August 01, 2014, 02:38:14 AM

Author Topic: Budget lens for birding ?  (Read 10190 times)

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2179
    • View Profile
Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« Reply #30 on: April 22, 2013, 11:09:59 AM »
Re the photo above with the 400 f5.6 and 7D, please don't think that photos taken with this setup are reflective of that picture, which is a very poor shot.

I'm confused - I'll be grateful if you'll explain why it's a poor shot as it looks great to me (I was just about to comment to that effect when I saw your post). I'm probably showing my ignorance but hey ho! if you don't ask you don't learn anything!
I think the brights could be brought down a little,  but it seems fine otherwise.   the  tail might be a little soft...  but I'm also looking at it on my phone. 
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100 f/2.8L->85mm f/1.8 USM->135L -> 8mm ->100L

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« Reply #30 on: April 22, 2013, 11:09:59 AM »

JPAZ

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 535
  • If only I knew what I was doing.....
    • View Profile
Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« Reply #31 on: April 22, 2013, 11:15:28 AM »
FWIW, I don't' think that is a "poor shot" per se.  I'd crop it a little tighter and different.  I do find the Bokeh to be a bit distracting, especially to the left of the bird.....kind of like streaks to me.  Might do something with a blur of that background in PP.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2013, 11:34:59 AM by JPAZ »
5d Mkiii; Eos-M; too many lenses; 430 EXii and a whole lot of stuff

vikram1988

  • Power Shot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« Reply #32 on: April 22, 2013, 11:53:20 AM »
thanks guys for all the replies . I'm gonna go with 100-400 . so whats the lowest price you've seen on them ? If i remember , last time during christmas time it was 1350 $'s ?

Mt Spokane Photography

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 8285
    • View Profile
Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« Reply #33 on: April 22, 2013, 12:29:35 PM »
thanks guys for all the replies . I'm gonna go with 100-400 . so whats the lowest price you've seen on them ? If i remember , last time during christmas time it was 1350 $'s ?

 
You won't get Christmas Pricing this time of the year.  The CR front page has a price search engine.  Buy using the link, and CR gets a few dollars to help pay the cost of running the site.
 
http://www.canonrumors.com/lenses/price-watch-zoom-lenses/
 
 

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« Reply #34 on: April 22, 2013, 01:47:25 PM »
Hey AlanF, I don't own the 300 f/4L (I only tried it for a short time), and apparent it's a good thing.  I guess we should all just sell our DSLR's and buy an SX50...you know, since it is superior to $8k worth of camera and lens!!

bwfishing

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 61
    • View Profile
Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« Reply #35 on: April 22, 2013, 03:22:40 PM »
You also may want to consider waiting for a sale on Canon's refurbished website

http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_282320_-1
 

The dust comment posted by: crasher8 is not a myth I had a copy with this issue as well. Some of the lenses also reported issues being soft. I hope you get a good one and enjoy it! I'm not posting to trying change your mind as I believe you posted that you wanted the 100-400 and already enjoy the 55-250 zoom. I have the 550d (t2i) body as well and my 2 cents is the 550d (t2i) is not the greatest for wildlife (low fps). The 7D would be a upgrade to consider as the af and fps are more better suited for wildlife.

Good Luck and Happy Shooting! 
« Last Edit: April 22, 2013, 03:30:52 PM by bwfishing »

Eimajm

  • Power Shot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 48
    • View Profile
Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« Reply #36 on: April 22, 2013, 03:26:36 PM »
Re the photo above with the 400 f5.6 and 7D, please don't think that photos taken with this setup are reflective of that picture, which is a very poor shot.


I'm confused - I'll be grateful if you'll explain why it's a poor shot as it looks great to me (I was just about to comment to that effect when I saw your post). I'm probably showing my ignorance but hey ho! if you don't ask you don't learn anything!


It's lacks sharpness, suffers from from camera shake and has been heavily cropped showing a great amount of noise, I also expect it has been brightened up to bring up detail in the shadows exaggerating noise too. The has resulted in poor image quality. It does not reflect the photos you can get with this setup at that iso. Here are a couple of photos at various iso so you see the the appearance of noise. Notice the barn owl which is shot at 3200 iso which is not that noiser than the image I commented on.

ISO 1000

Sedge Warbler (Acrocephalus schoenobaenus) perched, singing. by Jamie Medford, on Flickr

ISO 200

Herring Gull (Larus Argentatus) diving. by Jamie Medford, on Flickr

ISO 3200

Barn Owl (Tyto alba) by Jamie Medford, on Flickr




canon rumors FORUM

Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« Reply #36 on: April 22, 2013, 03:26:36 PM »

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2179
    • View Profile
Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« Reply #37 on: April 22, 2013, 09:03:24 PM »
thanks guys for all the replies . I'm gonna go with 100-400 . so whats the lowest price you've seen on them ? If i remember , last time during christmas time it was 1350 $'s ?


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?sid=used-9139179&is=USE&Q=&A=details&O=productlist&sku=800944750

1200 for a refurb at B&H. 
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100 f/2.8L->85mm f/1.8 USM->135L -> 8mm ->100L

AlanF

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 984
    • View Profile
Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« Reply #38 on: April 23, 2013, 03:59:41 AM »
Re the photo above with the 400 f5.6 and 7D, please don't think that photos taken with this setup are reflective of that picture, which is a very poor shot.

I'm confused - I'll be grateful if you'll explain why it's a poor shot as it looks great to me (I was just about to comment to that effect when I saw your post). I'm probably showing my ignorance but hey ho! if you don't ask you don't learn anything!

It's lacks sharpness, suffers from from camera shake and has been heavily cropped showing a great amount of noise, I also expect it has been brightened up to bring up detail in the shadows exaggerating noise too. The has resulted in poor image quality. It does not reflect the photos you can get with this setup at that iso. Here are a couple of photos at various iso so you see the the appearance of noise. Notice the barn owl which is shot at 3200 iso which is not that noiser than the image I commented on.


Jamie, they are truly excellent, especially considering the iso. Here is a crop to emphasize what you wrote about the noise etc. All the fine structure of the plumage has been lost, so only the coarse details remain with horrendous noise. It was also taken at f/10, which spoiled what bokeh there could have been.
5D III, 70D, Powershot SX50, 300/2.8 II, 1.4xTC III, 2xTC III, 70-200/4 IS, 24-105, 15-85, Sigma 10-20, Tamron 150-600.

rumorzmonger

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 118
    • View Profile
Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« Reply #39 on: April 23, 2013, 09:51:04 AM »
The push me pull me is a dust hog. Birding is field photography ergo I find the 400 prime a better selection.

The "dust hog" or "dust pump" nonsense is just that - a silly internet myth propagated by people who have never actually used the lens.

If the OP is planning to buy a newer lens, he shouldn't worry about getting a "soft copy" - the early problems with quality control were cleaned up about 10 or 12 years ago (this lens has been in production since 1998).

Nikon D800E, Nikon D7100, Fuji XE-1, Nikon FE2, Olympus OM-4Ti, OM-1 MD

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2179
    • View Profile
Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« Reply #40 on: April 23, 2013, 09:09:25 PM »
The push me pull me is a dust hog. Birding is field photography ergo I find the 400 prime a better selection.

The "dust hog" or "dust pump" nonsense is just that - a silly internet myth propagated by people who have never actually used the lens.

If the OP is planning to buy a newer lens, he shouldn't worry about getting a "soft copy" - the early problems with quality control were cleaned up about 10 or 12 years ago (this lens has been in production since 1998).

Why would people lie?  I heard that the 100-400mm and the 17-55 were dust collectors.  I don't have any experience with them, but I do stay away from them because of the rumors.  Of course I have spent a ton of cash on other lenses... so it's not like I'm missing out.
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100 f/2.8L->85mm f/1.8 USM->135L -> 8mm ->100L

steven kessel

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 185
    • View Profile
Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« Reply #41 on: April 23, 2013, 09:44:09 PM »
I've had the 100-400 for over a year and have taken over 10,000 photos with it.  I love the lens, it is sharp, easy to use, very light and portable for its reach, and produces great images for me.  I shoot exclusively hand held and  use it mostly for bird photography.  With IS I can get useable images down to about 1/100.  My only regret is that it doesn't work with the 1.4 or 2 teleconverter. 

Krob78

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1281
  • When in Doubt, Press the Shutter...
    • View Profile
Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« Reply #42 on: April 23, 2013, 10:19:56 PM »
The push me pull me is a dust hog. Birding is field photography ergo I find the 400 prime a better selection.

The "dust hog" or "dust pump" nonsense is just that - a silly internet myth propagated by people who have never actually used the lens.

If the OP is planning to buy a newer lens, he shouldn't worry about getting a "soft copy" - the early problems with quality control were cleaned up about 10 or 12 years ago (this lens has been in production since 1998).

Why would people lie?  I heard that the 100-400mm and the 17-55 were dust collectors.  I don't have any experience with them, but I do stay away from them because of the rumors.  Of course I have spent a ton of cash on other lenses... so it's not like I'm missing out.
I've had my 100-400L for over 2.5 years and had my 17-55mm f/2.8 for over 2 years and have no dust in them at all... I use them all the time, especially the 100-400L.  I used it today in fact. 

That being said, I do keep good B&H filters on them at all times.   Not only is my 100-400 crazy sharp and dust free, I guess it's overdue for regular servicing maintenance!  Maybe I should send it in for a check up and clean up!
« Last Edit: April 23, 2013, 10:22:11 PM by Krob78 »
Ken

5D Mark III, 100-400mm L, EF 70-200mm f/2.8 II, EF 24-105mm L, EF 17-40mm L, EF 85mm f/1.8 USM,  Canon 580EX II, Canon 430EX II, Promaster TC 1.7x

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« Reply #42 on: April 23, 2013, 10:19:56 PM »

Random Orbits

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1289
    • View Profile
Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« Reply #43 on: April 23, 2013, 10:25:55 PM »
The push me pull me is a dust hog. Birding is field photography ergo I find the 400 prime a better selection.

The "dust hog" or "dust pump" nonsense is just that - a silly internet myth propagated by people who have never actually used the lens.

If the OP is planning to buy a newer lens, he shouldn't worry about getting a "soft copy" - the early problems with quality control were cleaned up about 10 or 12 years ago (this lens has been in production since 1998).

Why would people lie?  I heard that the 100-400mm and the 17-55 were dust collectors.  I don't have any experience with them, but I do stay away from them because of the rumors.  Of course I have spent a ton of cash on other lenses... so it's not like I'm missing out.

So you might have missed out on using great lenses because of those rumors.  The rumors did their job! 

I had the 17-55 for about five years, and it gathered a few specks of dust that I could see, but nothing that would qualify as a "dust pump."  None of the lenses are air tight, so dust can get in any lens.  If you have questions about a particular lens, it's more accurate to get informed opinions from those that have used the item.  The internet has many opinions and a lot of them are wrong or not representative of the collective user base.

Krob78

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1281
  • When in Doubt, Press the Shutter...
    • View Profile
Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« Reply #44 on: April 23, 2013, 10:36:04 PM »
The push me pull me is a dust hog. Birding is field photography ergo I find the 400 prime a better selection.

The "dust hog" or "dust pump" nonsense is just that - a silly internet myth propagated by people who have never actually used the lens.

If the OP is planning to buy a newer lens, he shouldn't worry about getting a "soft copy" - the early problems with quality control were cleaned up about 10 or 12 years ago (this lens has been in production since 1998).

Why would people lie?  I heard that the 100-400mm and the 17-55 were dust collectors.  I don't have any experience with them, but I do stay away from them because of the rumors.  Of course I have spent a ton of cash on other lenses... so it's not like I'm missing out.

So you might have missed out on using great lenses because of those rumors.  The rumors did their job! 

I had the 17-55 for about five years, and it gathered a few specks of dust that I could see, but nothing that would qualify as a "dust pump."  None of the lenses are air tight, so dust can get in any lens.  If you have questions about a particular lens, it's more accurate to get informed opinions from those that have used the item.  The internet has many opinions and a lot of them are wrong or not representative of the collective user base.
+10  Additonally, we have no idea if these people  reporting these issues have a clue as how to properly switch a lens out with another one or even just to take a lens off to put the gear up.

My dad taught me almost 30 years ago with my AE1 and F-1 that the most crucial thing I did with his cameras was putting on and/or taking off lenses.  He drilled it into me and I've always taken great care and maximized my speed and efficiency at switching lenses in the field.  I guard the openings like they are my last dollar!  I check everything twice before I start a change and then do it very safely and very quickly.  I've never had dust issues.. just haven't. 

My uncle on the other hand, very good photographer yet all his images are filled with dust particles, with lenses not "known" for being dust pumps!
Ken

5D Mark III, 100-400mm L, EF 70-200mm f/2.8 II, EF 24-105mm L, EF 17-40mm L, EF 85mm f/1.8 USM,  Canon 580EX II, Canon 430EX II, Promaster TC 1.7x

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Budget lens for birding ?
« Reply #44 on: April 23, 2013, 10:36:04 PM »