Printable View
Good Morning Gang, looking for some advice. My father has the "birding/Wildlife bug now as well, he's 75 now and loves photography as well. He really doesn't wish to fool with the overall weight of the large tripod, and the 500mm, he's asking me 300mm prime or 400mm prime. i'm looking for expereinced wisdom here to try and steer him in the right direction. He also owes a 1.4 II EX canon also, and all canon equipment.
Thks
Don
He could consider the Canon 300f/4 IS, which he could use with the 1.4x TC. It is quite versatile, due to its close minimum focusing distance, he could use it as semi-macro and it works well for wildlife and birds, too. The 300f/2.8 would be an alternative, since he could use it with a 2x TC. I would probably go with the 300f/4, though.
Don, If his main focus is going to be birds then I would recommend the 400 f/5.6 if he is looking for a more all around lens I would go with the 300 f/4. I personally feel the 300 f/4 is the most underrated lens in Canons line up takes the TC well and ad extension tubes and it makes a wonderful marco lens were you want to isolate the subject from the BG. Doesn't your dad already have the 100-400 if so what focal length does he use most often?
And the 400/4 DO is pretty light for its FL and f-value.
Thks guys, yes he has a 100-400 but as we know, the 1.4 EXII will not AF. I think he's looking for some more distance, with a 1.4 working as well. What's the skinny on the 400 DO i know artie uses it???
Don H
Don- I've used the 400/DO a few times although I don't own it (I would like to but I have the 500/4).
It is a super duper lens as far as I am concerned- very sharp, fast, light and hand-holdable.
You need to let us know: tripod or no tripod? Budget? How much is he willing to carry in all? Once you get back to me I have the answer.
I agree with Artie. Budget is important. Money put aside, the 4/400 will give you a lot more pixels than a 4/300 for a bird. To be exact, 77.7% more pixels (400/300 * 400/300). That is a lot.
Markus
If he's prepared to spend the big bucks for a prime lens he should still consider the 500 which is surprisingly manageable even in my hands and I was able to use without a tripod without problem. When you talk primes in the 300 and 400 range the weight begins to add up especially with a TC. Now I've switched to Nikon the 500 is the one lens I really regret. He should try renting one for a few days and see how he likes it.
If lightweight is really the issue the 400 5.6 is a fabulous alternative but won't autofocus with a TC
Deborah,Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah Harrison
What do you mean when you say the 500 is the one lens I really regret ?
Scott
I recently switched to Nikon for various reasons, the main one being my husband who was a Nikon user and.... In spite of this switch really considered keeping my Canon 500 and one body because of this lens's sharpness and great manageability handheld. However, the only practical solution was to make a complete switch and of all my lenses, this was my favorite and hence regretted the most giving up. I have the 200-400 Nikon and am selling it because it is less 'user friendly' to someone with arthritis and/or getting older than my Canon 500.
We're now dealing with one system in this household, however, if I were to return to Canon, the 500 would be the first lens I would reacquire!
Hope this answers your question in a somewhat roundabout way!
He will use with both hand and tripod, but would like to keep weight down, since he likes to walk on trails for wildlife photos. tks. Don
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah Harrison
Ok, I understand what your saying now. I'm actually thinking about going back to Canon, and that is the main reason so I can get an afordable 500/4 with IS. The price of the Nikon 500/4 Vr is just crazy and people are asking more for used non VR versions then the Canon IS version.
Hi Don:
I have both the 300 F4 and the 400 DO and both work very well with the 1.4 TC. However, based upon the fact that your dad already has a 100-400, purchasing a 300 doesn't make much sense and with the 1.4 would only put him at 420mm. However, the 400 with the 1.4 would put him at 560mm. The reason I purchased the 400 DO was b/c of its light weight and fast, and I think he would be quite pleased with this choice. This would give him the range of 100-400 with the one lens and 400 and 560 with the other.
Marina
Yes, the 400 DO is looking good with a decent tripod and a Mongoose head. Assuming that you Dad does not have a pro body he will have AF with a 1.4X II TC and a 1.6 crop factor. That would put him at 400 X1.6 X1.4 = 896mm equivalent at about 18X. But again, a decent tripod and a Mongoose will be the key to sharp images. I would recommend the 3530 LS. We have the tripods in stock but the M3.5B heads have been hard to keep in stock; as soon as we get three we sell three...
