I am in the process of picking a bird/wildlife lens and have several choices.
My current bodies are a Canon 50D and 5D Mark 2.
My choices are as follows:
EF 300mm 2.8 usm is with 2X TC
EF 400mm 4.0 usm is with 1.4X TC
EF 400mm 2.8 usm NON IS
EF 500mm or 600mm F 4 NON IS
These combos fit my current budget. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
This is hard to answer without knowing what you like to shoot the most. Heres what I have done. I like the 500mm the best for my wildlife shooting. I spend a lot of time shooting song birds and depending on where and what type of birds your after will dictate the lens you buy. I have a 300mm and almost never use it unless I'm shooting shore birds from a boat and even then I tend to take the 500mm. I had a 400mm 2.8 and its sharp as hell and worked great with converters attached but its a heavy lens. Compared to the 500mm really heavy.
Posted by Luke Ormand on February 6, 2010 at 7:28 PM
Mike,
For the birds we have around the Island I'd go with the 500 and a 1.4XTC. The IS is more or less a non-issue because you will almost always be shooting with plenty of light (it has yet to hamper me). Obviously you have seen my gallery and my photos and everything has been taken with my 300 + 1.7X TC which = 500mm. Having that kind of reach on a prime would be great and being able to add the TC for the perched raptors (Ospreys in particular) would be fantastic. I can't help you much on weight since I use Nikons and have never used the larger lenses, but lighter obviously is better
- Luke
Posted by Nate Chappell on February 6, 2010 at 7:47 PM
Hi Michael,
I guess I'm a little confused by your post because to my knowledge Canon does not make a 500F4 or 600F4 Non IS lens. They previously made a 500mm F4.5 non IS lens. With that being said I would agree with Douglas that the 500F4 is the most versatile and probably best choice for birds. I often pair it with the 1.4 tc with excellent results. If you are fairly strong, it's light enough to hand hold at around 8 pounds, while the 600 weighs in at about 13 pounds. The IS is also a very useful feature for when you are shooting in low light. It's not very much more expensive than the 400F4 (about $1,000 more) and the quality and extra length imo make it well worth that extra amount of money. If on the other hand, you not able to handhold the 500mm and will be doing a lot of handheld shooting than the 400F4 is a very good option because it produces quality images, does well with that teleconverter and is very light.
Thank You everyone for your input. My 1st passion is shooting raptors but I also have my backyard setup with bird feeders and attract a interesting array of subjects.
Canon had made the Ef lenses in 500 and 600mm F4 non IS. They are very affordable used. I agree that the 500 is probably the way I should go but now my choice is IS or NON IS. The question I have to answer is what improvements were made in the glass on the newer IS lenses. I would love to get a good used one from someone trading up.
Please keep the ideas coming.
Posted by Luke Ormand on February 6, 2010 at 10:01 PM
IS of course is helpful and will allow you to shoot several stops from where you would if you did not have this feature. But, I don't have it on my 300 f/4 and honestly it's never been an issue (though I've only had the lens since October). When I am shooting w/slower shutter speeds, I'm almost always shooting from my car and can rest the lens on the window sill or beanbag and that will allow me to have enough sharpness. Plus, your 5D Mark D II should have good enough ISO capabilities that a shot at ISO 1000 will be very usable.
I would say go with a 600mm non-is. I can't see a reason why the glass would not be as excellent as the current IS model. Put this on your 5d II for excellent low light shots of raptors and put your 50d on when you need more focal length and or fps. It's much easier to get farther away from a bird than it is to get close to it. The extra focal length can also help you take shots of details on the birds such as the beaks or talons.
I would say to test both the is and non is versions of the lens you plan to buy. If you plan to shoot in sunny conditions most of the time i would definitely suggest the non-is. Wildlife is almost always out in the early morning or late afternoon, so plan accordingly. With a 5d mark 11 IS is less of an issue. Good luck!
Posted by Hilke Breder on February 10, 2010 at 6:19 AM
I love my Sigma 150mm - 500mm OS telephoto lens on my Nikon D300. It is also available for Canon, is versatile, easy to carry for long distances, great for bird photography, including raptors and seabirds. I just returned from a birding trip to Florida; got good pics of Ospreys and Red-shouldered Hawks. Check the photos in my blog: onejackdawbirding.blogspot.com
Hilke Breder
Brattleboro, VT
Posted by Nancy Elwood on February 18, 2010 at 5:22 PM
I would definitely recommend the 500mm for sure. The 600mm is nice but is that much heavier and bulkier to travel with. I have never regretted getting my Nikon 500mm AFSII non VR lens. Plus the Canon 1.4 tc works great with it. I just wish I had bought one sooner. Just DO IT!! You know you want to .
Posted by Tim Ferrell on February 19, 2010 at 9:07 AM
I'm shopping for a lens as well. I'm leaning to the 600mm IS. How much disadvantage is there with the wieght when you are using the lens?
Posted by Michael Lotito on February 21, 2010 at 10:08 PM
Discussion
10 repliesMy current bodies are a Canon 50D and 5D Mark 2.
My choices are as follows:
EF 300mm 2.8 usm is with 2X TC
EF 400mm 4.0 usm is with 1.4X TC
EF 400mm 2.8 usm NON IS
EF 500mm or 600mm F 4 NON IS
These combos fit my current budget. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Mike
For the birds we have around the Island I'd go with the 500 and a 1.4XTC. The IS is more or less a non-issue because you will almost always be shooting with plenty of light (it has yet to hamper me). Obviously you have seen my gallery and my photos and everything has been taken with my 300 + 1.7X TC which = 500mm. Having that kind of reach on a prime would be great and being able to add the TC for the perched raptors (Ospreys in particular) would be fantastic. I can't help you much on weight since I use Nikons and have never used the larger lenses, but lighter obviously is better
- Luke
I guess I'm a little confused by your post because to my knowledge Canon does not make a 500F4 or 600F4 Non IS lens. They previously made a 500mm F4.5 non IS lens. With that being said I would agree with Douglas that the 500F4 is the most versatile and probably best choice for birds. I often pair it with the 1.4 tc with excellent results. If you are fairly strong, it's light enough to hand hold at around 8 pounds, while the 600 weighs in at about 13 pounds. The IS is also a very useful feature for when you are shooting in low light. It's not very much more expensive than the 400F4 (about $1,000 more) and the quality and extra length imo make it well worth that extra amount of money. If on the other hand, you not able to handhold the 500mm and will be doing a lot of handheld shooting than the 400F4 is a very good option because it produces quality images, does well with that teleconverter and is very light.
Canon had made the Ef lenses in 500 and 600mm F4 non IS. They are very affordable used. I agree that the 500 is probably the way I should go but now my choice is IS or NON IS. The question I have to answer is what improvements were made in the glass on the newer IS lenses. I would love to get a good used one from someone trading up.
Please keep the ideas coming.
- Luke
I would say to test both the is and non is versions of the lens you plan to buy. If you plan to shoot in sunny conditions most of the time i would definitely suggest the non-is. Wildlife is almost always out in the early morning or late afternoon, so plan accordingly. With a 5d mark 11 IS is less of an issue. Good luck!
Hilke Breder
Brattleboro, VT