A longer lens of a 1.4 TC? Bogen Tripods?

[d_weissman]

I have a 10D, 24-85mm and the 70-200 4L, 420EX flash. I am very

happy with this setup, it was a retirement gift to myself! My

question is.....on a limited budget I want a little more length for

those times I'm outdoors hiking, lots of hawks, owls and critters.

The 200 is great but sometimes I would like just a little more.

I was thinking of either a 300mm, not very over the top thought, I

have $400 budget. Would a Canon 1.4 TC be a good solution? Maybe a

Sigma or Tamron zoom like the 200-400MM tamron. I am not a

professional, just like to take and share my photos with friends.

They love my work. I have been handling cameras for 50 years and

have taught photography in high school 30 years, What I did learn was

to ask questions.

Also...I need a new tripod, does anyone have a Bogen 3205GN3 with a

3030G head? Looks perfect to me but would like any observations from

you out there.

[anthony_m1]

D., <BS>I use Bogen tp and Bogen heads. I dont use the 3205g tripod, but I am familiar with it and it is very nice and has some great options. I do use the 3030 and just picked up the GRIP ACTION BALL HEAD / Cat. No: 322RC2. Since the pistol grip, I havent used the 3030. The 3030 is a great supplement. I find it great panoramics since you can swivel on a consistent plane. The ball head is a little harder to accomplish that task. The ball head is far easier to use and much more versitile. I have found the ball head to be far easier to use shooting nature v. the 3030. The 3030 has a limitted amount of movement like say 70-90 degrees. The ball head will move in a heartbeat and the pistol grip is dead solid and quick to adjust. <P>If your shooting recreationally, I wouldnt spend an arm and a leg for expensive glass. I still use a 70-300mm sigma tele-zoom. Here is a shot recently captured from this lens (no teleconverter, hand held, shot at 250th second at 300mm) <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=007Hnk&photo_id=2105722&photo_sel_index=0">example of a cheap lens</a>. The results I have gotten from the combo sigma zoom and the 1.4x was less than acceptable. To get a good canon 1.4x or 2x you will have to spend the money but its worth every penny. My 1.4x is manufactured by Tokina or Tamron, and I havent used it enough to really comment. <P>You obviously are not new to the world of photography, but I hope this advice helps and have fun with your new 10D, it will open a new world for you.

[mark u]

$400 is a tough budget when looking for 300mm plus solutions. Since you already have the 70-200, the TC is certainly one way to go and works well. The Sigma 70-300 f/4-5.6 APO Macro Super II mentioned above is a cheaper solution that offers probably the sharpest optics available at 300mm without going over budget on new glass and is also great for closeups from 3-5ft at up to half life size or 4/5ths on a 10D (although a used 100-300 f/5.6 L offers excellent sharpness too for around $300). I'd avoid the Tamron 200-400, which is a disappointing lens. If you want to go a bit longer, then probably you should look at a Sigma 400 f/5.6 prime or 135-400 f/4-5.6 zoom second hand - but be sure to check that they are chipped to work with your 10D.

[harman_bajwa]

"<i> I have a 10D, 24-85mm and the 70-200 4L</i> ... and ... <i>Would a Canon 1.4 TC be a good solution</i>"

<p>

 

I remember searching for similar question before in this forum:

<br>

 

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=006chB">http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=006chB</a>

 

<br>

 

Of course, the real question would be whether even 280mm (200 + 1.4x) would be enough ?

<p>

 

- Harman

[harman_bajwa]

Also, forgot to mention that with a 10D you have an "apparent" focal length of 1.6 times due to the smaller sensor. So the 280 would now behave more like a 448 mm.

 

 

- Harman

[catchlight]

<p>Welcome to the world of retirement, with nearly unlimited time for photography and other pursuits.<p>

It may be beyond your budget, but <a href="http://www.mkwphotography.com">Matthew Whitley, a very skilled bird photographer</a>, recommends the <a href="http://www.mkwphotography.com/Canon100400.htm">EF 100-400mm L IS</a> for a light, hand-holdable wildlife lens. He has some useful information and many superb images on his site.<p>

http://www.mkwphotography.com<p>

The EF 300mm f4L with a 1.4X TC would be a cheaper alternative, but would need to be used on a tripod.

[mark u]

For $400? Tell me where I can get one!

[harman_bajwa]

Make that two !!!!

 

- Harman

[catchlight]

<p>Note the "it may be beyond your budget . . . " proviso in my previous post to Mr. Weissmann.<p>

Matthew Whitley and other expert bird guys feel that "bird photography begins at 400mm", which obviously is going to cost more than $400.<p>

When I retired in 2000, I dipped into my retirement savings to buy the photo gear I needed, because I know there's no guarantee as to how long I'll be fit and mobile enough for nature photography, or even around at all. (A friend who was also 62 died two weeks ago).<p>

If well cared for, top quality lenses like an EF 100-400mm IS can be resold years later for at least 75% of their purchase price, so guys like Mr. Weissmann and me are in effect just "renting" that superb piece of glass for a few years to take advantage of our last chance to enjoy it.<p>

I'm not trying to be morbid, just realistic. I hope we're all going strong at 90, but unfortunately none of us are writing the script.

[harman_bajwa]

Oh OK, I get it. When you said "EF 300mm f4L with a 1.4X TC would be a cheaper alternative" you were really comparing it with the 100-400 L IS and not the $300 budget.

 

Anyways, the prospects did seem to make my coffee intake have more effect than usual :)

 

- Harman