Need advice on long lens [Archive] - Canon Digital Photography Forums

View Full Version : Need advice on long lens

RikWriter

10th of July 2005 (Sun), 08:30

Okay, here's the situation.
Most of the photography for which I need a long lens is wildlife shooting, particularly birding but also deer and elk and such when I am on vacation out west.
I HAD been using a Sigma 50-500, and it was working out all right for birding...but then I took it with me on vacation. I am not a small man, and I don't have a problem carrying a bit of weight, but carrying that Bigma in a backpack on several hikes of more than 3 miles convinced me I need something lighter. What also helped in that decision was two different experiences shooting elk. The first, I was close to my car and able to use a tripod and the pics turned out awesome. The second, I was far away from the car and only had a monopod. Those pictures were unusable.
So, I need something lighter that will still get me some serious reach.
I've narrowed the contenders down to these three:
1)Canon 400mm f5.6L USM
2)Canon 100-400mm f4-5.6L IS USM
and
3)Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS USM with a 2X extender (I already have, and love, a 70-200 f4L, but I wouldn't care to halve that f4 by using a 2x extender on it.)

So, which of these meets my requirements the best in your opinion? Which is a better buy for the money? Could I get away with getting the non-IS 70-200 f2.8 and using the extender, or would I be better off with the IS for monopod and hand-held shots?
Also, which of these would be lighter? And how much longer is the 400mm prime than the collapsed zooms?
Finally, are there any possibilities I am overlooking?
Any help would be appreciated.
TIA

condyk

10th of July 2005 (Sun), 08:42

I sympathise ...

If I was walking with the Bigma I would always use the carry handle/tripod mount to hold it. I never found that a problem over a couple of miles as it just falls by your side fairly easily. Not much good if you are otherwise burdened with gear or on very difficult terrain!

If the problem was held held shots then I guess you need an IS or OS lens. I would opt for the 100-400mm L IS or the Sigma 80-400mm OS. Can't see how a non-IS/OS lens would suit you better than the Bigma as the handshake issue is still there.

I am in the same situation as my main interest is wildlife shooting and I don't really want to be hassled with tripod/monopod and even more weight, but I also need the minimum 400mm length. I don't know enough about the primes with IS, but a 400mm f4 Do IS with TCon would do it for me:

http://www.outdoorphotographer.com/content/pastissues/2002/apr/canon.html

Shame about the price :lol: mMy current best all around compromise is a SH 100-400mm IS L, or a new one if I get flush ...

lensmen

10th of July 2005 (Sun), 09:19

THere is already a discussion on the Canon 100-400L IS which may be of interest to your search.

L lens (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=81911)

RikWriter

10th of July 2005 (Sun), 09:50

THere is already a discussion on the Canon 100-400L IS which may be of interest to your search.

I've read that...I did a search before posting this topic. I didn't feel it addressed my specific needs, however.

lensmen

10th of July 2005 (Sun), 21:38

I've read that...I did a search before posting this topic. I didn't feel it addressed my specific needs, however.

Well, I can see why. I am a birdie lover and uses the 100-400L IS. IS is a lifesaver to me, that I can do away with the bulky tripord / mono pod.

Given that these (birds) are shy creatures, a long lens that is easy to ready-for-shot is a must. Hence my decision on this lens. Opps, I am not much of a prime lens lover coz I had been using Zoom since my 35mm days over 20 yrs ago.

Yah, your subjects may even be further than I can imagine. The 2X may be needed. But once you use the TC, the IS or AF function may be disabled (better check). This will be a very mius point here.

Enjoy your search.

grego

10th of July 2005 (Sun), 22:36

Yah, your subjects may even be further than I can imagine. The 2X may be needed. But once you use the TC, the IS or AF function may be disabled (better check). This will be a very mius point here.

It makes your AF slower, which can be make you lose a shot or two from time to time.

Tom W

11th of July 2005 (Mon), 05:36

If you're doing some serious hiking, I'd have to say that the 70-300 IS DO lens is your best choice for its smaller size and weight. Otherwise, I'd go with the 100-400L. It's still fairly compact at it's shortest focal length.

Matatazela

11th of July 2005 (Mon), 06:04

I'd like to recommend that you take a 600mm F4 for a few outings. Then the Bigma won't seem so huge! LOL

Seriously, I'd love to be able to get a 70-200mm 2.8 combined with the 1.4 and 2 TC's, you have a useful range. Take a short zoom lens along for the ride, just in case...

Take a beanbag, filled with lightweight plastic beads instead of a tripod, and you may save a few grams as well.

CyberDyneSystems

11th of July 2005 (Mon), 06:28

RikWriter

11th of July 2005 (Mon), 09:35

I'd like to recommend that you take a 600mm F4 for a few outings. Then the Bigma won't seem so huge! LOL

LOL, yeah, I've had pros on another board slam me for thinking the Bigma was too heavy. It's not a question of ability though...hell, I carried around 80+ pounds of gear in the Army for 12 miles or more. But I'd rather not turn my family vacations into the Bataan Death March, even for a hobby I like as much as this one.

RikWriter

11th of July 2005 (Mon), 09:36

FYI.. of the three lenses liste dhte 70-200mm is the heaviest.. by a good deal.
And that's without any T-con...

I'd knock it off your list straight away .. for shooting long.. a 2X T-con is a bad solution.

At this point, I have just about decided on the 100-400, unless someone can convince me otherwise. But I still DO want a 70-200 f2.8 at some point...

xuxu1

11th of July 2005 (Mon), 10:21

Okay, here's the situation.
Most of the photography for which I need a long lens is wildlife shooting, particularly birding but also deer and elk and such when I am on vacation out west.
I think that under these circumstances the best way to go is the 100-400L. I know, i know... the 70-200L f2.8 would would be nice too. But your going to miss the reach. And as others here mentioned, the 2x TC is not a good solution.

I do lot´s of wildlife photography and therefore i went straight for the 100-400L. Oh yes... i´m still crazy about that 70-200L IS and it´s on my shoppinglist. Still saving though. :)

Hellashot

11th of July 2005 (Mon), 10:37

I HAD been using a Sigma 50-500. The second, I was far away from the car and only had a monopod. Those pictures were unusable.
TIA

I have a Bigma that I've only used on a monopod. So far I only have film photos so I have nothing to post digital and my film shots have turned out just fine. Maybe you need a better monopod or more practice with it. Certainly not a big reason to give up on such a great zoom and reach.

condyk

11th of July 2005 (Mon), 10:39

How about the Sigma 80-400mm OS? Good quality, good handling, black, cool design, loyal fan base, extra 20mm, cheaper ...)

(Ducks down fast awaiting volley from 100-400mm owners :lol: )

100-400mm IS is on my most wanted list, so a purely objective suggestion.

RikWriter

11th of July 2005 (Mon), 11:05

I have a Bigma that I've only used on a monopod. So far I only have film photos so I have nothing to post digital and my film shots have turned out just fine. Maybe you need a better monopod or more practice with it. Certainly not a big reason to give up on such a great zoom and reach.

The monopod worked fine for me...as long as it was on level ground, where I could get a wide stance, and as long as I could keep it down around chest-high. But I found out that most wildlife shots are not that simple. I had to take some shots of a bull elk from behind a chest-high bush, with one foot on a hillside and the other on a cement block. I had to take some shots of harbor seals on water-soaked deep sand, with the tide pulling at the bottom of my monopod and the sand sinking beneath it.
Now, granted, that kind of difficulty doesn't come along with most shots...but those were once-every-SEVERAL-years shots for me. And I missed them. THAT isn't happening again. I want a lens that CAN be hand-held in an emergency.

xuxu1

11th of July 2005 (Mon), 11:05