Which lens do you use for Wildlife??

[fubarhouse]

Which is your favourite lens for Wildlife photography, please state reasons below.

100-400L because it's the only one I can afford for reach and does a great job So I don't complain.

[RikWriter]

I have the 100-400 and the 300 2.8. I mostly use the 300 with teleconverters for wildlife.

[imtrashed]

200 2.8, as in the 200mm focal length of my 70-200 2.8 IS. We can't all afford super long primes.

[Poindexter]

If I could only use one lens, it would be the 300mm f2.8L Is plus teleconverters because I find myself in situation where I am very close to the action and other where I need the extra reach. If I could have 2, the second would be the 500mm f4L IS.

[Bubble]

600L ofcourse. The longer the better.

[RikWriter]

200 2.8, as in the 200mm focal length of my 70-200 2.8 IS. We can't all afford super long primes.

If you can afford the 70-200 2.8 IS, couldn't you have afforded the 100-400 instead?

[imtrashed]

I said I can't afford the long primes. I could afford the 100-400, but I think having 2.8 and the versatility of 70-200 is better. Just a personal preference. Maybe a 300 someday, but I'm just a hobbyist and have spent enough $ already.

[toonartist]

I use the 100-400, can't really afford a 600L:( but the 100-400 is very versatile and I use it for landscape shots as well:D

[Lester Wareham]

I use the 300/4 IS because it has IS, a good minimum focus and is relatively light and very sharp.

I can add tubes to get a long almost macro lens, and add TCs to get a 420 or 600mm lens.

When I don't need so much reach I use the 200/2.8, great for zoo shots as it sharp wide open allowing good results whilst getting rid of fences and distracting backgrounds.

I also use the 100mm macro a lot.

All these lenses get used for other stuff like landscape etc, the 200/2.8 possibly with a tube is great for maximum creamy bokeh shots of wildflowers.

If Santa was rich I would love a 500/4, also if I was to go on safari I think I would grab the 100-400.

[Keltab]

I use the 400 5.6 quite a bit, and the results are amazing. Great colors and very sharp - and not too much money for it. I have even gotten really good results with a 2x TC. I also use the 70-200L 2.8 IS USM. Versatile, and you can maintain autofocus with the 2x TC.
I too wish Santa could afford the 500L or 600L... :D

[condyk]

It partly/majorly depends on body IMO. With a 1D you can get awesome results with a 400mm 5.6 L and 1.4x and retain good AF. So 560mm with AF of top prime quality is very attractive. I've been to Africa twice with that lens and it shines and if partnered with a 70-200mm or 70-300mm IS then you are sorted with huge bang for your pound. However, most take the 100-400mm IS for flexibility on a single body. I just don't see it compete much of the time, especially not with a TCon.

[Sasquatch41]

Sigma 150-500. Because I can afford it.

[BSBXTi]

I have both the 400mm 5.6 and 100-400m L and I use the Prime a lot more to the point where I'm considering trading the lens for 70-200mm F4 IS or Selling it.

[gymell]

Depends on the context. 99% of the time when I'm shooting birds, I'm using the 500. If I need fast AF and a wider field of view or less focal length, the 400. For those situations where I need versatility, then the 100-400.

[sumodog]

hey sasquatch,

love your sig! lol.

woof!

[rdricks]

I'm currently using the 100-400. But after a recent trip, I am really looking to a 300 f/2.8. By the time the wildlife was starting to really get active, I was at ISO 3200. I was wishing for faster speeds.

[kozmix]

My fav is the 100-400 because it's the only one i have =)

In the future maybe 300 with tcs or 500/600, who knows..

[gasrocks]

I checked none of the choices. Many use non-Canon lenses and you didn't include those. Myself? 300-800/5.6

[jjackflash]

I use the 400 f5.6 because i liked it better than the 100-400......anything longer is far too expensive to justify having.....for me that is.

[Brad Remick]

Either my 70-200 2.8 IS L or my 300 4.0 IS L. I am trading in the 300 and have purchased a 400 5.6 and a 1.4 extender for greater reach when photographing birds.

[Hikin Mike]

My favorite is also my only 'big' lens....300mm f/4 and a 1.4tc. It's what I can afford. Maybe someday I can afford a 500mm or 600mm....:D

[cutaway]

I like the 100-400 for its versatility. I don't know if I'd ever get serious enough to cough up the money for a large prime (500mm or larger).

[ctranter]

400 5.6 - 'cos I can't afford a 500

[Mike55]

300 F4 IS with Canon 1.4x II. Love it. I would only consider upgrading to the 600 F4 IS, and even then I would keep my current combo.

[sumodog]

I recently rented a 100-400 4.0-5.6L to shoot at www.safariwest.com (http://www.safariwest.com) in Santa Rosa, CA. While I would prefered to have either a 300 or 400 2.8L, the rental lens was versatile enough in bright sunlight to meet my needs. Hopefull Canon will see it fit to modernize this lens and I'll probably purchase one when they do.

[jacuff]

It really depends. I use both the 600mm and 400mm quite a bit, but I'd say the 600mm gets a little more usage when it comes to wildlife.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Notes,
1- I voted for SOME of the ones I USE as requested in the Poll question, as opposed to which one is my FAVORITE as asked in the subsequent post.

2- "SOME" as I use other lenses not listed.

3- Might want to check out the EF FAQ in the EF lens forum where we discuss optics, and where many such polls including our top ten polls for Wildlife Primes and Zooms can be found in the EF lens FAQ

[col4bin]

i primarily use my 300/2.8 and throw on a 1.4x when I need a bit more reach

[StarDog]

500 f4 L is doses 95% of the work for me. Bob

[camerageorge]

I would have the 500L in a heartbeat if I could afford it, but at the minute the Canon 100-400mm has got to be my most used wildlife lens. I've got a mini review of my experiences with it on my blog (http://www.georgelowther.co.uk/section247828.html) if anyone's interested...

[Dave 1942]

I use the 100-400L and the 300 2.8L. I had a 500 f4L lens, but it was so big that I found myself leaving it at home and taking the 300 2.8L. I like the 100-400 for it's versitility.. You add a 2X teleconverter to the 300 and you get 600 5.6 and with the crop factor of the 40D at 1.6X it ends up as a 960 5.6 and it is a very compact package..

JMHO

Dave

[gasrocks]

Why can't we use a non-Canon lens?

[Dave 1942]

No problem using an aftermarket lens ie: Tamaron, Sigma or whoever. Tamaron and Sigma make some great lens. I think that a Tamaron 28 - 350 would be a great all - purpose lens for anyone. My shooting buddy has one on his Canon and he gets some great shots..

Dave

[VO1GXG]

I use a Canon 100-300MM f/5.6 from 1986 when the lenses were still made in Japan!

Seems to work great for my needs. thinking of getting a 2X teleconverter though see how that works out.

[LowriderS10]

70-200 :D

[Larry Weinman]

I have the 100-400 and the 300 2.8. I mostly use the 300 with teleconverters for wildlife.

What he said

[snowyowl13]

I use the 100-400 as my main lens. It's rarely off of my camera. I would love to get something longer though.

[RikWriter]

I have to change my answer now...I sold my 300 2.8 and bought a 500 f4. I use that almost exclusively now.