CANON IS TELE LENSES GUIDE

[mny]

I actively shooting birds in Malaysia which size is varies from small

to large. I am planning to invest in Canon IS Tele lense for a combi

with Eos30. I 've read about IS 500mm and 600mm in this forum but it

will cost me a fortune.

 

I need an opinion on IS 400mm f2.8 to be attached with 1.4x and 2x

canon TC to achieve 560mm at f4, 800mm at f5.6 and 1120mm at f8?.

According to my calculation, these range would be better as compared

to 500mm or 600mm attached with both TC. My main concern is the cost

and on the other end I cannot sacrifice the ability to cover long

range of focus cause any closer than 10 meters will disturb the

subjects. Please give a fair and detail opinion on both 400mm and

500mm as I will definately need it most.

 

Thanks, mny

[daniel_bergmann1]

<p>I have not used Canon IS teles so I 'm no expert. But I've read

much about them and have years of experience with Canon

lenses, including a long white barrel that a

"not-really-into-photography" friend of mine refers to as the travel

toilet (due to the large lens hood). But here I am. Sitting up in

Iceland in mid-January, which means dark, cold and right now, a

storm. This really makes me content to be working at my home

office right now. The wind is blowing hard outside but our

houses are built to withstand a storm from hell, in conjunction

with a 9.5 earthquake and a couple of volcanic eruptions, all at

the same time. Now back on track.</p><p>Why 400/2.8? Of

course it is a great lens, but it's <b>heavy</b>. When you are

talking 1120mm f8 that is with both TC's attached. Will that not

reduce the quality, even with IS? If you are concerned about cost

then be aware that the 400 is closer in cost to the 600, the 500

being the cheapest of the lot and lighter (at 3.8 kg if I remember

correctly). I saw an excellent review on the 500 by Fritz

Pölking. I stumbled on it from a link here at the nature

section submitted by Hans Martens (if my worn memory is not

letting me down). You will find it by doing a search, I am to lazy to

do it for you.</p>Now back to the programming (and the

Guinness, which really helps to make it through those long,

hard, dark winters here up at 66 degrees north).</p>

[mny]

Thanks Daniel, it is unexpectable to me at this time on the 400mm cost as you said. I already all over this photo.net forum for 500mm and 600mm specs. But the 400mm is the least I could compare before decide to invest in 500mm. In Malaysia the only time that stop me from hunting the birds is from NOV to JAN rain season. I am preparing for FEB to come until full OCT circle to finish with. If 400mm is costing me that much then I would get the 500mm.

 

Is there any other thing that I missed?

 

Thanks a lot.

MNY

[daniel_bergmann1]

Yes, Eos30. Is that some consumer model? Does it respond

quickly enouh for birds? If you are willing to invest loads of

money in a lens, then consider getting a body that will give you

the most out of your lens's speed. EOS 3, or an EOS 5 if money

is tight.

[robert_p._boner]

If your main interest is birds, you can't have too much focal length. I started with 400mm and was dissatisfied so I went to 500mm. I currently use 600mm and sometimes wish for more. If your choice is between 400 and 500, I recommend the 500. It is also easier to carry.

[mny]

Well I can't really be serious in this habit isn't it. I am aiming for a EOS30 and 400mm or 500mm IS for serious birding. I mean Business but as it is still in initial stage and I am new to EOS system perhaps the 30 can be use to start with. I do not for sure know exactly the handling of EOS30 but reading and compare it with other series seems that it is good enough at 3 fps, fasters eye control focus in EOS family and can be attached with 50 L series Lenses. I would invest on Super tele as I will not get a subtitute to this cute lense as the body has.

 

I am currently using a combi of F80 and Sigma 170-500mm. If have got what I want in learning about tele handling but I need a fast lense and not so slow body to progress further. Anyway the 30 can be a back up after I be able to get EOS3. The only concern is about the quality of the image from these tele. Reading the discussion before on 500mm and 600mm and the price that I could pay for 400mm f2.8, it is better though to get the 500mm together with the TCs. I am going to need the TC/s at most of the time.

 

Thanks,

mny

[bob_royse]

I'm just curious why you're considering the 400/f2.8. It's roughly the same price, size and weight as the 600/f4. If you're willing to pay the money and deal with the weight, why not just get the 600mm? The 600mm IS with the 2x makes an excellent 1200mm that's easy to use and extremely sharp, by the way.

[clivecc]

I do a lot of birds and believe me you will always be wishing for more focal length no matter what lens you have. I have the 600mm IS and it is, I believe, the best for birds you can get out there for the price. Obviously if you were super rich, super strong and had a pickup bed to mount it on the 1200mm 5.6 is probably better.

 

With a 2x TC I still get very sharp images at incredibly low shutter speeds. I have shot down to 1/15 sec @1200mm on a tripod with a lot of success!!!! When using Velvia this is a major bonus.

 

The next best is the 500mm IS giving you 1000mmm with the 2x. But I think if you do birds a lot you would always be wishing for the 600mm if you bought the 500mm. So my advise is save a bit longer and get the best equipment for the job.

 

If you want to pay a bit less and sacrifice the features of IS (TRUST ME THEY'RE WORTH IT!!!)then the old 600mm is still a brilliant lens for birds. Comparing the old and new 600mm side by side I believe the IS to have the edge in optics with a 2x TC. With the 1.4 TC and bare lens you will hardly see the difference.

 

I believe the 400mm is a comprimise for birds unless you can get very close to your subject.

 

Happy hunting

 

Clive

[gregdowning]

I have owned the 400 2.8 for a while now and I am selling it to buy a 600 IS. If you shoot alot of birds the 600 is the one to go with. You will probably want to use the 1.4 converter most of the time getting a very sharp 840 f5.6. You can get 800 5.6 with the 400 and the 2x but it will not be as sharp as the 600 with the 1.4. Yes you can stack converters (1.4 and 2x) with the 25mm tube in between and get 1160mm f8 with the 400 2.8 but you lose autofocus. With the 600 and just the 2x you get 1200mm f8 but it still autofocuses with the EOS 3 and the EOS 1V and is alot sharper. The 400 2.8 is a very versatile lens but not the best if you are mostly shooting birds.

[bob_royse]

I added a review of the Canon 600 f4 IS for bird photography to my website at

http://www.geocities.com/roysephotos/600IS.html

 

Most photo.net regulars already know what my opinions on the lens are and you'll find no surprises there. At least I didn't supply any place for people to post their disagreements there :)