Taking the plunge - Superzoom to DSLR (2 Viewers)

[Macswede]

One of the best Finnish nature photographers Vesa Huttunen http://www.birds.fi/ says the 100-400IS is perhaps his most used lens due to its utmost versatility (and he probably has all the lenses Canon has ever produced ).
/QUOTE]

Can't imagine ever achieving anything approaching his results by a million miles but I find this lens more and more attractive.
Graham

 

[Macswede]

i think that best choise is canon eos400 (30d autofocus system) and canon 100-400mm/f4.5-5.6
try to buy lens at second hand/QUOTE]

I think I'm going to follow your advice.
Graham

 

[Macswede]

Thanks again for all the great advice. Many people on Bird Forum have said the there are no bad DSLRs and that's also something I've kept in mind.

I think the Pentax would be a great choice for someone who knew which lenses to go for but I don't and I'm not sure I want to take the time to learn.

I'm coming round more and more to the view that the Casnon 400D /Canon 100-400 IS is the combo for me. I also plan to buy a monopod.

I understand that it's better to use a teleconverter with a prime lens but is it possible to get good results with the 100-400 IS and a TC?

Thanks again for all the really advice and the wonderfiully inspiring photos.

Graham

 

[Keith Reeder]

is it possible to get good results with the 100-400 IS and a TC?

I'll say!!

 

[gmax]

I'll say!!

Romy is a great photographer with lots of experience, no doubt .. in his hands many a lens will produce excellent results!
But, and this is a tiny, wee, modest but, I'm not impressed by the results taken with this lens + TC: mind, I'd be glad to get myself similar pix on a consistent basis!
I've seen superb shots taken with the naked zoom lens, but especially/mainly at close range: when a bit more distant, they are closer to what an amateur may get ... is Romy (as well as others) getting worse with farther subjects? Not at all, given for example the excellent samples in his superb gallery .. I guess this is due to the soft(ish) feeling this lens gives to me when used at the long end with faraway subjects, a feeling much more evident when there's a TC on .. just my impressions
PS nothing personal Romy, just profiting for the sake of comparison from the wide range of great shots you provide in your galleries

 

[Macswede]

I'll say!!

Great!!
Graham

 

[Macswede]

I've seen superb shots taken with the naked zoom lens, but especially/mainly at close range: when a bit more distant, they are closer to what an amateur may get

Well, I'd lke to give it a try anyway somewhere down the line.
Graham

 

[destombe]

Your pictures are really astonishingly good. Really professional and inspiring! It was a real pleasure to look at them.
I intend to buy a monopod and will use a tripod at least some of the time. I imagine the light situation in Arizona is different from that in Sweden but do you have any examples of pictures taken with a handheld camera?
Graham

I have used both a monopod and a tripod, but I'm not very enthousiastic about a monopod. I find it almost more difficult with a monopod than handheld. The horizontal freedom of the camera makes it feel like it's jumping uncontrollably.

I strongly prefer to use a tripod because I'm not a very stable handholder but actually there is one picture in the series you saw that was handheld: the Harris's Hawk. It was somewhere at the roadside on a phone pole, I just jumped from the car, no time for a tripod, it flew away, I was just in time. There was good light, it's at ISO 800, f/8, 1/5000. Of course I had to do some noise reduction on it.

Bu as I say generally I prefer a tripod at all times, I think it is much better than any IS will do ever. Just get a light-weight one, it's a bit of cash but once in a lifetime. And if you would consider a tripod, consider carefully the head. Fine readjustment should be possible. Tilting the horizon should be very hard, you have already enough problems to not have to consider that. I think this means ball-heads are out. Plus it is essential that you can handle the head with your left hand since your right hand is on the camera.

BTW I don't know about the light situation in Sweden but in Arizona it was Xmas time and the weather was mixed. Sunlight was rarely strong. Some pics of the series you saw were taken on overcast days, e.g. the roadrunner. For some birds e.g. spotted towhee all pics taken without sunlight were useless because you could not see the eye. Generally I took about 1800 pics and threw away almost all taken in no-sun conditions.

Best,

Louis

 

[Macswede]

I have used both a monopod and a tripod, but I'm not very enthousiastic about a monopod.

Thanks for the extra informatioin and clarification. I've never actually used a monopod so maybe I should try one out before buying.

The Harris Hawk picture is pretty convincing and it's very interesting to learn that Arizona is't always bright and sunny. That makes your photos even more impressive as does your extraordinary perseverance. I think I might have given up but looking at your pictures again that woiuld have been a huge mistake.

Thanks again!

Graham

 

[bkrownd]

I think the Pentax would be a great choice for someone who knew which lenses to go for but I don't and I'm not sure I want to take the time to learn.

I'm not sure why it would be difficult to decide on a lens. The 500mm Sigmas are the obvious (only?) choice for Pentax. You have more decisions to make with Olympus, Canon or Nikon. Anyhow, the features and handling of the camera should be your decision-maker.

As far as tripod vs. monopod, tripods are only an option if you plan to sit in one spot for a long time. Monopods are the only option if you want to go cross-country and find wildlife in the wild.

 

[impotentspider]

I'm not sure why it would be difficult to decide on a lens. The 500mm Sigmas are the obvious (only?) choice for Pentax. You have more decisions to make with Olympus, Canon or Nikon. Anyhow, the features and handling of the camera should be your decision-maker.

As far as tripod vs. monopod, tripods are only an option if you plan to sit in one spot for a long time. Monopods are the only option if you want to go cross-country and find wildlife in the wild.

Ahem....Not quite so bkrownd, Pentax have some excelent choices for lenses, though most are out of production so only available secondhand, and there are the new sonic motor ones due out anytime.
The attached was taken with a Pentax 80-320AF which cost me £149 brand new about five years ago. The lens isn't perfect around the edges but most people who use this sort of lens crop later anyway. you can pick this lens up for around £80 on ebay.
And for the Technophiles.....Pentax K10D, 1/125th f8, ISO 400, Handheld at 320mm, equiv. to around 450mm on the DSLR. Cropped to about 1/3rd original with a bit of "photoshop tree pruning"

 

[Macswede]

Ahem....Not quite so bkrownd, Pentax have some excelent choices for lenses, though most are out of production so only available secondhand, and there are the new sonic motor ones due out anytime.
The attached was taken with a Pentax 80-320AF which cost me £149 brand new about five years ago. The lens isn't perfect around the edges but most people who use this sort of lens crop later anyway. you can pick this lens up for around £80 on ebay.
And for the Technophiles.....Pentax K10D, 1/125th f8, ISO 400, Handheld at 320mm, equiv. to around 450mm on the DSLR. Cropped to about 1/3rd original with a bit of "photoshop tree pruning"

Yes, I meant Pentax lenses. Very nice picture by the way.
Graham

 

[postcardcv]

As far as tripod vs. monopod, tripods are only an option if you plan to sit in one spot for a long time. Monopods are the only option if you want to go cross-country and find wildlife in the wild.

I've got to disagree with this - you might not take a tripod out with you when going 'cross-country', but mine goes with me whenever I'm out birding. Sure it's a bit heavier and bulkier than my monopod, but it's also a lot more solid.

 

[NIGHTJAR1]

The 400D and 100-400is lens is an ideal set-up. It's also a very flexible lens for most nature based trips, ie, animals etc. It's also a very capable macro lens as it focuses quite close. The other lenses you are considering do not compare to the 100-400.

 

[Macswede]

The 400D and 100-400is lens is an ideal set-up. It's also a very flexible lens for most nature based trips, ie, animals etc. It's also a very capable macro lens as it focuses quite close. The other lenses you are considering do not compare to the 100-400.

Thanks, that's the conclusion I've reached myself. It'll be intreresting to see what kind of resultts I get. I'm guessing it will take me a while to learn how to use it

Graham

 

[bkrownd]

I've got to disagree with this - you might not take a tripod out with you when going 'cross-country', but mine goes with me whenever I'm out birding. Sure it's a bit heavier and bulkier than my monopod, but it's also a lot more solid.

Must be a good workout carrying that around all day. Trying to set it up fast in the bush and manouver it through the understory must be challenging, as well. I'll pass.

 

[bpw]

Must be a good workout carrying that around all day. Trying to set it up fast in the bush and manouver it through the understory must be challenging, as well. I'll pass.

I have both but only use the tripod now. I suppose it depends on your environment, approach, and equipment – I don’t have an IS lens. With the tripod legs closed, it can be used like a monopod if there isn’t time or room to open up the legs. Sure, it’s bulkier and heavier, but I’ve got used to that and I feel I get much better results with it.
.

The other lenses you are considering do not compare to the 100-400.

?

 

[Macswede]

I got the Canon 400D last week and the 100-400mm IS arrived today so hopefully I'll have some pics to post soon.
Graham

 

[jackpalmer]

Super Zoom Lens for birding

Just saw your post from February this year. I do digital photography and birding. This past year I purchased a Sigma 170-500mm, 5.0-6.3 zoom lens to use with my Nikon D40x. The lens has been great. But it's a DG lens which means that on my D40x it does not auto-focus - I have to manually focus. It will however autofocus on a camera with a servo motor for focussing. All D40x metering works OK through the lens so there is no problem there. Manual focus has been a really good experience. Birds sitting in trees for example are hard to focus with an auto focus lens (I have a Nikon 75-300mm zoom also which I will probably sell as I always use the Sigma.) - the tree branches are always in focus and the bird not always - it's hard to get it right - unless you manually focus. Some of my photos are at http://www.pbase.com/jackpalmer if you care to look. The Sigma lens costs 740 USD or about 4700 SEK.

Jack Palmer
Houston USA

 

[RAH]

Thanks for the extra informatioin and clarification. I've never actually used a monopod so maybe I should try one out before buying.

Here is a link to a good article which has been posted before on this forum. I particularly like Option 3:
http://www.outdooreyes.com/photo5.php3

I think that monopods are in no sense a substitute for tripods. They are really in a different category, more akin to shoulder harnesses, bean-bags, etc. - things that help you with your hand-holding. A tripod is rock steady and you can shoot 2 hour star trails!

I do think that monopod use is a real advantage of image stabilization. I too have often felt that since I usually use a tripod when I'm using high zoom level, what do I need IS for. However, IS DOES in fact make the use of a monopod much more possible with large lenses.