Long lens for wildlife

Here are some test shots with the sigma 150-500. They were taken handheld with my hip resting against a side of a kitchen unit. The shutter speed was very low but the difference with OS turned on is very obvious.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/grblades/sets/72157629754841861/
If the OS on the lens you are looking at is as good then I would say definetly et it unless you are only ever going to be using a tripod or taking photos of moving objects.
 
mike_6480 said:
Or, for your budget you could get both:

Sigma 150-500mm OS
Canon 70-200mm f4L non-IS

(will give you the option of using the canon when you don't need so much reach, as its lighter, and also has constant apature)
Click to expand...

I agree with mike, this is currently my setup and works well! The 70-200 with a 1.4tx is a good walk around and the 150-500 is a good one if your stopped someone for the day.
 
I will chip in here with a suggestion for the humble Canon 400mm f5.6 - Here are a few recent(ish) shots with one.
After owning a Canon 300mm f2.8 IS lens for a couple of years I can tell you that the 400/5.6 is right up there as far as IQ goes.
Of these five shots four were hand held (I rarely use a tripod with this lens).

pigeon2_900.jpg


snow1.jpg


piedwag1.jpg


goldfinch1c.jpg


pigeon1v2.jpg


spoon3.jpg
 
Last edited:
Just for good measure here are a few more, all hand held (you here so much rubbish about having to have IS!!!).

snowbunting.jpg


gold3.jpg


stonechat6.jpg
 
Last edited:
Roy C said:
Just for good measure here are a few more, all hand held (you here so much rubbish about having to have IS!!!
Click to expand...
Those are really excellent images Roy but you should consider those of us who through age or neurological impairment need some kind support/stabilisation. It's either that or give up bird photography.
It's not rubbish to us.
 
Last edited:
footman said:
Those are really excellent images Roy but you should consider those of us who through age or neurological impairment need some kind support/stabilisation. It's either that or give up bird photography.
It's not rubbish to us.
Click to expand...
Laurence, I am not anti IS and have two 4 stop IS lenses myself but there is nothing magical about stabilization, it just enables one to hand hold at a slower shutter speed than you could with a non IS lens. I did not say that you should not use IS and obviously for anyone who is neurological impaired it could be a life saver but from what I read it is general thought by even young fit guys that IS is a must which I say is rubbish, it is just a case of using the right shutter speed to get you the sharp shot, simple as!.
BTW I am a weakling OAP almost 70 year old (which is one reason why I use the 400/5.6 non IS lens as it is lighter than most other options for birds). I know most folk tend to use Av mode for birds but I prefer using Tv mode (with auto ISO) and simply setting the shutter speed to what I need for a sharp shot - you do not have to be particularity strong or fit to do that. In fact beacuse I am a weakling OAP most of the lenses mentioned here would just be to heavy for me to carry when out on walkabouts.
 
Last edited:
Roy C said:
Laurence, I am not anti IS and have two 4 stop IS lenses myself but there is nothing magical about stabilization, it just enables one to hand hold at a slower shutter speed than you could with a non IS lens. I did not say that you should not use IS and obviously for anyone who is neurological impaired it could be a life saver but from what I read it is general thought by even young fit guys that IS is a must which I say is rubbish, it is just a case of using the right shutter speed to get you the sharp shot, simple as!.
BTW I am a weakling OAP almost 70 year old (which is one reason why I use the 400/5.6 non IS lens as it is lighter than most other options for birds). I know most folk tend to use Av mode for birds but I prefer using Tv mode (with auto ISO) and simply setting the shutter speed to what I need for a sharp shot - you do not have to be particularity strong or fit to do that. In fact beacuse I am a weakling OAP most of the lenses mentioned here would just be to heavy for me to carry when out on walkabouts.
Click to expand...
All good points Roy :).
 
Roy C said:
Just for good measure here are a few more, all hand held (you here so much rubbish about having to have IS!!!).
Click to expand...

To be fair though, Roy, you obviously had plenty of light for those, up to 1/2500th I see!

OS isn't really designed for days like that is it?

It can work wonders on dismal days or even in the woods on sunny days, though. I wouldn't be without it personally, Sigma 150-500 OS by the way :thumbs:
 
Comfortably Numb said:
To be fair though, Roy, you obviously had plenty of light for those, up to 1/2500th I see!

OS isn't really designed for days like that is it?

It can work wonders on dismal days or even in the woods on sunny days, though. I wouldn't be without it personally, Sigma 150-500 OS by the way :thumbs:
Click to expand...
These days Daron I work on a simple principle with the birding lens, if the light is not good enough to get me the shutter speed I want (at up to ISO 1600) then I am not bothered about shooting at all - the more I have been at this game the more I realise that light is everything.
Just this week I was out on a poor light day (against my better judgement :bang:) shooting perched Swallows from around 5 metres with the 400 and a tripod with gimbal head, got loads of sharp shots but binned the lot as the light was just not good enough as far as I was concerned, the pics just did not pop even after playing around on CS5 for an hour or so. In the end I just deleted the whole folder.
If you do like shooting hand held on dismal days or in dark woods then IS/OS obviously helps. I came from the Canon 300/2.8 IS lens less than a year ago and can honestly say I do not miss the IS at all. That's not to say that I would not get another birding lens with IS but for me it is just a case of adapting my technique to suit the gear I am shooting with.With the 400/5.6 when hand holding I look for a minimum of 1/800-1/1000 sec for perched birds but if the light is really good I will not hesitate in upping the shutter speed.
Of course when you are on high(ish) ISO's on a Camera like the 7D it helps enormously to ETTR - I also use AI servo all the time together with back button focusing, when shooting perched birds like waders that are constantly on the move I actual find it an advantage not to use IS even if I had it (I often turned it off on the 300/2.8).
My whole point is that it is possible to get reasonable bird pics with a non IS lens - when I bought my current 400/5.6 (used) I was fully aware that I could have got a brand new lens like the 150-500 sigma for a little less than I paid but for me there was no contest (but then I am somewhat biased toward Canon L lenses).

I do believe that too many people these days assume that just because they have a IS/OS lens then all they have to do is press the shutter regardless of shutter speed and good shots are guaranteed - there is a lot more to it I believe.
Anyway that's enough from me, just enjoy your photography no matter what gear you have.
 
Last edited:
We can all shout about which is best, but what we need to understand is that we may not all have the same knowledge or understanding about photography. By that I mean two people may have the same kit but it does not necessarily mean the end results will look identical, this goes for an understanding of PP as well. Just by sticking lens "A" on a Canon, Nikon or whatever is going to give you entirely different results, we all use different picture styles, WB etc etc. There are so many variables to take into account nowadays, unless a piece of your kit is seriously flawed you just have to work on it and learn to get the best from it.
 
I will not deny the 400mm is an excellent lens (it was the one I traded for the 50-500), however for me and I would suggest for wildlife in general it is not flexible enough
 
JohnN said:
I will not deny the 400mm is an excellent lens (it was the one I traded for the 50-500), however for me and I would suggest for wildlife in general it is not flexible enough
Click to expand...
I lot of folks with slow zooms say this about primes John, but in the case of bird photographers they almost all secretly yearn for a 500/4 or longer prime ;). I prefer to do my zooming with my feet but if I could managed the weight I would love a very unpractical 800/5.6 or even a new 600/4 (and I would still use a tc to make it still more impracticable still LOL).
 
Roy C said:
These days Daron I work on a simple principle with the birding lens, if the light is not good enough to get me the shutter speed I want (at up to ISO 1600) then I am not bothered about shooting at all - the more I have been at this game the more I realise that light is everything.
Click to expand...

But not everyone in every situation has that choice.

We were in Africa on safari some years ago, and in Antarctica and South America earlier this year. If I wanted the photograph it had to be there and then. We were not able to wait for the light, nor were we able to go back later. In those circumstances the stabilisation often helped me to get the best shot possible.
 
footman said:
Roy, I see you're selling that lens, this means we wont see any more of your lovely bird shots.
I've only got one thing to say "DON'T DO IT MAN!" :):)
Click to expand...
LOL, to be quite honest Laurence I have not done a lot of birding all year. As I am very much a local patch man, apart from the very occasional rarity, I am just snapping birds that I have done a hundred times before so getting a bit boring for me. Besides traipsing about with long lenses is not getting any easier at my age so I fancy a crack at landscape.
 
Roy C said:
These days Daron I work on a simple principle with the birding lens, if the light is not good enough to get me the shutter speed I want (at up to ISO 1600) then I am not bothered about shooting at all - the more I have been at this game the more I realise that light is everything.

Anyway that's enough from me, just enjoy your photography no matter what gear you have.
Click to expand...

Yep, I agree with pretty much all of that, Roy.

If you are able to choose the best conditions to shoot & if you can keep your shutter speed up, then no problem.

I have to take my opportunities as they come along & make the best of the UK climate :suspect:

My previous "long" lens was 70-200 non IS & it was infuriating when conditions were poor. OS has massively extended my shooting time/options & that's why I'm a big fan.

It's the age old story of "horses for courses" :thumbs:
 
Thanks so much for all the excellent replies. At this point I think the Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS USM represents the best bang for the buck, although I would like faster, but that would put things out of my budget. I'm putting off getting a long lens for the time being, but I will return to this thread when the time comes.

Thanks again

Rich
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top