Canon lens help

[koputai]

Folks,
Looking to buy a new tele lens for the 350D as my wife is going on a safari in Africa in a
couple of weeks. Of course, I want to get one that is reasonably good for astro work as well.
So, I have a few questions I'm hoping some of you more familiar with this stuff can help me with.

As I understand it, L-series is best, then DO, then standard. True?
I suspect that prime would be better than zoom, but zoom would be better for general use.
Does the IS system help or hinder when doing astrophoto's? If so, can it be turned off?
What is the longest hand-holdable focal length? Is 200 a reasonable limit, or is 300 hand-holdable?
All answers gratefully received!

Thanks,
Jason.

[dpastern]

300 is hand holdable, although it won't be perfectly sharp, even with IS.

You are correct in the L/DO/normal lens quality heirachy.

If you're doing astro imaging, you should have your lens/camera mounted on a sturdy tripod, etc, so IS should be turned off when doing this imho.

I'd usually recommend a stand alone telephone, say the 300mm f4 IS L series, but a zoom is also handy...maybe the 100-400 might be OK, but I don't think it's IS enabled from memory, and it's a big and heavy lens, probably too much to realistically hand hold imho.

Also - 300mm isn't very long to be honest. You really want to be working with a minimum focal length of 500mm, but that's big moolah...

Dave

[[1ponders]]

Why the need for long lenses Jason? Don't the safari folk get you right up close and personal?

Or a cordless works for me, ;) but for photography in Africa I'm not sure whether Australian models would be compatible with their network. :P

:lol: Sorry couldn't help myself.

[dpastern]

rofl!!!! I mean telephoto you stirrer :P hahaha, good one!

Dave

[Octane]

Hi Jason,

David is right. A lot of the safari/wilderness photography that I've seen on the web, the photographer has been using the behemoth 500mm f/4L IS USM. Leon got one recently. Maybe he'll loan you it. :P

By the way, did you download DPP that I put up for you? Did it all work fine?

Regards,
Humayun

[[1ponders]]

:camera: :D

[koputai]

Hi Humayun,
Yes, I've downloaded it, and hope to try it tonight. Will let you know how I go. Many Thanks.

Cheers,
Jason.

[Sharnbrook]

I would strongly recommend the 100-400L IS Canon lens for Africa. There are many times when 400 is essential for really strong impact shots. I have such a lens, and I have been to Africa with it. It's heavy, and somewhat cumbersome, but it's an excellent lens.

As a rule of thumb, the shutter speed should be at least the reciprocal of the focal length being used. 300mm, 1/300sec. However, remember that with a 350D, there is a 1.6x factor, so 300mm fl is the equivalent of 480mm, so 1/500sec would be the slowest practical use for hand held. (That said, using the IS gives 1-2 stops extra, so you would probably still get by with 1/300 sec)

Yes, you can switch IS off. With my 100-400IS lens, it is recommended to switch IS off when using it on a tripod, or on B settings. It comes complete with a soft case, and a lens hood, as well as a tripod attachment, which is very useful for carrying the camera around when the lens is attached, as it is at the point of balance, and I find it very easy to hook my fingers around it for convenient and comfortable carrying.

For astro use, the focal length can be securely set by tightening the zoom ring, so you don't get any creep. I haven't tried to use it for serious Astro use, so I cannot comment on actual results.

If you do decide to get the lens, (it isn't cheap), I would strongly recommend getting a 12 and/or a 16mm extension ring, which is very useful for taking "close-ups" of small birds and the like.

If your wife is going to S. Africa or Kenya, in particular, she should be VERY careful about carrying the lens and camera around in full view when in large towns, or anywhere where there are crowds. In game parks or country areas, it's generally OK, but warn her not to carry a camera around her neck when walking alone in the street or on the beach, as that is asking for trouble. Make sure it is covered by her travel insurance or household insurance for all risks, and take a note of the serial number. Sorry to be alarmist, but trust me, it's a fact of life.

I hope she has a wonderful time, and if you have any questions, feel free to PM me.

[dugnsuz]

On Safari...
:camera::tasdevil:

[dpastern]

hey that looks like me (the avatar on the right that's jumping up and down)!

Dave

[Waxing_Gibbous]

Having been the previous owner of Leon's 500L, I can testify that its a go-er for safaris - except....you need a VERY sturdy mount, a Kirk or similar that can be attached almost anywhere on a vehicle. Its definately not hand-holdable for more than a few seconds. These mounts typically run $300-$1000 depending on features. The 100-400 is IS enabled but is not very sharp compared to other L glass. I've seen better results with a 70-200 f2.8 IS and teleconverter. Though thats getting a bit pricey.
A good compromise is the 300 f4L IS or the 400 f5.6L IS and shooting in RAW to capture more detail. You can then enlarge the image without much loss of detail.
The downside is that the autofocus is a bit dodgy at this apeture and you need good light and/or a slow moving target. There are quite a few on the second-hand market so it shouldn't break the bank.
Hope this helps. Have a great trip and watch out for the Hippos.
PJH

[dugnsuz]

Perhaps you should let the lads know your budget Jason!?
These lens recommendations are starting to cost as much as a holiday!!
I think I would be looking at a very good (L) zoom to cope with lots of situations and a monopod as minimum for stability.
That said, these guys above have much more experience with photography than I do.
Perhaps I'm being optimistic but a balance between focal length and portability/usability would be the go...70-200mm f4L IS??
Just get them to move the Land Rover a bit closer!!!
Doug

[koputai]

Good point Doug. Ideally I'd love to get away with it for under a grand, but I'm willing to spend up around 2k if I need to.

Cheers,
Jason.

[dpastern]

mmm, a few options. My personal advice - go the 300mm f4 and the 1.4x teleconvertor. The main issue you're going to see is that this will push the minimum aperture to f5.6, meaning less light for the AF sensors, so AF will be slower and less accurate. Been there, done that. Don't even think of the 2x TC, cos, unless you're using a 1 series body, you'll lose AF past f5.6. Good ole Canon crippling its camera bodies deliberately. Notice Nikon doesn't do this - pretty much all of the bodies from the consumer to pro use the same AF modules.

Dave

[Colsmith]

Very strongly agree with Mike!

I was lucky enough to particpate in a photo safari in Tanzania a few years ago and bought a 100-400 specifically for that trip.

Here is a link to a write up by the organiser http://www.luminous-landscape.com/locations/tanzania.shtml - I'm 5th from the left in the group photo. Lots of good info about what to expect and useful equipment!

As to hand-holding, most safaris use "pop-top" 4WD vehicles, in which case you can rest the lens on a small bean bag on the edge of the roof.

As noted in previous posts a zoom is not as sharp as a prime lens, and for astro work the 100-400 may be a little slow (I'm still experimenting with this).

Whatever lens you end up with I wish you every success with it!

Colin

[koputai]

Thanks for all the help and advise guys.
I'd really like to lash out and get some fancy glass, but seeing as my wife isn't used to SLR's
and changing lenses all the time, I'm thinking something with a reasonable zoom range is best.
Also, being a woman (like most wives) she wouldn't enjoy lugging something big or heavy around.
From my investigations, it seems that the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM is a good compromise.
Good points:
Range of zoom
f4.0 is ok
Has IS
Has Ultra-Low Dispersion elements like L-series.

It seems this is essentially an L-series but with a lesser focus motor.

If no one tells my I'm amazingly wrong, I'm hoping to head out this weekend and get one.

Cheers,
Jason.

[dpastern]

It'll probably be too short imho. I don't think you can use the TC with them either, from memory, Canon's TCs only work with their L series lenses. Being a zoom will cause issues as well. Even then, trying to use a TC with the lens will push it beyond f5.6 and you'll lose AF. There's no easy solution to this I'm afraid, everything is a compromise. Hopefully the Safari jeeps get close enough to the wild animals for your wife to get some decent shots.

Dave

[koputai]

Don't forget it'll be on a 350D, so effective focal length is 480mm.

Cheers,
Jason.

[RB]

Jason don't forget, your not actually getting extra reach because it's a crop body, it just means your imaging a smaller portion of the imaging circle compared to 35mm FF camera.

[Octane]

Jason,

I had one of those when I first got a 300D. I can tell you that lens is nothing like an L-series. It is not sharp and has poor contrast. It's also very slow to focus.

Also, it will only be f/4 at the 70mm range.

I would say, though, that for a beginner or learner, it is fine. If you don't intend to create large prints then it should be OK.

The problem with all this photography stuff is that quality is expensive and keeps us all broke. :(

Regards,
Humayun

[dpastern]

Amen that someone else understands how it works! I've been saying this for a long while now, it's amazing how few people actually comprehend it.

Dave

[koputai]

Yep, I understand that, maybe I should have said 'field of view'.

From what I've been reading, the 70-200 f2.8 L-series is not very well regarded, whereas the f4 version is very highly regarded, some say it's the best tele-zoom available. What about this beastie, with the 1.4x teleconverter?

God, this is all too hard!!!

Cheers,
Jason.

[RB]

The 70-200 f/2.8 is very highly regarded.
The f/4 has a slight edge over it since it's not a 2.8.
I prefer the f/2.8 since I can use the extra ap for astro work.

I was going to suggest the 70-200 f4 + 1.4x if your budget can stretch.

See this link for prices:
http://www.d-d-photographics.com.au/canonlenses.htm

[dugnsuz]

Stand strong Sir Jason!!!

The canon 70-200mm L range all get a good rap.
I picked the f4L (non IS version) as I primarily wanted an astro lens.
It has performed very well in both it's daytime and astro roles - very happy with it. And, it's relatively cheap in comparison with the rest of the L lenses.
I also used it with the 1.4x extender - once again, very nice. No CA or aberrations noticeable with this combination. I used the 70-200mm f4L +1.4x ext for much of the stuff on my photobucket page - in fact the Eta HaRGB which got a honourable mention in the 2009 Malins was taken with this combo.
I recently bought a 300mm f4L to extend my range + extender to 420mm. I found this combo nowhere near as nice as the 70-200+ext - the stars showed a bit of CA and astigmatism.

So, I can recommend the 70-200mm f4L/1.4x Extender combination from personal experience. Both are within your 2k top limit. $1292 for both on ebay!

Good Luck
Doug

[dpastern]

Whoah there lad. The 70-200 f2.8 L (non IS) is reputed as one of Canon's best lenses, along with the 300mm f2.8 IS. The IS version is just as sharp but with IS. Of course, wide open, it will lose some edge definition, that's pretty much unavoidable in any lens, but stopped down to f8 or so and it's *really* sharp. The same goes for any lens imho - f8 is generally the sweetspot. You'll find that the f2.8 lens is just as sharp at f4 as the f4 version is, what you're paying for is the extra stop, which can and does come in handy. I have an original 70-200 f2.8 non IS and it's my fave lens (after my macro lens that is). I find the f4 version just too light and not good enough build wise in my hands, but that's me. I prefer a 1 series body over a consumer body for exactly the same reasons - soliditity.

I really would be considering the 300mm f4 + 1.4TC. I think that will be the best and most versatile combination. I don't think anything shorter than 300mm for Safari will be of much use, at least animal wise. For general shooting, it would be good to at least have a nifty 50. Remember, zooms make you lazy. Learn to use your feet and you'll get better with composition and subject spotting imho.

Dave

[dugnsuz]

Agreed Dave - you must have found one of the very few bad reviews of that lens Jason.

Got to add to my last post (Dave jogged my memory)...the 300 f4L + extender was absolutely great for daytime stuff (no observable IQ degradation), it was only on the stars that the aberrations become more pronounced.

[dpastern]

I think that's a lot of lenses probably Doug. The Canon 300mm f2.8 seems to be very good quality for astro imaging, flat across the field, or as flat as. One day I'll get that lens, but for now, the 500mm f4 is more of a priority over the next few years - at least for me, since my primary interests with that lens would be motorsports and birding.

Dave

[koputai]

Aaaarrgghhh!!! This choice is not getting any easier, but thanks for all the info and opinions.

I think I still like the zoom over a prime lens, just makes things more versatile. I, nor the missus, will ever be a pro photographer, we just want to take good happy snaps, rather than "See that black dot, that's a rhino!" type of stuff.

Here's two reviews of the 70-200 f2.8, both say it has less resolution and more chromatic aberation than the f4 version, at the same aperture.
http://photozone.de/canon-eos/199-canon-ef-70-200mm-f28-usm-l-is-test-report--review

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-2.8-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

And here's the f4
http://photozone.de/canon-eos/196-canon-ef-70-200mm-f4-usm-l-is-test-report--review

The 2.8 appears to have a lot more chromatic abberation across the board. The f4 also has better IS than the f2.8

Cheers,
Jason.

[koputai]

OK, so if I may just throw this in to the mix......

Is it worth getting an IS lens over a non-IS lens?

Thanks,
Jason.

[dpastern]

Personally, I'd say no. But many here swear by IS. It's far better to use a monopod or tripod than IS. You'll get sharper shots every single time. IS is a temporary attempt to fix hand holding issues, it's not a cure all. Many users today do not practice good photography - they do not hold the body or lens correctly, their footwork is bad, and they do not learn how to control their breathing to reduce shake. I've taken a few shots with my Sigma 150mm at 1/15 second that look OK, and don't look unsharp unless you look at them 100% in Photoshop. That's significantly under what is recommended for hand holding. And that lens doesn't have IS. I have a bit of an advantage here, since I'm primarily a macro shooter, and that means very steady hands as a rule.

Dave

[koputai]

Well guys, I just took posession of a nice new Canon 70-200 f4L IS USM, plus a 1.4x Canon Extender.
I decided on the f4 for a few reasons:
1) Every review I found says the f4 is superior in both resolution and chromatic aberation than the f2.8 at equal apertures.
2) The f4 has 3rd Generation IS, whereas the f2.8 has 2nd Gen.
3) The f4 is half the weight (not that that really matters)
4) I could get the f4 plus the 1.4x Extender for $400 less than the f2.8 alone.
5) Doug's images !!

Thanks again for all your advice, no doubt I'll be asking again about other focal lengths.......

Cheers,
Jason.

[Octane]

Jason,

Congratulations. Great lens.

Though, for the layman, the sharpness between the f/2.8L and f/4L would only really be noticeable upon pixel peeping, or if you stand with your nose 1 cm away from a print on the wall. Just my opinion.

Regards,
Humayun

[dpastern]

Congrats Jason - I'm sure both you and your wife will enjoy it, it is an excellent lens. I also agree with H about the difference in sharpness. Digital is great, but too many people pixel peep these days.

Dave

[koputai]

Hehehehe, I'd never heard of 'pixel peeping' before. I like the analogy of the hypocondriac with his own MRI machine. Yes, you're probably right about the 2.8, but the $800 saved can now go towards other bits.

Cheers,
Jason.

[dugnsuz]

Nice one Jason - I'm sure you won't be dissapointed with the lens.
Post some of the safari pics soon please!!
Doug