Canon lens help...

[scott.keller]

Hello, after reviewing a lot of images in the forums I have come to realize that most people using a 500mm f/4 lens, which is unfortunately out of my price ranges. As as result, I am looking to buy a a new lens and was wondering what would be best for taking photographs of Birds. The options below are ones that are in my price range ($1000-$2000), if anyone has any other suggestion they would be most appreciated.

- canon 300mm f/4 + 2x teleconverter
- canon 70-200mm f/4 + 2x teleconverter
- canon 70-300mm f.4-5.6
- canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6

[Craig Clute]

Scott,

Keep in mind, unless using a 1 series camera body, AF will become inoperative over f5.6.

My primary set-up is currently the 300 f4 + 1.4x TC. A 2x TC will fit, however you would lose AF (ie. f8).

Similar in nature is the 70-200 f4. A 1.4x TC will work (f5.6). A 2x TC will lose AF (f8). If you went for the f2.8, then a 2x TC would work (f5.6).

The 100-400 is also a very popular option, however you will not be able to use even the 1.4x TC.

I have been very happy with the 300 f4, however am currently lusting for more length.

Hope this helps.

Craig

[Kaustubh Deshpande]

Scott, good points by Craig. Which camera is very important...and also which birds?

I'd rule out 75-300 as it does not take a TC and 300mm is too short for birds. The IQ will not be as good as the other lenses you mentioned.

I'd also rule out the 70-200f/4. Even if you are using a pro body and getting AF, it will be a f/8 lens with the 2x. You are going to be at long end of the zoom with 2XTC...you will have to stop down for good IQ. Think of it as a 400 f/9 or f/10 lens. That will severly limit your ability to get nice clean blurred BG( unless you aim to shoot birds on feeders that are very close with a distant BG). In the field, my guess is that combo will be frustrating.

300 f/4 IS + 1.4x is a good combo...you get IS, you get good IQ, some versatility. With a 2X, my guess is you'll have to stop down for best IQ. Think of that combo as a 600 f/9 lens. Tripod will be needed in most situations. I used to have the non-IS version but never used it with the 2X.

100-400 is another good option...pros and cons are similar to above...big advantage being the zoom capability. Lots of great photos on the Avian forum with that lens.

Any reason you do not consider the 400 f5.6L? Other than lack of IS, for bird photography, it is a very good lens. I am pretty happy with mine.....but I shoot in good light and like to keep SS high to freeze poses. If you intend to shoot in low light without tripod, then I'd go with the 300 or 100-400. If you intend to do flight photography, then the 400 prime has the most speedy AF.

One thing you've to realise is that 400mm is also not long enough for birds. It works well for large birds....but not for the small birds in the field. If you intend to shoot songbirds with 400mm, then you will have to use calls, hide, feeders, set up perches( ideally a combination of all) to get the songbirds within 15-20 feet. In the field, I find it very hard to get that close to one that is at eye-level without disturbing the bird.

Canon gives you many options to get good IQ at 400mm, but to get good IQ at 500mm+, one has to dig deep into the pockets :-) there is no short cut.

[Don Lacy]

Hi Scott I have used and love the 300 f/4 for years highly recommend it with the 1.4TC and ad a 25mm Ext tube and you have very versatile combo as it also makes a good Macro lens for the larger subjects.

[David Stephens]

I'd suggest the 400/5.6L. Second choice woutd be the 300/f4L IS with the 1.4x TC; however, I think that the AF will be faster with the 400/f5.6L, but the 300 can give the advantage of IS.

I used the 400/f5.6L before I moved up to the 500/f4L IS. The difference is huge, but so is the price. :eek:

[Chris Brennan]

I will second the suggestion of the 300mm f4 IS with the 1.4x.

Although my long lens used to be a 400mm f4 DO, I was very fortunate several months ago to be able to trade up to a 500 f4. But I still wanted to have something in the 400-range so I bought a 400 f5.6 for those occasions when using the 500 just wouldn't be feasible. I had the 400 for a weekend, and returned in Monday and exchanged it for a 300mm f4 for use with and without a 1.4x. My reason was that the minimum focusing distance with the 400 was abysmal at about 13', and many of my subjects are smaller and closer. The 300+1.4x is a marvelous combination: very sharp, very fast AF even with the 1.4, and a MFD of less than 5'!

[scott.keller]

Thanks everyone for the very helpful replies, I think I have it narrowed down to 3 lenses. I plan on renting the 100-400mm, 300mm + 1.4 TC, and the 400mm.

[Michael_Loizou]

I would go with the 100-400. Had them all and found the 100-400 to be the most versatile and very sharp too.

The 300mm and 400mm are now gone and I kept the 100-400.