Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 29 Oct 2010 (Friday) 17:01
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

what's the best lens for BIF around 1000$?

 
MT ­ Stringer
Goldmember
Avatar
4,650 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2006
Location: Channelview, Tx
     
Nov 01, 2010 00:21 |  #46

@ Bill Boehme - do you have a 1.4xTC that you can try on the 400 to see if the 7D will autofocus with it?
Thanks


MaxPreps Profile (external link)

My Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
K6AZ
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,250 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 9
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Richmond VA USA
     
Nov 01, 2010 00:22 |  #47

MT Stringer wrote in post #11202191 (external link)
@ Bill Boehme - do you have a 1.4xTC that you can try on the 400 to see if the 7D will autofocus with it?
Thanks

It won't, as with the 100-400 1D only.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bill ­ Boehme
Enjoy being spanked
Avatar
7,359 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 88
Joined Jan 2007
Location: DFW Metro-mess, Texas
     
Nov 01, 2010 00:47 as a reply to  @ MT Stringer's post |  #48

I have both the 1.4X and the 2X extenders. The regular AF will not work, but you can use Live View AF. The disadvantage is that Live View AF is terribly slow. I have even used both of the extenders stacked together on the 400/5.6 when shooting moon images. Live View AF can be used, but is not accurate enough for supercritical focusing. Instead, I zoom to 10X on Live View and manually focus. It requires a very solid tripod with sandbags and ground anchoring at 1120 mm FL to keep vibrtion under control. Even then, barely touching the focus ring results in significant vibration.


Atmospheric haze in images? Click for Tutorial to Reduce Atmospheric Haze with Photoshop.
Gear List .... Gallery: Woodturner Bill (external link)
Donate to Support POTN Operating Costs

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MT ­ Stringer
Goldmember
Avatar
4,650 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2006
Location: Channelview, Tx
     
Nov 01, 2010 00:50 |  #49

Thanks. I was just curious.


MaxPreps Profile (external link)

My Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
K6AZ
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,250 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 9
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Richmond VA USA
     
Nov 01, 2010 01:03 |  #50

Bill Boehme wrote in post #11202275 (external link)
I have both the 1.4X and the 2X extenders. The regular AF will not work, but you can use Live View AF. The disadvantage is that Live View AF is terribly slow. I have even used both of the extenders stacked together on the 400/5.6 when shooting moon images. Live View AF can be used, but is not accurate enough for supercritical focusing. Instead, I zoom to 10X on Live View and manually focus. It requires a very solid tripod with sandbags and ground anchoring at 1120 mm FL to keep vibrtion under control. Even then, barely touching the focus ring results in significant vibration.

Have you tried the tape trick? That is supposed to work on some lens/body combinations.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
phreeky
Goldmember
3,501 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Australia
     
Nov 01, 2010 06:49 |  #51

Bill Boehme wrote in post #11202170 (external link)
It is not only important, it is absolutely vital. When shooting BIF images, you must be very close to your subject. When birds are barely over treetop height and flying fast, it requires very fast reaction time to get the birds in the viewfinder and instant focus to get the shot off before the opportunity is missed

If you keep the lens pre-focused at fairly typical BIF distances even the 70-300 IS snaps into focus in an instant, and then most lenses will track fine if you keep the AF point over the bird.

As for the 1.4x on the 400, I've used it heaps on the 20D and a little on the 7D. It worked very well on the 20D with the centre point, on the 7D (in AI servo - it's useless in one-shot, irrelevant to BIF anyway) the centre point isn't very reliable so I use the centre zone and it picks up and tracks much more easily that way. Sharpness, as you'd expect with this lens, is still awesome.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MakeMeShutter
Goldmember
Avatar
1,343 posts
Likes: 28
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Upstate New York
     
Nov 01, 2010 07:07 as a reply to  @ phreeky's post |  #52

Just a thought, why not pick up a used 1D mkII and use the extra money on the lens!


New York Dragonflies (external link)
NYDragonflies.com

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
westernminnguy
Goldmember
Avatar
2,079 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jun 2006
Location: Western Minnesota
     
Nov 01, 2010 11:31 |  #53

shimoyjk wrote in post #11200410 (external link)
yeah that's what i've noticed this afternoon. i decide to get 7D + Tokina 80-400 (If thing works out and get more money, probably go with sigma 50-500 or 150-500, or Canon 100-400 :)

Congrats on the new system.

There are a few bird photography sites out there that can help with BIF tips.

Best of luck.

:)


IMAGES (external link)

VIDEO YouTube (external link)

VIDEO Vimeo (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
K6AZ
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,250 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 9
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Richmond VA USA
     
Nov 01, 2010 11:33 |  #54

MakeMeShutter wrote in post #11203141 (external link)
Just a thought, why not pick up a used 1D mkII and use the extra money on the lens!

The problem with a 1D II or IIn is that they're hard to find now with a reasonable shutter count. I passed on many of them (and a few Mark IIIs) because the shutter counts were too high for the price asked IMO.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bill ­ Boehme
Enjoy being spanked
Avatar
7,359 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 88
Joined Jan 2007
Location: DFW Metro-mess, Texas
     
Nov 01, 2010 12:44 |  #55

K6AZ wrote in post #11202325 (external link)
Have you tried the tape trick? That is supposed to work on some lens/body combinations.

I know about it, but do not use it because AF accuracy is very dependent on the intensity of the light reaching the AF sensor. At f/8 (the wide open aperture for the 1.4X TC on the 400/5.6) it would probably be OK in good light. At f/11 (the wide open aperture for the 2X TC on the 400/5.6) it might work in good daylight, but the AF accuracy is obviously going to be degraded in less than optimal conditions. Stacking both teleconverters results in a wide open of aperture of f/16 on the 400/5.6 and that would really limit the useful lighting conditions for acceptable AF results. I know that Canon's aperture limits for AF are somewhat arbitrary, but it seems to be the only reasonable way to ensure high quality AF performance and avoid user complaints about their camera's AF being defective because it missed focus when shooting by candlelight with an f/8 lens.


Atmospheric haze in images? Click for Tutorial to Reduce Atmospheric Haze with Photoshop.
Gear List .... Gallery: Woodturner Bill (external link)
Donate to Support POTN Operating Costs

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
phreeky
Goldmember
3,501 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Australia
     
Nov 01, 2010 16:57 |  #56

Bill Boehme wrote in post #11204768 (external link)
I know that Canon's aperture limits for AF are somewhat arbitrary, but it seems to be the only reasonable way to ensure high quality AF performance and avoid user complaints about their camera's AF being defective because it missed focus when shooting by candlelight with an f/8 lens.

Perhaps someone that knows the finer details might be able to provide more info, but my understanding is that it's not actually the light available but the diffraction at the particular f-stop that gives the limit.

I believe the AF system relies on polarisation so I guess that may be why it still works in certan scenarios but not others.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bill ­ Boehme
Enjoy being spanked
Avatar
7,359 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 88
Joined Jan 2007
Location: DFW Metro-mess, Texas
     
Nov 01, 2010 20:31 |  #57

phreeky wrote in post #11206401 (external link)
Perhaps someone that knows the finer details might be able to provide more info, but my understanding is that it's not actually the light available but the diffraction at the particular f-stop that gives the limit.

I believe the AF system relies on polarisation so I guess that may be why it still works in certan scenarios but not others.

There would be no reason to suspect diffraction as a factor. First of all, AF is always done "wide open" so no other aperture is even relevant. I don't know of any EF lenses that have a maximum aperture value smaller than 5.6 which all Canon DSLR cameras are able to utilize for AF.

The issue only comes about when using a teleconverter or possibly in some circumstances an extension ring.

Polarization is definitely not used in the AF system. Perhaps that Internet legend got started by someone confusing it with the "phase detection" type AF system used in DSLR cameras. Phase detection is an edge detection technique that uses a pair of parallel single row sensors that work by finding the focus setting that gives the most abrupt transition from light to dark. One thing that is certain is that using a linear polarizing filter can decrease the performance of an AF system.

AF systems work on absolute lighting levels which is considerably different than exposure where camera settings are used to equalize lighting on the sensor. In addition to the accuracy of AF being related to the absolute level of lighting, the speed of AF is also impacted.


Atmospheric haze in images? Click for Tutorial to Reduce Atmospheric Haze with Photoshop.
Gear List .... Gallery: Woodturner Bill (external link)
Donate to Support POTN Operating Costs

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
westernminnguy
Goldmember
Avatar
2,079 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jun 2006
Location: Western Minnesota
     
Nov 01, 2010 20:44 as a reply to  @ Bill Boehme's post |  #58

Sometimes it boils down to what you want to pay.

You can get a great lens...I've lusted after this one for years....just didn't pan out for me...price wise.

http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …2AA_EF_500mm_f_​4L_IS.html (external link)

I bought a Sigma that would reach out to 500mm..and still have some sort of IS

Do I think that my Sigma, great lens as it is, can compete with a Canon prime 500mm...??

Want the greatest BIF lens(greatest 500mm lens) out there??

Buy the Canon EF 500mm f/4 IS

:)


IMAGES (external link)

VIDEO YouTube (external link)

VIDEO Vimeo (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bill ­ Boehme
Enjoy being spanked
Avatar
7,359 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 88
Joined Jan 2007
Location: DFW Metro-mess, Texas
     
Nov 01, 2010 21:14 |  #59

westernminnguy wrote in post #11207772 (external link)
Sometimes it boils down to what you want to pay.

You can get a great lens...I've lusted after this one for years....just didn't pan out for me...price wise.......Want the greatest BIF lens(greatest 500mm lens) out there??

Buy the Canon EF 500mm f/4 IS

:)

While it might seem a bit expensive (OK, very very expensive), it does include its own plastic case. Well, It is actually more like a custom designed hard-side suitcase with built-in padding. And the case is big -- real BIG -- with wheels and a handle.

If I bought one, I would be afraid to use it. I would worry about dust, dirt, moisture, fingerprints, pollution, and even air molecules touching it. :lol:


Atmospheric haze in images? Click for Tutorial to Reduce Atmospheric Haze with Photoshop.
Gear List .... Gallery: Woodturner Bill (external link)
Donate to Support POTN Operating Costs

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Josh13
Member
Avatar
164 posts
Joined Apr 2009
Location: San Diego CA.
     
Nov 01, 2010 21:14 as a reply to  @ westernminnguy's post |  #60

I have the sigma 150-500 os and I love it. The os is great IQ is not the greatest and it's not my sharpest lens. I use it at 500mm all the time and mostly look for birds with it. I will have to look for some good BIF shots but here are some decent ones at 500mm f6.3. The hawk is 1/400 and the woodpecker is 1/100th all handheld. You can get the lens for under $800 easily, It's not light it does not weigh 8.5 lbs like the 500mm f4 only like 4.2 lbs so a little more then the 400L and 100-400L


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


5DIV, Elan 7n, 400 f4 DO I, 100-400mm II, 1.4x TCIII, Tokina 16-28 F2.8, Tokina 12-28 f4, 85 f1.8, 50 f1.8 STM, Flashpoint 620m, YN14EX.
A7rIII, A6300, 100-400 GM, 85 f1.4 GM, 90 Macro, 55 f1.8, 16-35 F4, 35 f2.8, Batis 25 f2, Samyang 14 f2.8 AF, MC-11.
D500, 200-500, Tokina 300 f2.8, 35 f1.8
S110, D20, Hero 6, 3+

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7,957 views & 0 likes for this thread
what's the best lens for BIF around 1000$?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Apo1980
1105 guests, 359 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.