I am a new user of 350D and want to buy a good all round wildlife lens. Would you go for a 70-200 F4 or 2.8 with or without an extender or go for a 100-400mm lens. Experienced user advice very much appreciated and thank you.
alantemperton Member 51 posts Joined Jan 2006 Location: UK - Hertfordshire More info | Jan 10, 2006 14:08 | #1 I am a new user of 350D and want to buy a good all round wildlife lens. Would you go for a 70-200 F4 or 2.8 with or without an extender or go for a 100-400mm lens. Experienced user advice very much appreciated and thank you.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
vjack Goldmember  1,602 posts Likes: 1 Joined Jul 2005 Location: Mississippi, USA More info | Jan 10, 2006 14:10 | #2 I don't think you'll find 200mm long enough for many wildlife applications. I'd start by deciding whether you will use a tripod/monopod most of the time or whether being able to hand-hold the lens is important. If you are okay with the tripod/monopod route, I'd recommend the Sigma 50-500mm (Bigma) or a Canon prime. However, if hand-holding is important, the IS on the 100-400 is nice to have.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
brivett Senior Member  396 posts Joined May 2005 Location: Milton Keynes, UK More info | What are you hoping to shoot ? Elephants from 20 yards or small birds from 300 yards... Barry Rivett
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jon Cream of the Crop  69,628 posts Likes: 227 Joined Jun 2004 Location: Bethesda, MD USA More info | Jan 10, 2006 14:19 | #4 100-400 IS. No question. You'll need the long end, and there's no point in getting a lens you know you'll have to mount a TC on for normal use if there's an alternative. And I have both 70-200 IS and 100-400. Jon
LOG IN TO REPLY |
uktrailmonster Senior Member 466 posts Likes: 1 Joined Oct 2005 Location: UK More info | brivett wrote: What are you hoping to shoot ? Elephants from 20 yards or small birds from 300 yards... I'm guessing he'll want to do both. Remember, it's easier to step further away from elephants using a longer lens than it is to creep up on birds with a shorter lens. Canon 7D, Canon D30, Canon G2, EF 24-85 F3.5-4.5, EF 75-300 F4-5.6 IS, EF 300 F4 L IS, EF 85 F1.8, iMac 24" + Canon i9100
LOG IN TO REPLY |
condyk Africa's #1 Tour Guide  20,887 posts Likes: 22 Joined Mar 2005 Location: Birmingham, UK More info | Jan 10, 2006 14:21 | #6 100-400 IS L if you know you'll need to do lots of hand held shooting, Sigma 50-500mm if you know you'll be doing lots of mono/tripod/beanbag shooting. Had both and both do the job. Depends on your specifics of need. https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php?t=1203740
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Mitcon Goldmember  3,670 posts Likes: 3 Joined Jun 2005 Location: Adelaide, South Australia More info | Jan 10, 2006 14:28 | #7 If your planing on shooting alot I'd stay clear of the 70-200 with Tcon. What type of wildlife are you planing on shooting as would help us give options also. A rought budget on what you wish to spend also would help. For most wildlife shooting the starting point is 400mm, if your into small animals that are skitish or birding you want every mm of reach you can get. Cheers Wayne
LOG IN TO REPLY |
brivett wrote: What are you hoping to shoot ? Elephants from 20 yards or small birds from 300 yards... Looking for an all round lens to both - in addition to wildlife I would want to add sports like football and skiing for example
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Mitcon Goldmember 3,670 posts Likes: 3 Joined Jun 2005 Location: Adelaide, South Australia More info | Jan 10, 2006 14:32 | #9 wow, lol I need to type faster. Cheers Wayne
LOG IN TO REPLY |
condyk wrote: 100-400 IS L if you know you'll need to do lots of hand held shooting, Sigma 50-500mm if you know you'll be doing lots of mono/tripod/beanbag shooting. Had both and both do the job. Depends on your specifics of need. Most of my stuff would be handheld but not heavy use - just want to make sure I capture good shots on my world travels from here on - sigma or canon
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Mitcon Goldmember 3,670 posts Likes: 3 Joined Jun 2005 Location: Adelaide, South Australia More info | Jan 10, 2006 15:01 | #11 which is better handheld will depend on your own abilites then, the 100-400 has IS that will help. I shoot mostly handheld with the 50-500 but quite a few folks find they don't find it easy to hold. Cheers Wayne
LOG IN TO REPLY |
morehtml Goldmember  2,987 posts Likes: 1 Joined Aug 2005 Location: Murfreesboro, TN More info | Jan 10, 2006 15:09 | #12 I have both lenses and for outdoor wildlife, 100-400L is your ticket. ---------------
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Yep the 100-400
LOG IN TO REPLY |
CyberDyneSystems Admin (type T-2000)  More info | Jan 10, 2006 15:59 | #14 |
lol at ALL the votes for the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in 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!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such! 1692 guests, 102 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
>
.