it has a balance tripod mount on the lens. It's not light though so a tripod is highly recommended for best results. I use mine whenever possible on a fairly heavyweight 'pod with the Manfrotto (Bogen in US/Canada I think) 393 gimble type head. Check my first reply and you will find a link to see them working together.

Hope this helps.

Denis.
 
Since it is mentioned here I have one point to make:
An image of a bird on a tree taken with say a 500mm lens on a Sony DSLR, or any other DSLR with an APS sized sensor is exactly the same size as the image taken with a 500mm lens on a 35mm camera or full size sensor. It is not as if taken on a 700mm lens.

The final image is the same size. The sensor is smaller so you get a smaller bit of the image. In effect your field of view is limited to that of a 700mm lens but the image size is that produced by a 500mm lens. So you really have a 500mm lens that is limited to the field of view of a 700mm lens. You are losing part of the image and not gaining magnification.

This seems to have been a good bit of marketing hype that makes people think they are getting someting they are not.
 
Since it is mentioned here I have one point to make:
An image of a bird on a tree taken with say a 500mm lens on a Sony DSLR, or any other DSLR with an APS sized sensor is exactly the same size as the image taken with a 500mm lens on a 35mm camera or full size sensor. It is not as if taken on a 700mm lens.

The final image is the same size. The sensor is smaller so you get a smaller bit of the image. In effect your field of view is limited to that of a 700mm lens but the image size is that produced by a 500mm lens. So you really have a 500mm lens that is limited to the field of view of a 700mm lens. You are losing part of the image and not gaining magnification.

This seems to have been a good bit of marketing hype that makes people think they are getting something they are not.


The net effect is an apparent magnification of the image when you come to print it. :t:

There is the Sigma 170-500 which is £200 cheaper.
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 16 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.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top