My turn for Birds In Space photos – a Black Shouldered Kite.
Hello,
We were on a family outing when my wife spotted this lovely creature hovering over a paddock. The bird kept changing position; first conjunct with the Sun then in opposition, making metering a real challenge. Anyhow, I did my best and here are the results. Canon 40D with Canon 400mm F5.6 lens.
Thanks Alex, Matt & Tony. The Kite hovered in a relatively stationary position for long periods of time so I had time to drag out the tripod and gimbal head to grab these shots. We stayed and watched for a good 5 to 10 minutes but in that time, he/she didn’t manage to find lunch.
I had to be careful not to let the Sun encroach into the field as I was following the bird’s movements.
I have been reading up on all the canon lens reviews inparticular the 400 F5.6 your using Dennis.
They have a huge following and are great value lens.
I was ponding between the Sigma 50-500, Canon 400mm L and the 100-400 L with IS.
I have decided to get the 100-400 L only for flexibility even though it's not as sharp as the 400 L, I think I will get more use out of it carrying hand held with the IS.
I purchased the 400mm prime specifically for bird photography and in the couple of months I have used it, mostly it has been too short! A 500mm would have been better!
It was a tough choice between the flexibility of the 100-400mm and the 400mm prime but when I reviewed how I have used my 70-200mm zoom, I noticed that 99% of the photos were taken at the 200mm setting, so I used this to help me decide on the 400mm prime.
I saw a 100-400mm zoom at the Qld Astrofest and it looked bigger and heavier compared to the 400mm prime – I haven’t checked the specs, this was just a visual impression.
I figured that when shooting birds in flight, IS may not be as important given that the 100-400 does have IS.
All my recent bird in flight shots were taken using a tripod and Jobu Design Gimbal head. I’m not to sure about using the 100-400mm as a walk about, hand held lens? I suspect it would be quite heavy and require superb hand holding technique to get the best out of it?
When is the coffee table book coming out Dennis?
Oh my goodness these are awesome !
Quote:
Originally Posted by Striker
I have been reading up on all the canon lens reviews inparticular the 400 F5.6 your using Dennis.
They have a huge following and are great value lens.
I was ponding between the Sigma 50-500, Canon 400mm L and the 100-400 L with IS.
I have decided to get the 100-400 L only for flexibility even though it's not as sharp as the 400 L, I think I will get more use out of it carrying hand held with the IS.
Another alternative would be to get the Canon 2x TC for your 70-200mm f/2.8.
This will give you 140-400mm at f/5.6.
If I was too use the lens for bird photography the choice would have been easy the 400 prime but I want a lot more flexibility then a 400 prime so the zoom was a better option, I dont only want to image birds.
Andrew I did think about the 2 x but many say it degrades the image and you lose focus, the 1.4x is better but then thats hardly worth while.
The 1.4x maybe an option with the 100-400mm.
The weight I think is similar to what I have the 70-200 2.8 and find that no problem.
The 100-400 just covers a lot of basis for me so if that means it will get more use then it's definetly the better way to gor for me, any L prime you would think would have to be superior.
I am taking a lot of what you guys are telling me onboard and always do my homework.
Andrew I did think about the 2 x but many say it degrades the image and you lose focus, the 1.4x is better but then thats hardly worth while.
You won't loose AFocus with your 70-200mm f2.8 if it's the IS model, only the non IS model looses AF.
Image quality with the 2x TC will degrade but not to a critical point IMO, I'd prefer it over the cost of the 100-400mm.
As you say, the 1.4x is not worth it in this situation.
Your own personal shooting requirements will drive your final decision and if the 100mm to 400mm flexibility is important, then it makes sense to get the zoom.
In my case, I knew that I would be using it almost exclusively at the 400mm end of the scale. My only concerns were what would I be “throwing away” in terms of flexibility and IS?
After much deliberation, I figured that as I would be using the 400mm mostly, the 100mm flexibility wasn’t too important. Also, my bird in flight photos are taken in bright, sunny conditions, tripod mounted so IS wasn’t high up on the must have list, it was more of a nice to have for those dark days and stationary birds.
i have seen the 100-400 being used with a 1.4 TC and it works well... however a sigma "bigma" might be the go instead. 50-500mm give also of fleibility. i have held one (not used) and while they are quite hefty they are compact at the 50mm end of the scale so can probably be lugged around quite easily. the down side is similar to adding a 1.4 tc to a 400 f5.6, it is pretty slow at f6.3 but cameras will still AF well at 6.3
oh, this is about dennis's pics! sorry mate
these are great! shooting hawks, falcons, etc is hard cause that are high in the sky so the only BG you get is blue sky usually. well done mate
fantastic! I am saving for the sigma 120-400 HSM OS at the moment... almost there
Wow Dennis, they're all fantastic, but I like number 1 the best.
I'll have to try for the eagle that hangs around our place on the weekends. ( the neighbours let their chooks out to free range on the weekends)
Wow Dennis, they're all fantastic, but I like number 1 the best.
I'll have to try for the eagle that hangs around our place on the weekends. ( the neighbours let their chooks out to free range on the weekends)
Hmm, now that sounds like an interesting and novel method of attracting these predators! LOL!
