Long Range L Choices
- Thread starter Wilmark
- Start date
- Status
I have been in south africa with the 300 2.8 IS 1 and 2xIII and changed the camera from 50d to 5dII as needed, together with a 70-200 4 IS and some more stuff.
This was a good choice of equipment, because it is still hand-holdable and transportable. I had to wear all this equipment with tripod on my back, and i couldn't imagine to wear more than one big white. Yes sometimes more reach would have been better, and yes with the 2x i couldn't manage to get BiF because AF is to slow.
But transportability is everything, what's the use of a 400 2.8 which gets stolen in the hotel, or what helps the best stuff if you couldn't get to your spot with it? So you must find your compromise and for sure you will know the best compromise when you are back from the trip and know whats opportunities you had.
and one more tip: i would not take a long lens without IS, so often you have no time for the tripod or no possibility for it if you can not leave the car for example. 960mm FF equivalent are very unforgiving even with IS. There the new generation long lenses with the newer IS would be much better than the previous generation.
This was a good choice of equipment, because it is still hand-holdable and transportable. I had to wear all this equipment with tripod on my back, and i couldn't imagine to wear more than one big white. Yes sometimes more reach would have been better, and yes with the 2x i couldn't manage to get BiF because AF is to slow.
But transportability is everything, what's the use of a 400 2.8 which gets stolen in the hotel, or what helps the best stuff if you couldn't get to your spot with it? So you must find your compromise and for sure you will know the best compromise when you are back from the trip and know whats opportunities you had.
and one more tip: i would not take a long lens without IS, so often you have no time for the tripod or no possibility for it if you can not leave the car for example. 960mm FF equivalent are very unforgiving even with IS. There the new generation long lenses with the newer IS would be much better than the previous generation.
Upvote
0
I am an amateur so I am not sure if I can offer much of an advise. So with that in mind, I would prefer to have an EF500mm f/4L IS II.
It is one of the lightest white ones (the 300mm excluded...), almost as long as a 600mm and a little cheaper too.
I would add the 2 teleconverters (EX1.4X III and EF2.0X III) and ... a 1DMarkIV to take advantage of both the 1.3 crop factor and f/8 focusing.
It is one of the lightest white ones (the 300mm excluded...), almost as long as a 600mm and a little cheaper too.
I would add the 2 teleconverters (EX1.4X III and EF2.0X III) and ... a 1DMarkIV to take advantage of both the 1.3 crop factor and f/8 focusing.
Upvote
0
You could always go big... The Canon 1200mm comes to mind. You might need the hulk to help you lug your gear. (Just thought I would lighten it up for a sec. Sorry it's not constructive to the thread.... ) ;D ;D ;D
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-1200mm-f-5.6-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
;D ;D ;D
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-1200mm-f-5.6-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
;D ;D ;D
Upvote
0
canon816 said:
Strap that to your back in the wilderness of Africa. Wouldn't it be cool to do 400 yard macro work?
Upvote
0
Have found the reviews on BH to be pretty helpful esp for the 400 F2.8II. It appears for the 13 reviews there that there is quite decent performance with the 1.5x Telli and the 2x slows down the AF too much for BIF. So you are looking at about 560mm useful range with the 400-2.8II.
Upvote
0
@ Tron. You might be right. The 500 may still be good for sports and action. And good for birding as is and with a 1.4x telli.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
