pretty little birds, what setup?

[martti]

There are lots of shy little birds in the nearby swamp forest.
I have been trying to get pictures of them with my 50-500 Sigma but the focus is missing systematically.
I've tried various configurations of the AF AI-Servo and Single shot, various configurations of one spot and clusters. The camera can stay on the bird for a while, then a branch moves and it locks there and then loses all interest to the birds.

I do understand that this is a part of the business and I did not really expect walking in the forest and coming out with NG-quality pictures after my three or four first attempts. Today I am going to try with the EF 100-400 L Dust Pump.

Now, this is getting to be something serious and I'll probably need a bit more reach.
Been weighing the Tamron 150-600 against EF 300 f/4.0 with a 2x Extender II.
I would like to get an opinion before I buy. Ken Rockwell 8) said that the Tamron was a lot better than he thought. He knows. Bob Atkins compared the Tamron to the Nikon zoom and found that it was a lot better picture wise. He showed some sharp birds (Tamron) and some blurry ones (Nikon).

What would be the opinions here?

 

[unfocused]

What body do you have? If you can adjust tracking sensitivity that might help.

 

[Khufu]

I shoot the aging 400mm f/5.6l, it has no IS but great sharpness and illumination to the edges and corners which, to me, makes it a great tool for composing pleasing images in which a subject can exist off-centre, amongst context, with beautifully rendered, smooth out-of-focus areas... which isn't really what you're asking for, I don't think, but honestly, what I've seen of these slower 600mm lenses at ~f/6.3 or whatever, I'm not really impressed with the 'pop', or lack of, for whatever physics-based reasons (aperture/DoF? Lens element sizes/reach and effect on flatness/perspective?) and haven't seen anything produced by them that I'd be thrilled to put my name to... I wonder if I'd be happier shooting a shorter lens on a high-pixel-density m4/3 or smaller sensor (and I'm someone who actively champions FF shooting!)

I have the 300mm f/l IS and it's possibly one of my favourite video lenses, due to size/reach/IS, but the rendering is busier and more distracting than the 400mm prime. It shoots very close, almost like a long-macro, which is amazing, but it's just not a favourite of mine for still images... It's also not as sharp and degrades rapidly with extenders in my experience. I've tried shooting it 2x as a 600mm and find the 400mm results much better! I've heard the older 300mm f/4l non-IS model shoots sharper images than the IS model but doesn't focus as closely, though I've no experience with it myself. Also, it's an old lens with old IS, maybe due an update if it's not just being phased out...

I'm not sure where you're at in regards to the various learning curves of photography technique, camera features etc... But I really recommend back-button AF then being able to snap away for as long as your subject is hanging around for without having to worry about your AF going mental...
I shoot birds often and despite having the apparently fantastic AF system of the 5D3, more often than not I simply use single focus points with back button focusing before mildly reframing and shooting!

I'm waffling, I'm not sure if I really answered any questions but, whatever... I highly recommend the 400mm prime if you've got the available light for no IS. Where exactly are you shooting btw, if it's not a major secret?!

Ps. The Sigma 600mm lenses both appeal more to me than the Tamron, just from looking around online. Are you familiar with them? They also do other things with ~300mm primes, zooms, extenders etc at sub-Canon prices. I'm possibly just complicating things, sorry

 

[martti]

What body do you have? If you can adjust tracking sensitivity that might help.

5D3...will try, thanks

m

 

[martti]

I shoot the aging 400mm f/5.6l, it has no IS but great sharpness and illumination to the edges and corners which, to me, makes it a great tool for composing pleasing images in which a subject can exist off-centre, amongst context, with beautifully rendered, smooth out-of-focus areas... which isn't really what you're asking for, I don't think, but honestly, what I've seen of these slower 600mm lenses at ~f/6.3 or whatever, I'm not really impressed with the 'pop', or lack of, for whatever physics-based reasons (aperture/DoF? Lens element sizes/reach and effect on flatness/perspective?) and haven't seen anything produced by them that I'd be thrilled to put my name to... I wonder if I'd be happier shooting a shorter lens on a high-pixel-density m4/3 or smaller sensor (and I'm someone who actively champions FF shooting!)

I have the 300mm f/l IS and it's possibly one of my favourite video lenses, due to size/reach/IS, but the rendering is busier and more distracting than the 400mm prime. It shoots very close, almost like a long-macro, which is amazing, but it's just not a favourite of mine for still images... It's also not as sharp and degrades rapidly with extenders in my experience. I've tried shooting it 2x as a 600mm and find the 400mm results much better! I've heard the older 300mm f/4l non-IS model shoots sharper images than the IS model but doesn't focus as closely, though I've no experience with it myself. Also, it's an old lens with old IS, maybe due an update if it's not just being phased out...

I'm not sure where you're at in regards to the various learning curves of photography technique, camera features etc... But I really recommend back-button AF then being able to snap away for as long as your subject is hanging around for without having to worry about your AF going mental...
I shoot birds often and despite having the apparently fantastic AF system of the 5D3, more often than not I simply use single focus points with back button focusing before mildly reframing and shooting!

I'm waffling, I'm not sure if I really answered any questions but, whatever... I highly recommend the 400mm prime if you've got the available light for no IS. Where exactly are you shooting btw, if it's not a major secret?!

Ps. The Sigma 600mm lenses both appeal more to me than the Tamron, just from looking around online. Are you familiar with them? They also do other things with ~300mm primes, zooms, extenders etc at sub-Canon prices. I'm possibly just complicating things, sorry

Thank you, khufu.
I have the back-button focusing since a couple of years now.
Sunday it was these little guys; I know the picture is not 'sharp' that's why I am asking for advice:
Sigma 50-500 on a monopod (against a tree trunk) f/6.3 1/250 at 1600 ISO

 

[martti]

The lens question has been discussed on this forum already.
Tamron beats the prime + extender -combinations, is as sharp as the 100-400 up to 400mm and costs a lot less.

 

[AlanF]

The lens question has been discussed on this forum already.
Tamron beats the prime + extender -combinations, is as sharp as the 100-400 up to 400mm and costs a lot less.

I used to own the Tamron and had it for a while at the same time as the 100-400mm II. I have compared the Canon 100-400mm II directly with the Tamron and both Sigma 150-600s on FF and crop. The 100-400 II outperformed the Tamron, and was overall sharper at 560mm and f/8 than the Tamron at f/8 - the Tamron is fine in the centre but gets rapidly soft. The TDP has comparisons of the pair, and objektivtest.se has measured the MTFs of the 100-400 II ± 1.4xTC and the Tamron, showing that the Canon is sharper (these are real MTF measurements and not the Imatest ones used on other sites, apart from Lensrentals who also measure real MTFs). In practice, all the lenses are more than adequate, but I prefer the size, weight, AF, IS and optical performance of the 100-400mm II, especially on the 7DII.

By all accounts, the Tamron at 600mm will beat the 300/4 + 2xTC hands down.

 

[martti]

The lens question has been discussed on this forum already.
Tamron beats the prime + extender -combinations, is as sharp as the 100-400 up to 400mm and costs a lot less.

I used to own the Tamron and had it for a while at the same time as the 100-400mm II. I have compared the Canon 100-400mm II directly with the Tamron and both Sigma 150-600s on FF and crop. The 100-400 II outperformed the Tamron, and was overall sharper at 560mm and f/8 than the Tamron at f/8 - the Tamron is fine in the centre but gets rapidly soft. The TDP has comparisons of the pair, and objektivtest.se has measured the MTFs of the 100-400 II ± 1.4xTC and the Tamron, showing that the Canon is sharper (these are real MTF measurements and not the Imatest ones used on other sites, apart from Lensrentals who also measure real MTFs). In practice, all the lenses are more than adequate, but I prefer the size, weight, AF, IS and optical performance of the 100-400mm II, especially on the 7DII.

By all accounts, the Tamron at 600mm will beat the 300/4 + 2xTC hands down.

Thank you, Alain.
I ordered the Tamron, eBay 850 dollars and VAT to pay once it arrives, total about 1000 dollars brand new.
Since I already have the 100-400 old version and I am shooting with a 5D3, the new version did not enter into this contest.

 

[TheJock]

Thank you, Alain.
I ordered the Tamron, eBay 850 dollars and VAT to pay once it arrives, total about 1000 dollars brand new.
Since I already have the 100-400 old version and I am shooting with a 5D3, the new version did not enter into this contest.

I also own the 5D3 and 1st version of the 100-400L, so I will be watching this thread as it unfolds to see what options are out there. I already owned a Sigma 150-500 and I wasn't really impressed with it, but my 100-400 + 1.4TC is about the same, and much better without the TC.

 

[bholliman]

The lens question has been discussed on this forum already.
Tamron beats the prime + extender -combinations, is as sharp as the 100-400 up to 400mm and costs a lot less.

I used to own the Tamron and had it for a while at the same time as the 100-400mm II. I have compared the Canon 100-400mm II directly with the Tamron and both Sigma 150-600s on FF and crop. The 100-400 II outperformed the Tamron, and was overall sharper at 560mm and f/8 than the Tamron at f/8 - the Tamron is fine in the centre but gets rapidly soft. The TDP has comparisons of the pair, and objektivtest.se has measured the MTFs of the 100-400 II ± 1.4xTC and the Tamron, showing that the Canon is sharper (these are real MTF measurements and not the Imatest ones used on other sites, apart from Lensrentals who also measure real MTFs). In practice, all the lenses are more than adequate, but I prefer the size, weight, AF, IS and optical performance of the 100-400mm II, especially on the 7DII.

By all accounts, the Tamron at 600mm will beat the 300/4 + 2xTC hands down.

Thank you, Alain.
I ordered the Tamron, eBay 850 dollars and VAT to pay once it arrives, total about 1000 dollars brand new.
Since I already have the 100-400 old version and I am shooting with a 5D3, the new version did not enter into this contest.

Have you considered selling the Tamron and 100-400 mk1 to help fund a 100-400 mk II?

 

[kaswindell]

Sigma 50-500 on a monopod (against a tree trunk) f/6.3 1/250 at 1600 ISO

Perhaps this is a silly question, but have you tried bumping up the ISO to 6400 or so in order to use a faster shutter speed? The 5D mk3 can take the higher ISO pretty well. I have struggled to get good pictures of little birds too with just a 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II and a TC 2x III (the longest combo I have at this point in time). At 1/250 you may not be fast enough to freeze tiny movements caused by wind or the natural twitch of the little birds.

 

[martti]

Selling a used 100-400 old version is pretty much impossible for any money at all now that there is the II in the market and shops are dumping the I at ridiculous prices. I have not got the Tamron yet, it has only been appointed a tracking numbe at Japan Post six hours ago. My decision was based on the price, the reach and the stated picture quality which –according to multiple comparisons– is near equal at 400mm.

Obviously to fight motion blur the only way is to crank up the ISO and add noise reduction or wait for a sunny day.
When the sky all of a sudden clouds up, you lose 4 clicks of light. It makes a difference.

 

[TexPhoto]

I am not a bird photographer, but i can tell you some awesome bird photos are taken by photographer sitting in their living rooms: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEWcVisQTPs

 

[wsmith96]

If you go the 300 with the 2x converter, you'll need a body that can focus at f8. Make sure you have the latest firmware for your 5D to enable that.

Sorry, corrected for 2x

 

[AlanF]

If you go the 300 with the 3x converter, you'll need a body that can focus at f8. Make sure you have the latest firmware for your 5D to enable that.

What 3x converter is available that will allow AF at f/8?

 

[wsmith96]

If you go the 300 with the 3x converter, you'll need a body that can focus at f8. Make sure you have the latest firmware for your 5D to enable that.

What 3x converter is available that will allow AF at f/8?

I meant 2x - corrected above

 

[RickWagoner]

It will take some time to get used to the Tamron and learn its way, unlike oem lenses like canon brand lenses every third party lenses has some goofy quirks about them on different bodies. For example lots of 7d2 owners need to micro adjust the tammy but on the 70D the servo tracking is a bit slow, i am not sure what the quirk s on the 5d3 body. Join the tamron 150-600 fb group and they will help you get setup and going fast with the lens.

The good news is the Tammy loves full frame bodies and works well on the 5D3 compared to crop stuff.

Anything at 150-400 can be shot beautifully wide open with fast autofocus and tracking, you may find your old 100-400 not getting much use anymore because the Tammy is that good. After 400 and to 600mm it will get soft wide open but if you step to f8 it is easily a great optic. The Tammy like every lens likes to be closer to the subject than further away and you will see a big difference it plays but if you shoot a bird for example super far out then don't go to 600mm, take the lens back to 400mm and shoot the bird so it will be a sharper crop later on. Scaling back to 400mm wide open also is the way to shoot bif with it and turning on the focus limiter helps your autofocus speed amazingly. Give it a good few months of shooting before you judge the lens, once you get it down you will love it no question. No need to play with extenders or anything with it, just walk and shoot.

 

[martti]

Thank you, RickWagoner.
Microadjustment I know how to do. That's not a problem.
I am aware that it takes a while to get used to a new range of focal length. Once the lens arrives, I will take a lot of shots of the ducks in the park just to get used to the lens. The thing about recropping at 400mm I did not thinks about!
Nice to point me to the FB page, appreciated.

 

[AlanF]

It will take some time to get used to the Tamron and learn its way, unlike oem lenses like canon brand lenses every third party lenses has some goofy quirks about them on different bodies. For example lots of 7d2 owners need to micro adjust the tammy but on the 70D the servo tracking is a bit slow, i am not sure what the quirk s on the 5d3 body. Join the tamron 150-600 fb group and they will help you get setup and going fast with the lens.

The good news is the Tammy loves full frame bodies and works well on the 5D3 compared to crop stuff.

Anything at 150-400 can be shot beautifully wide open with fast autofocus and tracking, you may find your old 100-400 not getting much use anymore because the Tammy is that good. After 400 and to 600mm it will get soft wide open but if you step to f8 it is easily a great optic. The Tammy like every lens likes to be closer to the subject than further away and you will see a big difference it plays but if you shoot a bird for example super far out then don't go to 600mm, take the lens back to 400mm and shoot the bird so it will be a sharper crop later on. Scaling back to 400mm wide open also is the way to shoot bif with it and turning on the focus limiter helps your autofocus speed amazingly. Give it a good few months of shooting before you judge the lens, once you get it down you will love it no question. No need to play with extenders or anything with it, just walk and shoot.

It seems that you saying that the Tammy 150-600mm is best used between 150-400mm for all purposes - from BIF to birds far away? If so, wouldn't the 100-400mm be preferable?

 

[RickWagoner]

It will take some time to get used to the Tamron and learn its way, unlike oem lenses like canon brand lenses every third party lenses has some goofy quirks about them on different bodies. For example lots of 7d2 owners need to micro adjust the tammy but on the 70D the servo tracking is a bit slow, i am not sure what the quirk s on the 5d3 body. Join the tamron 150-600 fb group and they will help you get setup and going fast with the lens.

The good news is the Tammy loves full frame bodies and works well on the 5D3 compared to crop stuff.

Anything at 150-400 can be shot beautifully wide open with fast autofocus and tracking, you may find your old 100-400 not getting much use anymore because the Tammy is that good. After 400 and to 600mm it will get soft wide open but if you step to f8 it is easily a great optic. The Tammy like every lens likes to be closer to the subject than further away and you will see a big difference it plays but if you shoot a bird for example super far out then don't go to 600mm, take the lens back to 400mm and shoot the bird so it will be a sharper crop later on. Scaling back to 400mm wide open also is the way to shoot bif with it and turning on the focus limiter helps your autofocus speed amazingly. Give it a good few months of shooting before you judge the lens, once you get it down you will love it no question. No need to play with extenders or anything with it, just walk and shoot.

It seems that you saying that the Tammy 150-600mm is best used between 150-400mm for all purposes - from BIF to birds far away? If so, wouldn't the 100-400mm be preferable?

IMO no, actually they're two completely different lenses for birds. If a person has a main body, say a big full frame with a long prime lens on a gimbal tripod mount for far out but has a secondary body on a strap for bif like a 7D2 then the 100-400 is the perfect lens on the second body. Lots of birders with money will shoot Eagles on the locks like this actually. Perfect match up here not only for the 100-400 but for the 7d2 also. Reality sets in for most of us (myself esp) is we can not have two setups, so for people like me you need both those setups in one kit. This is where the 150-600mm lenses comes in because you have a powerful optic wide open till 400mm but you still have the reach and not a bad optic at f8 600mm. When i say draw the lens back to 400mm for birds far out i am talking about birds extremely far out...like super far..so far out the picture is not going to be a print quality no matter what. If you step back on these birds you can get a bit sharper crop and if the subject or action is that nice it may be worth it. I once caught a Bald Eagle dive bombing an Osprey that was so far out even at that moment i had no clue what was going on till i cropped the image later. I also use a 70D which suffers a slower servo tracking with the Tammy, so for bif i have found it tracks better if you scale the focal length back and have it wide open. If you are not miles away from the bird the Tammy is still awesome at f8 600mm and for a birder there is no replacement for pure reach on a lens. I have rented the new 100-400mm and tried a few different older versions long before. I was not that impressed with the optic of the new lens vs the old for the price, both are great lenses but the difference is no huge. I never liked adding extenders in any mix because it is a poor mans way of getting more bang for the buck. Back in the day when Canon ruled the birding SLR market with the 400 5.6 or 100-400 for entry level pricing adding an extender was a must but now today with three great 150-600s on the market there is no point is buying a lens that is double the price and adding more into the setup by extending it for more money (i am talking about buying the 100-400II). The new 100-400II is also not much lighter or more compact than the Tammy 600, but the build and mfd is a different game of course. So to wrap it up the Tammy is great 150-600mm but being a third party it will have its quirks on different bodies. For me on the 70D it is Servo Tracking (which is not bad but it is not lock on lightning speed) so there ways to work it to get the most out of it for the body you use depending on the quirk. Once you learn those you have a 600mm reaching light weight hand holdable $1000 all around great lens and this is simply not comparable for a person without the budget of a two body setup i talked about before. The 100-400 are great lenses for sure, even the older dust pumper is awesome. For a birder it is more niche on a second body than an all in one these days. I like the 100-400II but if i where going to add an extender or crop later i would try the 70-300L also, to me this lens has some weird magical unicorn micro detail about it that few lenses i ever used have..just my opinion.