Need to get closer, on a budget

[mark_lapolt___new_haven__c]

I have a friend who is a Marine Biologist doing seal research for a

non-profit. She has a need to photograph seals in their modern

habitat (Southern New England commercial waterways), without

disturbing them. Which means being a good distance away. Primarily,

she uses the 75-300 f4-5.6 IS Zoom, with mixed to good results, but a

little more range would really help her out.

 

She was sold the canon 2.0 extender, which of course does not work

with her lens (I'm really mad @ B&H, they dropped the ball when they

sold it to her, should've asked what lenses she was using). So, she's

back at square one, how to get closer without breaking the bank?

(500mm f4L IS ~ $5000.00 and up, OUCH!)

 

Does Canon make an extender compatible with the 75-300 IS zoom?

Are there any third party compatible extenders that are good?

 

Any other suggestions?

 

Thanks in advance for all of your help,

[keith_van_hulle1]

No, B&H did nothing wrong. Caveat emptor. Five minutes research on PN (or several other places), would have netted the info NOT to buy the Canon for this lens. I would never expect any vendor to protect me from my personal responsibility to myself. However, the less expensive Kenko (not their"pro" model) should work just fine on this lens.

 

BUT. There is no such thing as closer on a budget. It just doesn't happen, especially if you want decent shots. With any TC on a consumer lens you're going to get marginal quality. That's WITH perfect technique on a tripod. Since she'll most likely rack it out to 300 where that lens is known to be soft already, with the TC compounding that, AND shooting at F11 (at least), not sure how well that'll work for her.

 

A better choice, in this case only, MIGHT be a 3rd-party long lens. You don't say what the budget is but, under the circumstances, not sure what else will get you somewhat long, somewhat cheaply (~$1,000) and still have some detail in the shots. Then again, for that money, she could buy a used 300/4 L and get passable shots with that and the Canon TC. Again, technique WILL make a difference here.

[mark_lapolt___new_haven__c]

Yes Keith, you're right, caveat emptor. My apologies for trying to blame B&H, they didn't do anything wrong, but let's say that perhaps they didn't do 'enough right' (All I'm going to say, this isn't the retailers forum).

 

The problem, and the reason for the IS lens in the first place, is where she's taking the pictures from. She's on a boat in Long Island Sound, and its harbours. A perfectly stable base to shoot from doesn't exist. (Not without expensive damped tripods, mounts, etc.) She's got good sea legs, and a natural handholding technique, and her photos at 300 aren't bad. With the Image Stabalizer turned on.

 

My concern with the third party long lens, is that she'll loose the IS. With an extender, she may loose autofocus (Not sure if the AF on an Elan 2 will work at f8-11). I need to find out what the center has given her for a budget. Anyone interested in becoming a Parton of the Norwalk Maritime Center? :)

 

Sorry. I realize now that I should have titled my question "How to do the impossible, cheaply" <G>

 

Thanks again for your help

[olivier_de_lame]

Hi Mark,

 

I do not understand why she did not send back the extender when she saw she cannot use it. Yes it is not a good practice to send back an article that is perfectly functionning, but it can be done if you find an accord with B&H.

I do not see any good lens for a little budget; there are some third party lenses for less than 500$ that go till 400mm (or till 500mm for 600$); it depends which quality you need: for WEB publication or for 10x15 cm (4x6 inches) even Vivitar could be sufficient. In any case only Canon has IS.

 

Sorry,

 

Regards,

 

Olivier.

[nelson cotrim]

Mark, bad news: I have the 75-300 USM (non IS) and sometimes I use a Vivitar 2x 7 elements Series 1 (non pro) TC. I have to stop down at least to f/11 (actually f/22 with 600mm) to get a sharp picture, otherwise the image will be terribly soft, even on a sturdy tripod, protected from the wind. So she will get pretty slow speeds, and probably blurry pictures anyway. I use the Elan II too with this combo, and the AF might work if there´s a lot of light (or it may not), but it will hunt a lot, and is useless for moving subjects - even if they are still and the camera is rocking on a boat.

 

What about a manual outfit? Get one fast long prime (much cheaper than an AF, if not german made :^), stack a 1.4x or 2x TC and find a cheap body to match it.

[mark_lapolt___new_haven__c]

Oliver, she's going to work with B&H to send the extender back, She just got it, and came to me over the weekend when she "Couldn't get the lens on." It's new, unused, and I don't foresee her having any problems getting B&H to take it back. Have you had any experience with the cheaper long lenses? We're only talking 4x6 prints to assist in census and tracking research, so enlarging isn't an issue. Maybe a monopod to help support the longer lens?

 

Nelson, that's what I was afraid of, f/22 on a hazy day on LI Sound doesn't make for fast shutter speeds. I was going to recommend a fast emulsion film maybe even pushing NPZ to 1600 or the Fuji Press 1600. Any other recommendations for fast film?

 

I'll pitch the idea of an alternate cheaper platform, but the Center has shied any from used photo gear in the past.

[carl smith]

B&H is primarily a professional's source for items such as that. They expect the buyer to know what they are doing. Canon and other sources will tell you clearly that the TC will not work on anything but certain (maybe all?) L lenses.

 

For the lens you have, I wouldn't suggest any teleconvertor. The cheapest Canon you could get would be a used 400mm 5.6 L probably to give you more reach. I don't know how much they go for but I don't believe it's much. On the other hand, you could look at third party lenses. Depending on which body you have, you could get a lens and have it work without any trouble. Sigma and others make a wide variety of long lenses. But they're usually slow and not great optically. Probably not a whole lot better than a 75-300 w/ TC.

[._kaa]

Given that it's only for printing 4x6 and the artistic qualities of a shot are not all that important, why don't you try a MIRROR telephoto.

 

Yes, they have a fixed aperture, and yes, they produce horrible bokeh, but they are very cheap (compared with other alternatives).

[citizensmith1664875108]

How about just excepting that 300 is as close as you can reasonably get and then buy a scanner and a version of photoshop to crop down with. Probably be no uglier than overworking a budget lens. I've had great success cropping and enlarging with photoshop.

 

Or, buy a D30 or D60 and enjoy that 1.6x multiplier that you get as a good thing. Now your 75-300 is a 120-480.

 

Or, lots of seal food, get them to swim closer. :)

[photobyalan.com]

Does she really need to BUY a lens? Unless she's going to be using the lens a lot, it would probably be much more economical to just rent a 500, 600 or 1200mm lens when she needs one. Renting long lenses is fairly common and not terribly expensive. A quick search turned up some prices around $60/day for a 600/4 EF lens. If she needs the lens every day for three months this probably wouldn't be the best option, but for shooting a couple times a month it would make a lot of sense.

[kevin_qu]

A consumber DC such as G2 ($540 from B&H) or Nikon 4500 ($600) plus a scope (she probably can use one for her work) can get her very close and produce good results.

[olivier_de_lame]

Hi Mark,

 

To answer your question, I do not have experience with third party lenses. However as quality is not a big issue, I would expect them to be good enough. I never really took photos (outside of snapshots) on a boat, so I am not sure a tripod will work as well as on earth. Here your 75-300 IS can be very effective.

 

Regards,

 

Olivier.

[mark_lapolt___new_haven__c]

Wow. Thanks again for all the great input and suggestions guys. I spoke to her last night and relayed all of your suggestions, and she's going to look for a place that rents the longer lenses for when she needs them. I'm concerned about the lack of the IS technology in the third party lenses (especially as focal length gets longer), and about the light reduction affecting autofocus when using the extender, so renting a lens seems to be an awesome alternative.

 

Does anyone know of an outfit in the Norwalk, CT area that rents equipment?

 

Thanks again for all of your help,

[colin_jones]

I went onto EBay and for $45 got a Tamron 1.4x extender.

 

Yes the quality isn't L class, you keep AF till about 110mm then zoom in and check focus.

 

420mm at usable aperture of f8. stop down to f11 and not bad.

 

Worth a thought for occasional use.

[theoldman]

How about a variation of "sea-anchors"? Take some heavy canvas, make a shallow-bowl-shaped (the larger the better) piece held open by something like fibreglass or wooden dowling, and secure both sides and ends with line sufficient to withstand the rolling of the boat: One (at least) on the starboard side, one on the port side; when either side goes down so does the anchor go deeper into the water picking up a full load and staying open. Then when the boat starts to roll to the other side the vertical resistance of lifting the "anchor" (or "bag") thru the water slows and minimizes the roll of the craft when it's not under power, just floating or riding the hook. The only thing you have to do is build it so it stays open, and sinks readily when that side goes down so the lifting lines don't get any slack, maybe even have a vertical support to make sure it sinks to the limits of it's securing-lines. This is a vertical variation on the fisherman's horizontal "sea anchor" which slows down the horizontal drift of a fishing boat without power. The heavier the boat, the larger the anchors have to be in order to provide inertia sufficient to help stabilize the natural roll caused by passing waves.