Canon lenses

[jamesbernard]

Hi, Im a newbie at photography so can you advise as to which lens--canon 70-200mm f2.8 with x2 converter or canon 100-400mm f4.5-56mm I want to try bird photography -- bern.ps I have a 70-200mm.

 

[fraggle101]

you COULD use the 70-200 with the x2 but there IS an issue with loosing IQ.. imo the 100-400 would be the better option..

 

[Sandds]

I'm no expert but If you already have a 70-200mm I would think something like a 400mm prime would be a better bet for birding rather than another zoom.

Steve...

 

[StewartR]

Welcome to TP, James. For bird photography, you typically want the longest focal length you can manage. A 2x extender will turn your zoom into a 140-400mm f/5.6, which is the same as the 100-400 at the long end (i.e. 400mm f/5.6). The 100-400 has IS (you don't say whether or not your 70-200 has), and it will give you slightly better image quality than a 70-200 plus 2x, but to be honest I don't think those advantages are going to be worth paying best part of £1000 for. Given that you already have the 70-200, a 2x Extender (~£200) is going to be the most economical way of getting to 400mm.

Beyond that, the prices start to look scary. The 300mm f/2.8 IS is a lovely lens that takes a 2x Extender very well to give you 600mm f/5.6, but it's around £3000. The 500mm f/4 IS is another birders' favourite but it's around £4000. But if you try to economise with a 300mm f/4 IS and 2x, or the 400mm f/5.6 and 1.4x (each combo is about £1000), your fastest aperture is only f/8 and that's not going to be good enough (especially without IS) except in bright light.

 

[Chappers]

The 2X converter dosn't seem to have a good rep with those who have used it. I've a 1.4x and it's OK but you can see a drop off in quality. However only you can say if the quality is good enough.

I agree with Fraggle the 100-400 would be the better option. However £1,000 to "try" bird photography is a bit expensive.

Why not try visiting one of the Wildfowl and Wetland trust sites, around the country.I know the one up here at Martin Mere enables you to get up close and personal with some of the birds. The Geese will eat out of you hand, and the Flamingos are really pink.
Alternatively try some of the RSPB reserves. Your 70-200 may be long enough for some of these venues. You can then find out if you really want to spend the money on a lens for Bird Photography.

I have the 100-400, and it's a fine lens but it does go a bit soft after about 350mm. If you just want a good long lens then the 300mm or 400mm primes are good alternatives.

If your still unsure why not see if you can hire the lenses for a week or so to see if they fit your bill.

Old wildlife photographer saying, "However long the lens is it's never long enough"

 

[StewartR]

If your still unsure why not see if you can hire the lenses for a week or so to see if they fit your bill.

Obviously I'm going to agree with this, though I didn't want to be the first to suggest hiring.

But yes, if you're contemplating spending say £800-£1000 on a big telephoto then arguably spending £40-£50 to hire one for a week is a good way to ensure you're making the right investment.

 

[jamesbernard]

Thank you all for comments and good advise. I will take a bit more time to think about options, thanks again jamesbernard.

 

[George]

James, you don't say which body you are using, so we don't know what the crop factor is. I personally have just come back from the Antarctic, and was using a 1Ds for landscape and a 40D with a 100-400 L IS and I have just had some of the shots blown up to A1 from the latter camera at effective 400x1.6 ie 640mm and they are stunningly sharp, I was really surprised how sharp they were, so I'd certainly have no hesitation in recommending that lens, and it's a very useful zoom with a full frame body as well.
Any fall off at the edges would of course be masked by the crop factor of 1.6, and I haven't compared the two lenses yet on the full frame body.

however, it is a serious investment, and I would agree that hiring for a few days will give you a much better idea.

The other advantage of the 100-400 is it is relatively light compared to the 300mm 2.8 prime and so is good for hand held, an important issue for wildlife and travel.