Telephoto Lens needed - 300mmF4IS, 400mmF5.6, or Sigma 150-500mm???

[Jamie Douglas]

I am in the premlinary stages of deciding what telephoto lens to purchase. Here are my thoughts so far...

I currently have a 7D with a 70-200 f2.8 IS and 2x convertor but for birds in flight and the local black bears (early evening bike ride encounters) I need something longer because I have tried and tried with the 2x and it doesnt cut the mustard. Does a good job of slow moving or stationary subjects though in good light when they arent too far away but a med tele would be so much nicer.

I dont have 4000 dollars plus so that rules out the 300mm f2.8 IS which would be ideal becasue it takes the 2x well etc but I have to remain within my budget of about 1500.

300mmF4 - heard lots of good things but probably too short and a 1.4x would be needed which could be an option with a slight budget tweak and would save buying an expensive tripod.

400mmf5.6 - No IS but with a decent tripod or HH technique I hear good things but is this lens dated and ready for a new release with IS? I bought my 70-200 mark 1 sixteen months too early and dont want to risk them releasing a new version.

Sigma 15-500 -I hear lots of mixed opinions and dont know if this is the way too go even though Robert O'Toole does good things with it.

I apologise for a flogged to death topic but I need advice.

I did find this http://www.birdsasart.com/faq_4f56or3is.html which is intersting but doesnt quite answer my questions.

Thanks

Jamie

[Christopher C.M. Cooke]

Jamie, I have and have used the 300 f/4 and 400 f/5.6 for many years and use them both with the 1.4X Con.

Birds in flight, the 400 f/5.6 is the best hand held lens around BUT you refer to Bears and therefore the 300 f/4 IS + 1.4X is a better option IMHO.

The 300 f/4 IS is a very versatile lens which will give you 420mm f/5.6 with the 1.4, plus IS and for wildlife and not simply BIFs would be my choice by far.

This lens also will focus much closer than the 400 f/5.6 and with the addition of good macro tubes is a fantastic long Macro lens.

Both lenses DO NOT need a mono pod or tripod and you can handhold them all day.

Best of luck but both lenses are superb with slightly different abilities.

[Dave Peters]

For birds in flight and indeed many moving subjects, you require fairly high shutter speeds due to subject movement. So the lack of IS does not really matter. I would go for the 400 f5.6 unless you can afford to go to the 500 f4 or you want the lens to do other tasks as well. People have been forecasting a replacement with IS for many years now and about the only thing that is certain is the price will be much higher if it happens. Both the 300 and 400 are easily hand holdable and a tripod will just slow you down and prevent fast tracking of birds. With practice you can even hand hold the 800mm but then the IS does help as does technique and practice.

Dave Peters
www.dpphotoimages.com

[Kaustubh Deshpande]

Since you already have a 70-200 f/2.8, I think the wise thing to do would be to go for 400 f5.6L. You got the 300 f/4 already covered with the 1.4x. 7D is supposedly quite decent at high ISO...so the lack of IS should not hurt as much as it used to do on the older cameras. That lens is very light and with proper technique, one can get sharp shots at 1/400s. IQ is excellent, to say the least. Dont worry too much about whats going to come :-)

[Jamie Douglas]

Hi, just got back from work. Firstly thanks for responding.

Chris: When you say "Birds in flight, the 400 f/5.6 is the best hand held lens around BUT you refer to Bears and therefore the 300 f/4 IS + 1.4X is a better option IMHO" is that refering to the 300mm having IS?

Dave: Don't mention the 500mm please, not realistic unless I tell my wife we arent having children for a few years :) I am just scared 400mm will be too short. Wildlife varies out here from eagles in flight, to bears in berry fields 10 meters away, to shooting seals from a boat so my head is spinning when it comes to deciding do I go for IS or no IS.

Kaustubh: I like this quote "Dont worry too much about whats going to come :-) " when it comes to investing a bit of cash I like to at least make sure theres nothing on the cards for the next 12 months etc, I held off upgrading to the 50D when I was tempted to upgrade 6 months after its release but I was rewarded for waiting for the 7D. The 7D will allow me to push the ISO and give me a crop IQ advantage if 400mm is slightly too short.

I'll pop back in here later after dinner.

Thanks again

Jamie

[Dave Peters]

With birds you never have enough focal length but you have to be realistic in what you can afford. I think its better to have a good quality lens with fast AF that you can use most of the time without converters. The 7D has enough pixels that you can crop for most purposes. If you have a special vacation you can always rent the 500 or 800 for a short time. As time goes by, the secondhand 1D series will be available at reasonable prices with enough pixels to compete with the 7D but with AF at f8. If you have 400 5.6 then you can use the 1.4x but if you have 300 + 1.4 then you need a 2x and quality will be way down and AF slow.

[James Shadle]

400 5.6!
I wish Nikon had a lens like this, I'd but it.

[Kaustubh Deshpande]

Kaustubh: I like this quote "Dont worry too much about whats going to come :-) " when it comes to investing a bit of cash I like to at least make sure theres nothing on the cards for the next 12 months etc, I held off upgrading to the 50D when I was tempted to upgrade 6 months after its release but I was rewarded for waiting for the 7D. The 7D will allow me to push the ISO and give me a crop IQ advantage if 400mm is slightly too short.

Jamie, I understand the rationale about waiting w.r.t cameras. There is always a better camera on the card these days. BTW, I am still on 40D :-) But for lenses, its not a guarantee. Moreover, the L lenses hold their value so even if you were to sell it later, it would not hurt the wallet a lot. If you wait for an year and a 400f5.6L-IS does not come out, you will feel that you wasted an year. Or what if it comes out with improved internals and price tag of $2k? Best approach is to buy what you need and afford when you can justify the expenditure to yourself :-)

I was using an old 300 f/4 non-IS with 1.4x for birds. I had bought it used for $700. I wanted to get into BIF last winter when the ducks come here...so I sold it for $650, put in some extra cash and got the 400f5.6L. The ducks-in-flight images I made last winter quickly proved to me that I made the right decision then. We should all thank Canon for giving us budget bird photographers this option.

[David Stephens]

I vote for the 400mm f/5.6L. I used that for several thousand images before I bought my 500mm f/4L. It is light enough to take on your bike treks and great for birds in flight. As for using it with a 1.4x, I found that very frustrating on my 7D because it slowed so much that it was really only useful on stationary or slow moving targets. It didn't work for me at all for small birds and birds in flight.

You WILL long for more focal length with any of your proposed lenses. For eagles I find the 500mm, plus the 1.4x on a 1.6 crop camera to be barely enough, but way better than the 400mm. If you visit Haines, Alaska, then 400mm will be plenty, but here in Colorado I find that the eagles are usually way out on the ice or in a distant tree such that I need all the focal length that I can muster.

[Christopher C.M. Cooke]

Chris: When you say "Birds in flight, the 400 f/5.6 is the best hand held lens around BUT you refer to Bears and therefore the 300 f/4 IS + 1.4X is a better option IMHO" is that refering to the 300mm having IS?

Yes and no! The 300 f/4 + or- the 1.4 is a far more versatile lens.

Living in Australia we are a bit short on bears. and despite the fact that colloquially our cute but agro little Marsupial is commonly called the "Kola Bear" it is no pint sized Grizzly but I frequently end up photographing these little critters with their cute babies every year in their heavily wooded habitat and I find the 300 much better along with my 70-200 when it comes to getting close in shots as it will focus down to about 5 feet and if the foliage is a bit dark the IS helps a lot when hand held.

For me the 400 f/5.6 is a dedicated BIF lens and nothing beats it at this job and on my MKIII and MKIV I can AF at f/8 with the 1.4 at 560mm.

My opinion is that at their present price you should have both but I am retired and the main drains on my finance have both left home and have good jobs. :)

[Jamie Douglas]

I like Jame's response but appreciate everyone giving me a few more words of advice.

Kaustubh - The fact L lenses hold their value so well is very helpful but IS and weather sealing would be nice on the 400mm. Thats why I waited for the 7D as it rains a lot up here and I spend a few hours in the rain at duck ponds trying to find otters but a decent rain coat and say a monopod would fill that void and come much cheaper than a weather sealed IS lens.

Dave - I like the idea of the 400mm being light so I could stick it in a pack while I go out on my bike and yes there is never enough focal length. 640mm is still too short for most wildlife. Using a 2x on my 70-200 gives me 640mm and this is still barely enough so not 100% yet. The IQ would be so much better on the 400mm so being able to crop and get better results might be a solution until I can afford a 500mm etc.

The following were taken with a 70-200 and 2x so I am sure the IQ on the 400mm will blow me away...

http://jmdouglasphotography.zenfolio...308a#h1d5ed4ca
http://jmdouglasphotography.zenfolio...308a#h1d5ed4ca
http://jmdouglasphotography.zenfolio...308a#h20d9308a
http://jmdouglasphotography.zenfolio...308a#h2d2789a4

Chris - I am just at the start of getting into finance drains but I refuse to give up investing in my passion and where there is a will there is a way.

I'll aim to try out the 400mm this weekend if the store has a rental available.

Thanks again.

[Christopher C.M. Cooke]

Great images Jamie, seems to be very little loss of IQ with the 2X on your 70-200 and I envy you you your bears and beautiful Eagles, down here we are restricted in our search for dangerous prey to huge White Pointers and massive Salt Water Crocodiles both of which have developed a taste for photographers. :)

Best of luck with your choice of lens, neither will disappoint, but start saving for that beautiful 500 f/4 L.

[Jamie Douglas]

Thanks Chris, the images of the bears and eagle in the tree were taken from a boat using an xti body as well so no fast AF and fps. My mum is from Brisbane so I have visited the mother land and while I was there I based myself in st kilda. Not white pointers but I did see a tiger shark in WA.

Thanks for the advice above.

Jamie

500mm F4 will be mine one day.

[Christopher C.M. Cooke]

If you ever get back to the land downunder, I will take you for a dive off Phillip Island and introduce you to "Big Mama" a 20 foot female Whitey who visits us every year when the Australian Fur Seals have their pups, she seems harmless enough and we have been diving with her for 15 years and have not lost anyone "YET" :)

I look forward to seeing some photos with your new lens.

[Milan V]

You should consider also Sigma 50-500 which is for example sharper then Sigma 150-500. But at Sigma a lot depends also from semples.

Best!
Milan

[Roger Clark]

But the zoom is not as sharp as a fixed focal length lens. I'll bet the 400 f/5.6 produces more detail on a subject than either zoom at 500 mm.
The 300 f/4 may win that test too, and may also win it with a 1.4x TC attached.

One should strive for resolution on the subject and not simply focal length.

Roger

[Jamie Douglas]

Thanks Milan, I have a 70-200 so I have that focal length covered and dont want to replace it. I am really after a a fixed focal rather than a zoom and so far no one has given me their thoughts on the Sigma's performance.

Thanks Roger, I agree, a fixed focal is going to win that test handsdown and I only included the 150-500 to see if anyone on here used it regularly and had advice. I am trying to get my hands on a 400mm for a weekend to test it's performance and thinking the lack on IS wont hurt me too much.

[Ian Cassell]

Since I bought Arash's 400/5.6 (he got something bigger :) ), I have been in love. The lens is lightweight and easy to handhold. With the 7D which performs reasonably well at higher ISO's than my old 30D, I don't feel incredibly handicapped by the fact that it is an f/5.6 lens. The lens is considerably sharper than my Sigma 100-300mm f/4, which I always felt was an excellent lens. It also focuses incredibly fast.

[Jamie Douglas]

Thanks Ian, do you have any 400mm f5.6 examples on your website?

[Ian Cassell]

Search my images here ... most recently have been with that lens. :)

[Jamie Douglas]

Given the new Canon lenses I think it's a good idea for me to sit on this decision for a while to wait and see. New convertors could be much better as well but time will tell.

[David Stephens]

Given the new Canon lenses I think it's a good idea for me to sit on this decision for a while to wait and see. New convertors could be much better as well but time will tell.

I only saw a 70-300mm f/4-5.6, which I see having little play in your decision. It's not going to work with an extender and the reach without an extender isn't going to get you to where you said you want to be.

They may release something in the spring, but who knows what? The fall releases are usually done by now in anticipation of the shows.

With the 300mm and 400mm that you're considering the IQ is already near the very top of Canon's heap (my 500mm has better than my very good 400mm f/5.6 had, but that's out of your current budget). Yeah, a 400mm f/5.6 with IS would be nice, but that could be years away, if ever.

You can certainly wait all you want, but the reason given doesn't really make sense unless you didn't really feel a big need.

Getting back to where you are now, going from your 70-200mm f/2.8 plus 2x TC to a 400mm f/5.6L is not going to gain you a ton of IQ. Your AF speed will very likely improve, but that'll be the main thing. If I were you, I'd try mainly working with the 1.4x TC on you 70-200 and I think you'll be very happy with AF speed. Just count on cropping for that extra enlargement. Your keeper rate will go up.

It'll be great if they can bring the 2x TC IQ up to the 1.4x TC, but I doubt that the series III will improve the AF speed on a 2.8.

[Edy Subiyanto]

Hi Jamie

Have you bought 400 f/5.6 yet?
I want to know the image quality using that lens. Cause I also want to buy that lens

Regards
Edy

[John Chardine]

Here's another thought. A lot of BPNers (e.g., Daniel Cadieux) get excellent results with the Canon 100-400 zoom. It has IS and is more or less within your budget.

[Jamie Douglas]

Not yet Eby, I have been trying to find a used one to save a few bucks.

[Mike Vanecek]

You should consider also Sigma 50-500 which is for example sharper then Sigma 150-500. But at Sigma a lot depends also from semples.

Best!
Milan

I have been thinking about the Sigma 50-500 OS versus the 300/400 discussed above. Is it a reasonable option to get more reach than the other 2?

Thanks.

PS Does the 400 f4 DO IS come into play at all in this discussion?

[Jamie Douglas]

Hi Mike, Yes I did consider the 400mm DO but a little pricey and I am thinking the used 500mm market might open up next year after they release the new version so will postpone a big purchase until then. For now I think I have found a good 400mm F5.6 which I am discussing at the moment with the owner.

Jamie

[Jamie Douglas]

Bought the 400mm F5.6 from our very own BPNer Dave Leroy, thanks Dave.

Thanks for all the advice folks. First impressions are good and I'll get some images posted soon.

Jamie

[steve farmer]

I use a 50D with the sigma 150-500mm all the images on my website were taken with it www.freewebs.com/madaboutnature


Steve.

[Marina Scarr]

The 300L F4 was my first telephoto lens. It is a sharp and fast lens and I continue to use for much of my birds in flight photography. Coupled with extension tubes, it is also a good lens for macro. I have also used the 400L but find the 300 F4 faster even with a 1.4 TC which will allow you for better opportunities in lower light conditions.

Good luck with your decision.

Marina

[Jamie Douglas]

An example from today.

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?ai...50570641630962

This was taken using a 7D
Tv( Shutter Speed ) 1/320
Av( Aperture Value ) 5.6
Exposure Compensation +1
ISO Speed 2000
AF Mode AI Servo AF
Tripod