largest size of lens which can be used without a (tri)pod?

[peterpijpelink]

Hello, I like to buy a new lens, I have a 75-300 mm EF ultrasonic lens from Canon. Also use a 300mm 2.8 from Tamron with my 1D and EOS A2E. All works fine, but I like to use 500 or 600mm and shoot from hand, so without a tripod or anything.

I know Canon has a 400mm L stable lens, but I was thinking about the 170-500mm from Sigma. (Canon L is not my budget).

What do you think? Would I be able to make steady shots from a boat with this lens?

Peter

[chris maddock]

I know Canon has a 400mm L stable lens, but I was thinking about the 170-500mm from Sigma. (Canon L is not my budget).

What do you think? Would I be able to make steady shots from a boat with this lens?



Surely you'd have trouble making steady shots from a boat WITH a tripod ;-)

Seriously, I used to have one of these lenses (till I traded it in against a 100-400 IS) and didn't have too much trouble handholding, provided I kept the shutter speed up. The instantly changable ISO options with the DSLRs is helpful for that.

Another option you might like to consider is a monopod or a shoulder rest.

KRs
Chris

[CyberDyneSystems]

Peter,

Occasionally I hand hold my Sigma 50-500mm.

But I try to use at least my monopod as often as I can. I have a quick release on both tripod and monopod and there have been times when a bird takes flight and the monopod is dropped like sack of potatoes so I can point to the sky!

It can be done for sure depending on light conditions.

If you can afford one of Canon's IS models that will certainly help. The 100-400 IS seems the best bang for the buck.

FYI,. I read a lot about both of Sigma's 500mm Zooms before buying the 50-500mm over the 170mm-500mm.

I could care less about the extended low end of the 50-500's Zoom range,. (i use it almost exclusively at 500mm)

I paid a little extra for that lens because MANY MANY reviews said the overall build quality,. Image quality, and focus speed was superior to the 170-500mm. It is one of Sigma's newer designs and is considered to be an improvement.

I think however that one of its downsides is it is even heavier than the 170-500mm. (it is heavy,. but with a monopod it is quite usable trekking in the woods)

Check my bird pics in my gallery link below. Most of the photos are with the 50-500mm

[robertwgross]

As I have stated elsewhere, I use the Sigma 170-500mm zoom. Nearly 90% of the time, I will mount it on a tripod. In fact, I can mount the lens on one tripod and mount the body on another tripod. If you would see it and feel the weight of the whole thing, you would understand. That is for getting something like a moonrise shot. I have tried handholding the big zoom, but it is a bitch. For one thing, you really need some kind of shoulder brace or monopod or beanbag. I found a lightweight shorty tripod in my closet, and that made a halfway decent arm brace for the big lens.

I think it will be difficult shooting from a moving boat of any kind unless the lens has IS. In fact, I think that is what IS was invented for.

---Bob Gross---

[chris maddock]

I think it will be difficult shooting from a moving boat of any kind unless the lens has IS. In fact, I think that is what IS was invented for.



Nope, IS is to deal with camera shake - it will not cope particularly well with the motion of a boat rocking, the angular variation is too great.

KRs
Chris

[henkbos]

Peter,

I have the 170-500 for sale if you are interested. Not even 1 year old. Bought some L-glass. Send me an offer.

Handheld? In general the more support you can get the better it is. Depends on circumstances and abilities. I would say monopod is the least. When I bought this lens I got a Wimberly Sidekick for better control.

Henk

[Longwatcher]

peterpijpelink wrote:
What do you think? Would I be able to make steady shots from a boat with this lens?

Peter

I have used the 75-300 IS from a rocking boat and the IS seemed to help a bit, but still helped even more to time my shots to the boat motion. Since the 100-400L IS tends to work better then the 75-300's, I would recommend that one. I have noticed that at 400 it takes a very steady hand even with iS to prevent blur except at higher shutter speeds.

I think 500 would be about max for handheld, but weight would start being a problem as the Canon 500L will be 10lbs with camera. The 4.5 of the 100-400 w/camera limits my handheld to about 5-10 shots before I start getting handshake from the weight.

Don't know how much your other choices weigh, but I would definately take that into consideration.

[rdenney]

peterpijpelink wrote:

I know Canon has a 400mm L stable lens, but I was thinking about the 170-500mm from Sigma. (Canon L is not my budget).

What do you think? Would I be able to make steady shots from a boat with this lens?

Peter

My wife has a 170-500 on her Nikon (we were brand-established before we met), and it performs reasonably for its cost. I get sharp images at 500 hand-held only when I use a shutter speed of about 1/2000. Fortunately, on a sunny day, you can get that shutter speed wide open if you use ISO 400, which provides excellent quality on the 10D. Don't expect a lot of depth of field, so choose your focus point with care.

I would suggest a monopod, even on a boat, because it will make the camera easier to aim. At 500mm, my normal gettin'-old shakes make framing a challenge. Eliminating the effects of boat movement is much easier than hand movement--you could probably shoot at 1/1000 or perhaps even 1/500 with a monopod, even on a boat. The monopod will also keep your arm muscles from cramping, which in my experience does more damage to my picture taking than anything. You'd probably get all the improvement you'd need with the monopod even if you use a ball head untightened, so that it could "float", letting you keep pointed to the subject despite the tilting of the boat.

The Sigma lens is not the match of Canon's high-end long telephotos by all reports, but it's also a third or a quarter the cost. But used with care, you can get the results with it.

Rick "who has a Pentacon 500mm f/5.6 medium-format lens that weighs at least five times what the Sigma weighs" Denney

[CyberDyneSystems]

My wife has a 170-500 on her Nikon (we were brand-established before we met),

:O I'm stocking up on rations and ammo now,.. I am quite certain that this is one of the signs of the apocolypse,.. right up there with Earthquakes, Tidal waves, 40 Days of darkenss,.. Dogs and Cats living together! :eyes

:D :D

Again,. the MONOpod is a must,. as Rdenny says if not for stabilty ,.. then just for the weight!

I spent about 6 hours today lugging around my 50-500mm Sigma (even heavier than the 170-500mm) I could not dream of doing this without the "pod".

No fatigue at all while shooting as all the weight is on the ground,. and when walking I rest the camera body and back of the lens on my shoulder and hold the "pod" like a rifle on my shoulder,.. all the weight is out of your arms and on your shoulder.

[tzrider]

Hi there,

If you have a 10d I would recommand
the 400 5.6 L

Light and VERY sharp. You won't mis
IS on this lens if you are using the 10d
because of the excellent noise level
at ISO 400 and even 800

You can buy the 400 5.6 L second hand
for very nice prices. It is still produced.
The newer types come with a white softcase
like the 100-400, the older was have a
round leather case