Canon Telephoto Lenses

I am planning a photographic equipment upgrade this year and I have decided to go with the Canon 60D. I have also decided that I want a fixed focal length telephoto lens so that I can optimize image quality. I am been leaning toward purchasing the Canon EF 400mm f/5.6 lens and eventually adding the Canon 1.4 teleconverter. However, I would like to know whether I might be better served opting for the Canon EF 300mm f/4.0 with IS, and then eventually adding the Canon 2x teleconverter. Is there a clear advantage or disadvantage to either of these arrangements? I understand the rationale behind avoiding a 2x teleconverter for a f/5.6 lens. However, would the 300mm lens handle the 2x teleconverter any better? By my calculation, the end result with teleconverters with the above arrangements would give me 960mm focal length with the 300mm lens and 896mm with the 400mm lens. I understand that the lack of image stabilization on the 400mm will require that I provide support at times, and so I plan to utilize a monopod since I would prefer the mobility it provides; but I plan to use a monopod with the 300mm as well. Would someone please weigh in? Many thanks.

Ronald,

Please tell us what you want to image, e.g. BIF or static subjects.

Be aware that you will lose AF with anything slower than f/5.6, so adding a 1.4x on the 400 or 2x on the 300 will lose AF.

My choice would be the 300 f/4 (which was my choice when I bought). I felt the IS was important and still do.

If you want to do action, also consider an upgrade from the 60D to something like a 7D (although the pixels are the same size).

Roger

BIF (birds in flight?). Yes, I would like to have that option; although it may not be my primary concern. I have read that the 400mm has a great reputation for capturing birds in flight since it is relatively light in weight compared to other long lenses. that does attract me to the lens, so I can see one clear advantage there since without the teleconverter, it offers greater reach than the 300mm. My decision to go with a 60D was made, in part, when I decided to "bump" myself up from the T2i or T3i. I wanted at least the 5 fps of the 60D, and I wished to have a better monitor of manual settings. I realize the desirability of the 7D, but felt that as a part-time hobbyist to bird photography, the 60D may work, and allow me to invest a bit more in at least one good fixed focal length telephoto lens (either 300 or 400mm). I am just wonder if the limitations of the 2x teleconverter and the 300mm is equivalent to the limitations of the 1.4x teleconverter and the 400mm.

I think I now see your point: more times with BIF, then opt for the 400mm. Less time with BIF, then opt for the 300mm. Does this seem about right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronald Zigler

BIF (birds in flight?).

I think I now see your point: more times with BIF, then opt for the 400mm. Less time with BIF, then opt for the 300mm. Does this seem about right?

---

Ronald,

Yes, BIF = birds in flight.

For BIF, whether 300 or 400 mm is a matter of individual preference. I prefer IS lenses, so I would choose the 300 f/4 L IS over the 400 f/5.6 if I had both. But others may choose the non-IS 400. For BIF one really needs AF tracking and that means staying at f/5.6 or faster with non-1D series cameras.

Roger

Thanks Roger. This evening I re-read Arthur's comments about these two lenses from his web site (I had read Arthur's comments a month ago, but thought I should revisit his comments). Your comments and his are very helpful. This is a challenging choice. Recently, I have also been thinking of selecting the Canon 18-200mm as my "kit" lens since I figured it would be a good all purpose sort of lens, especially since one review of the lens I read indicated that at the upper end (200mm) its quality does not diminish as much as some other zoom lenses. I suppose this might incline me to select the 400mm, since it will extend my range more significantly than the 300mm. But, I have a couple of months to think about this choice (my investment will be both a birthday and holiday gift at the end of the year). Again, thanks for your advice.

Hi Ronald,

I have the 400mm F/5.6, I use it for a wide assortment of photography, from landscapes and static objects to bird photo's. I notice you are considering the Canon 60D which does not permit user access to perform micro adjustment for AF tuning purposes, while the 7D does. With my 400mm I did need to perform a micro adjustment and it did indeed help AF accuracy. Depending on how serious you want to drill down in to optimizing your lenses, you might add micro adjustment as a requirement for your next camera purchase.

I think if you are considering a telephoto and you will already have the range 18-200mm covered that you would be better off with the 400mm, since it may be possible to walk in a bit further with the 200mm to fill the frame of what a 300mm would give you.

If you really need 800-1000mm on a budget, you might consider digiscoping, however you are restricted to a tripod and manual focus.

I agree with Roger. I too prefer the 300mm f4 L IS USM lens over the 400mm f5.6 L USM. A 1.4x TC gives you 420 mm with the 300mm lens.

2x TC with 300mm was stretching it too far. No point in sacrificing quality.

Since you are also looking at a kit lens, you may also think about the 70-200 f2.8 L IS II USM. This is an excellent lens and works well with the 2x TC. Price is higher, however, that means you will not be required to buy the 18-200. Personally I feel this is a lifelong journey, so better to buy right even that means buying less number of lenses initially.

Cheers,
Sabyasachi

I understand that the image may be sacrificed with a teleconverter; however, would a 300mm f4 with a 2x TC be better than a 400mm f5.6 and the 1.4 TC? I am unfamiliar with the question of "micro adjusting" AF. Ouch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sabyasachi Patra

I agree with Roger. I too prefer the 300mm f4 L IS USM lens over the 400mm f5.6 L USM. A 1.4x TC gives you 420 mm with the 300mm lens.

2x TC with 300mm was stretching it too far. No point in sacrificing quality.

Since you are also looking at a kit lens, you may also think about the 70-200 f2.8 L IS II USM. This is an excellent lens and works well with the 2x TC. Price is higher, however, that means you will not be required to buy the 18-200. Personally I feel this is a lifelong journey, so better to buy right even that means buying less number of lenses initially.

Cheers,
Sabyasachi

---

Hi Ronald,
A couple of points, photographers who shoot the 400 f/5.6 for BIF use it bare without a TC the same with the 300 f/4 if you're going to use 1.4 TC on the 300 for BIF you are better off buying the 400 f 5.6 since it focuses faster.

The 400 f/5.6 will not auto focus with a 1.4 TC on a Canon 60D and the 300 f/4 will not auto focus with a 2x TC on a Canon 60D the same is true with a 7D.
If you want a great all around telephoto lens that you can use for different applications then I would recommend the 300 f/4 with or without the 1.4 TC this is the combo I used for years if you want a BIF lens buy the 400 f/5.6 and spend your money for a TC on something else.

Again if you're really interested in BIF I would also not buy the 60D and would spend the extra money needed for the 7D the better AF on the 7D easily justifies the price over the 60D especially if you buy a refurb from Canon http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs...10051_-1_29252

I think the question I am challenged to sort through regards BIF. Since I have not really owned the kind of equipment that would make that possible, it presents a very attractive horizon for me and I want to explore it. However, I also enjoy shooting perched song birds, hence my thoughts of combining the 400mm with a 1.4 TC. Arthur Morris recommends a "sturdy" (and expensive) tripod with this option. Is it unrealistic to think I could succeed with a good monopod when employing a 1.4 TC and the 400mm?

Quote:

---

Is it unrealistic to think I could succeed with a good monopod when employing a 1.4 TC and the 400mm?

---

I think so first you have to manual focus second your minimal aperture will be f/8 which will limit your shutter speeds which you need to produce sharp image at those focal lengths. To get into the focal lengths you want you are either going to have to look into some of the third party lenses or step up to a 300 f/2.8 and TC's or a 500 f/4. If portability is a concern then the 300 f/2.8 is a great lens and handles both TC's with excellent results.

Trying to keep within a budget of $3k for a 60D and a couple of lenses makes this discussion a bit more discouraging than I anticipated. Nonetheless, I greatly appreciate everyones input. It is better that I sort through these options now, than after making an investment and learning the hard way. I have a few months to contemplate this investment. I have not been considering "third party" lenses since I have heard that while their optics are good, the overall quality of the lens is such that they are simply not made as well as a Canon lens and will not hold up as well over time.

If I was starting over with that budget i would go with the a refurbished 7D for 1350.00 and pair it with a 300 f/4 1379.00 and 1.4 TC at 319.00. To further save money you can always look for a used 300 f/4 and TC.

Don, after reading yours and all of the other recommendations (and re-reading Aurthur's discussion), I am, for the first time, beginning to lean toward the 300 f4 with the 1.4 TC. While I am willing to use a monopod or tripod on occasion, I am not sure I am prepared to constantly carry one with the 400mm and miss out on some of the quick movements of perched birds when using a TC. I think I now better appreciate the trade-off between a lens like the 400mm that can capture BIF under optimal lighting conditions, and the 300mm paired with the 1.4 TC which may not match the 400mm for BIF, but will perhaps be better for shooting smaller birds in lower light that are momentarily perched. Does this seem about right?

I am, however, still a bit reluctant to abandon the new 60D and at least the 18-135 "kit" lens that can come with it since I do like to do landscapes and travel photography and feel inclined to pick up an additional lens such as this with a body. Nonetheless, I will keep my eye on Canon's refurbished web site that you provided. Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Lacy

If I was starting over with that budget i would go with the a refurbished 7D for 1350.00 and pair it with a 300 f/4 1379.00 and 1.4 TC at 319.00. To further save money you can always look for a used 300 f/4 and TC.

---