Wildlife lens for £400

B

bx338

Suspended / Banned
Messages
331
Name
john
Edit My Images
Yes
I have now got my new camera on the way, a canon 40D,
thanks to the advice from forum members, :thumbs:

I want to spend about £350-400 on a lens (new or used) that would give me good sharp results.

Im not sure which to go for, there is far too much choice out there.

I am wanting the lens for birds and general wildlife, so if you could give me some recomendations to research into i would appreciate it. :)

cheers.
 
For birds you really need 400mm minimum, so the cheapest in that range are the Sigma 120-400, although it's not considered as sharp as the Sigma 150-500 or 50-500 both of which are likely to be more expensive, but hunt around for secondhand and see what you can find.
 
bx338 said:
I have now got my new camera on the way, a canon 40D,
thanks to the advice from forum members, :thumbs:

I want to spend about £350-400 on a lens (new or used) that would give me good sharp results.

Im not sure which to go for, there is far too much choice out there.

I am wanting the lens for birds and general wildlife, so if you could give me some recomendations to research into i would appreciate it. :)

cheers.
Click to expand...

I agree with Ken you are really looking to get something in the region of 400mm or better ie; Canon 100-400L or third party lens a Sigma (Bigma) 50-500 for wildlife. If you can get a big lens with image stabilzation on it if your shooting handheld as a lot of the time it will be see the bird, take aim and shoot. Setting a tripod up the bird in question would be long gone.

If you have £400.00 available why not do yourself a favour hang on to it a bit longer, save a bit longer your already halfway there and get a quality L or similar lens for your quality camera. Don't jump at the first telephoto you came across. I used to use a 40D and 100-400L and found the to worked great together. I sometimes wished for a longer lens but couldn't afford it.
Keep your eyes on the classified section here, sometimes you get a bargain lens will appear but you have to be quick. THis pic here was caught on a 40D & Canon 100-400 L lens
ieowl2.jpg
 
Last edited:
If you look around you can get the Sigma 50-500 for under £500 which is a very good lens for the price. Another option is the Tamron 200-500mm for around the same price but the AF in the Sigma is better.
 
It's a lot of money, but these things are real expensive, I have spent hours looking at various lenses (the greatest magnification for my money) I have finally settled on and would strongly advise this lens, which gives even more magnification if like me your on a crop censor; Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. Jessops have it at £420 although you can get it for around £300 on ebay or as I found today in CEX £280.

Hope this helps. Mark.
 
Thanks for the advice, i will have a look at the sigma lens, and keep checking the sales section.

Since im just starting out on the dslr route im not sure if i can justify the price tag that goes with a quality lens like the 100-400L, i know it sounds perfect for what i want, but i cant justify the £££ at this moment in time. Once the weather picks up and we get some decent days i might change my mind ?

One other question, can you only use a TC on a prime lens ? I have been told that a prime will give better images than a telephoto.
cheers.
 
bx338 said:
One other question, can you only use a TC on a prime lens ? I have been told that a prime will give better images than a telephoto.
cheers.
Click to expand...

Yep, TC's are really designed to be used with the prime lenses and will give you the better results. As for the for mentioned wildlife lens.

You have 2 choice's, the sigma 50-500mm or 120-400mm etc canon 100-400mm zoom's be prices vary from around £550 - £1200

or the prime lenses like the canon 300mm f4 or 400mm f5.6 but again over £1000

If you have no problems with used equipment, then 2nd hand is a very good way of getting a lot more lens for your $$$

Mpb photography, ffordes, mifsuds, camtech, park camera's and the for sales forums are a good source of used equipment.

Now isn't a great time to buy with the price hikes because of manufacturing problems at the main brands, but there may still be a bargain to be had if you look around. Link below a good source of best price for new

http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/

Me personally, I would hold off and increase the budget and get a better lens.
 
Perhaps take a look at a used canon 300mm f/4L USM non-IS + a 1.4x converter

Might push your budget a bit, but it's the highest quality you'll get without splashing out on a 400/5.6L USM prime
 
i need help deciding what to get, i need a lens for wildlife photography and cant decide between the canon 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 IS USM with a 1.4 or 2.0x converter. Or the Sigma 50-500mm APO DG OS HSM??? I am really confused. this will be my first big lens so if someone could help me decide that would be great :)
 
micloi said:
50-500mm OS as the 100-400 + 1.4 will be f8 and not AF
Click to expand...

Or just the 100-400 without TC.
 
The 50-500 is longer, has a larger range and a better stabilization system, being a 10 year newer design.
The 100-400 is a little sharper at 400mm and a little faster (f5.6 rather than f6.3)

Depends what you want from a lens.
 
micloi said:
The 50-500 is longer, has a larger range and a better stabilization system, being a 10 year newer design.
The 100-400 is a little sharper at 400mm and a little faster (f5.6 rather than f6.3)

Depends what you want from a lens.
Click to expand...

The 100-400 is also smaller and lighter and has a zoom system that some people detest (worth trying one out if you're thinking of buying).

But I agree completely, two superb lenses. There isn't a wrong choice, they're both just slightly better suited to slightly different things.

There's also the canon 400mm f/5.6L prime in that price range, which is less flexible being a prime with no-IS and a long minimum focussing distance (3.5m), but it'll easily out perform the 100-400 and 50-500 for focus speed and image quality, and is lighter than both of them. It's popular a lot with birders who need the fast focussing but don't need the shorter focal lengths or IS since for birding you'll be able to use support most of the time or require shutter speeds fast enough for IS not to matter at all. Again another superb choice suited to a different style of shooting.
 
Last edited:
squishy said:
The 100-400 is also smaller and lighter and has a zoom system that some people detest (worth trying one out if you're thinking of buying).

But I agree completely, two superb lenses. There isn't a wrong choice, they're both just slightly better suited to slightly different things.
Click to expand...

Forgot the size and weight. Do not notice these things since I had to use the Sigmonster (300-800mm) handheld last year :lol:
 
50-500mm OS as the 100-400 + 1.4 will be f8 and not AF
Click to expand...

Depends on the TC. I bought a Kenko 1.4x DGX Converter and tried it on my 100-400 L and the AF still works fine, even at the long end and in average light too. It might not work in very poor light but mine hasn't failed to work yet.
I recently got a Sigma 150-500 OS as well and the IQ of this lens is very good so far, and the distance you can get with it and get a decent photo is amazing. People were saying I wouldn't notice too much difference between this and the 100-400 but you sure can, the 500 compared to the 400 is great and on a 7D it's even better.
 
Last edited:
I know. I sometimes use the same DGX TC with the 100-400 but AF is patchy in low light and slow for birds in flight while still being f8. Also this combo works on the 500D, 550D etc but not on the 40D, 50D, 60D and 7D that have more sensitive centre points. On these cameras only the peripheral points will work with the same limitations as on the xxxD models.

To cut a long story short if you need more than 400mm go with the 50-500 rather than adding the 1.4x on the 100-400mm
 
AF will not work with a 100-400 and a 40D/50D or 7D. Not unless your definitition of the word 'work' is - "attempts to do what it should do and may sometimes succeed; but will normally give up after a short while'.
 
Well against a lot of advice (mostly sought here) I just bought one as it fitted my price point and as im pretty new im definitely not going to be as critical as some more serious/seasoned togs

It arrived today and seems well built, the Focus is quick, the OS is a touch noisy compared with the 70-200F4 IS that I Just sold

I paid £450 for a mint copy from LCE, which suited my budget, I will have a play with it at the weekend

I looked at pictures taken with it on flickr and it gets good results

http://www.flickr.com/groups/sigma_120-400_os/
 
I have a 100-400 with a 1.4x Kenko tc, and have just swapped from a 50D to 7D. On both cameras I have only used it with centre af points . With the 50D it worked fine as long as there was a bit of contrast for it to lock on to. With the 7D I have yet to have it fail to focus at all, it has behaved perfectly and focused fast and accurately.
 
MadWoman said:
I have a 100-400 with a 1.4x Kenko tc, and have just swapped from a 50D to 7D. On both cameras I have only used it with centre af points . With the 50D it worked fine as long as there was a bit of contrast for it to lock on to. With the 7D I have yet to have it fail to focus at all, it has behaved perfectly and focused fast and accurately.
Click to expand...


Great. Let's see some shots of birds in flight.
 
I hear what people are saying but I would just like to add (about 3 days late) the case for the 70-300mm . I use this lens on my 600d for wildlife and birds. Because I shoot video as well I like this focal length. However if I had more money , I'd love the 400mm f5.6 BUT I have the 70-300mm and I would say its a pretty good lens for birds, even in flight as it seems to focus pretty quick.
Using the 70-300 teaches you the need to get close but hey, thats the no1 trick anyway.
I even manage to get shots of tiny fast moving birds with it. a few samples
http://youtu.be/jUQV7GeAtT8 Not great , but I'm not a great photographer.. Its in budget (about £350) and a good quality bit of kit..
 
I'd been to the Verdon a while ago and one thing that stuck with me was the Vultures. This time I went in search of a BIF lens before leaving.

I went to Harrisons and tested out a load of combinations from a 1.4 TC on my 70-200 f/4, a 1.4 TC on the Sigma 70-300 f/4, the Sigma 150-500 and 50-500, the Canon 100-400 and finally the Canon 400mm 5.6. I threw all the shots in a folder (taken on the street just outside) and went through them flagging the ones that were sharpest, had the most contrast etc. Every flagged image without exception was the 400mm f/5.6 (incidentally the Sigma 70-300 f/4 + TC combo was my runner up).

Quite simply its an amazing lens and I really didn't miss the lack of IS. Its so much lighter than all of the other combinations and I happily handheld it and carried it fair distances. The Bigma weighs an absolute tonne and to handhold it for long periods I'd reckon you'd need the IS just to battle your shaking body. [A few of my (first ever) BIF shots are in the Landscape and Wildlife seciton on the link below.]

This doesn't much help the OP though as if its out of your budget then its out of your budget. I reckon both the Sigma 150-500 and 100-300 + kenko TC would be feasible with a modest increase in cash or likely the former without?
 
I might be totaly wrong here john and there is no harm in wanting something. But considering your camera is still in transit I guess you are fairly new to photography. I suggest you wait until you have used it for a while and have got to know it before deciding. Similar to those that say " I want a lens that takes sharp shots like the ones I see on here etc etc " In reality it does not work like that straight away and may cause some dissapointment. Only my thoughts but imo there is more to it than just choosing lens "A" over lens "B"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top