Great Capture of the turkey, LCD. Those are hard to get, especially sharp images.
Just got the 100-400L myself, yesterday and am heading out tomorrow for some test
images. I just jumped the Sony ship and so far love my 7D and 40D, but am looking
forward to using some quality glass.
Next purchase after paying off the new (to me) 400L zoom is the 24-105L. I shoot
a lot of wildlife here in the Rockies, but get in some landscape as well.

Thanks for the posted images, at least I know what the lens is capable of.

Hi again all, many thanks for the advice on lenses, here's what i've managed to get. All nikon d300 with sigma 150-500. Many more at bertiegregoryphotography.com, comments welcome.

Originally Posted by Harryb I've used a sigma TC and was much happier when I switched to a Nikon.

Why is that Harry? I have both right now, but am sitting on the fence about use of the Canon for Tele. So, what is your experience?

The reason I am fence sitting is, the 5DMk2 seems to resolve so much better when cropped.

thanks,

Originally Posted by angevin1 Why is that Harry? I have both right now, but am sitting on the fence about use of the Canon for Tele. So, what is your experience? The reason I am fence sitting is, the 5DMk2 seems to resolve so much better when cropped. thanks,

I just found the IQ to be better and the AF to be faster with the Nikon than the Sigma. I was shooting with a Nikon body and the Sigma 70-200 lens at the time.

Originally Posted by Harryb I just found the IQ to be better and the AF to be faster with the Nikon than the Sigma. I was shooting with a Nikon body and the Sigma 70-200 lens at the time.

Got it!

Not seen many thumbs up from the Sony guys (I cant be the only one)

Sony 70-400G - I have used this glass for everything from distance to 'macro look' and everything in between and love it, it has great colours fast AF and is on my a900 90% of the time. Few sample shots for you:

1/320, f/7.1, iso200, 300mm


1/25, f/7.1, iso200, 400mm handheld through glass


1/400, f/7.1, iso200, 400mm


1/250, f/5.6, iso200, 330mm


1/500, f/5.6, iso1000, 400mm no flash, handheld (excuse the blur at the bottom - edge of the fruit dish it was sat in)


.DAVID. in the corner waving the Sony flag ;)

My favorite lens for wildlife is the Canon 400mm 5.6L. It's easy to handle because the weight and is not as heavy as the IS version. Same for the price of this lens... ;)

Tripod is welcome but during a summer day with enough light not neccesarry.

Example photos:


1. Wild fox at Oostvaardersplassen.


2. Friendship Lions, Ouwehands Dierenpark in Rhenen.


3. Kingfisher bird on a stick, Oostvaardersplassen in The Netherlands.

So many great shots here from so many different pieces of equipment. Lemme ask for a tally here... zoom or prime lens' for wildlife? I am considering a 200-500mm 5.6 or a 300mm 2.8 (both manual lens). Any insight? I have used my 70-200mm 2.8 alone and with a 1.4 t.c. but feel i need a bit more reach and i don't care for the final product with the teleconverter. Lemme know, looking forward to hearing ur thoughts/suggestions.

Originally Posted by vegaguy (both manual lens)

What's a manual lens?

You didn't mention the brand, but all the 300 F2.8 lenses I know of are stunning, and would blow away any zoom lens at that focal length. That being said, 300mm is pretty short for most wildlife, especially birds. Although it would work for shooting in zoos, or say buffalo at Yellowstone that will let you get pretty close. Otherwise, you will be fooling around with TC's a lot, and then negating the point of that fast glass. But it is one way to go.

As for the 200-500, there are only two I know of. The Tamron AF 200-500mm f/5.0-6.3 which is so inexpensive that I doubt it's any good, or the Sigma 200-500 F2.8 which would be fanastic, but a bit pricey at $25K, and hard to hand hold. http://www.kenrockwell.com/sigma/200-500mm.htm

So maybe you could give a bit more information about exactly which lenses you're looking at, and what kind of wildlife interests you most.

Originally Posted by kdog What's a manual lens? You didn't mention the brand, but all the 300 F2.8 lenses I know of are stunning, and would blow away any zoom lens at that focal length. That being said, 300mm is pretty short for most wildlife, especially birds. Although it would work for shooting in zoos, or say buffalo at Yellowstone that will let you get pretty close. Otherwise, you will be fooling around with TC's a lot, and then negating the point of that fast glass. But it is one way to go. As for the 200-500, there are only two I know of. The Tamron AF 200-500mm f/5.0-6.3 which is so inexpensive that I doubt it's any good, or the Sigma 200-500 F2.8 which would be fanastic, but a bit pricey at $25K, and hard to hand hold. http://www.kenrockwell.com/sigma/200-500mm.htm So maybe you could give a bit more information about exactly which lenses you're looking at, and what kind of wildlife interests you most.

Ha! Whats' manual.?. My bad! It's some older Tamron Adaptall glass. Not in the market for $25k either. The 300mm is 2.8 and the 200-500mm is 5.6 all the way thru. How much more would a 1.4x and a 2x slow things down ya think? I have heard decent reviews on both.

p.s. Hawkers!?! Is that legal!?! :)

Originally Posted by mushy Anyone using the Canon 100-400 IS USM L ?? its possibly my next purchase so any comments positive or negative would be appreciated

I bought this lens before I went to Africa. I can see I need a lot more practice with it. I have trouble with exposure. Granted, I have not been in to photography very long, and have a lot to learn. I really like it, and can see there is great potential. Attached are some of my better shots this month. I also did quite a bit of research and this is the best quality lens for my budget. The next step up was also a leap in price. With more time, I think I would be able to recomend this lens with confidence.






There was no opportunities for a tripod with this big boy wanting to charge us.

I recently picked up a nikon 300 f4 for outside summer sports. I find it to be very good for my back yard birds.

I see that no one has reported on the Nikon 200-400 F/4 VR lens so far so I might as well have a go at it. I picked up a used 200-400 VR I lens late last year so here is my non-technical non-pixel peeking report.

Overall I like the lens a lot. It has very good IQ from 200- 300mm. Images obtained at the far end of its reach appear a tad softer to me. This not to say that the IQ at 400mm is not good just not as good as the images closer in. From 200-300mm its IQ is on par with the IQ of my 500mm f/4. The lens works very well when shot wide open.

The AF is fast and accurate and it does OK on flight captures. The lens is a heavy beast at 7.4 lbs but its 1 lb lighter than the 500mm f/4 and around 3 inches shorter. You can shoot with it handheld for a short period of time if you are into pain and discomfort. I have taken a few sequences with it handheld but I don't recommend it as a common practice.

The attached tripod foot from Nikon, to be kind, sucks. Its too short and there is a bit of wobble with it attached to a tripod. If you get a 200-400 be prepared to spend a few hundred more $ for a Kirk or Really Right Stuff foot.

The 200-400 works fine for me with the 1.4 TC. The IQ and AF are only marginally impacted. The IQ with the 1.7 TC is OK but the negative impact on AF speed is to much of a compromise for me. Thom Hogan reports that it works well with the new Nikon 2.0 E III TC but I haven't tried one on the 200-400 myself.

It has become my main lens due to the flexibility the 200-400 reach gives me. I still prefer the 500mm for bird captures but living in Florida where I can get reasonably close to my subjects the 500mm was overkill in too many instances.

Here are few captures with the 200-400

"Heron in Flight." This image was captured with a Nikon D90 camera and a Nikon 18-200 telephoto lens while visiting a friend in Middle River. I'm not able to afford a long lens which has taught me how to approach and observe from a close distance. I was following this guy along the bulkheads and watched as he cleaned his feathers. It was amazing to capture this magnificent bird in mid-flight. I'm happy with the point of focus, getting all of him in the frame, and being able to see a great amount of detail in the feathers!

I went through the pages, and I don't think I saw this one represented, so here goes...

I'm big and stupid. Big enough to lug this thing around, Stupid enough to pay that much for one lens .

I had a prior post on Olympus equipment and had a change over to Nikon. The reasons were future availability, and autofocus. The logical replacement fot the 300 f2.8 Zuiko was the 600 VR.

Its a big, heavy lens that demands support (I'm not THAT big to handhold the beast). I use both a gimbal head on a tripod and a monopod, depending on what I'm doing. Its fast to focus and keeps up with motion sequences...











Minimum focus distance is about 16 ft, and that impacts the ability to fill the frame with small birds. Becaues of that I use the TC-14 (for 850mm) and TC-17 (for 1000mm) teleconverters. The quality of the TC-14 images is very good, and ok on the TC-17 as long as your close to the subject.

D3s/600 VR/TC-14



Another



And the TC-17 (1000mm)



Another at 1000mm




x

Granted, this is a bit noisy, blown out whites, soft, etc etc. but hey ... it was shot about 100 YARDS away, using an old FD series 400mm, with a doubler, PLUS 2.0x digital zoom on a Sony NEX-7 ... OK, doing the math, thats about 1600mm ... and a little extreme, but some days it takes extreme, not to mention cheap. (Ran it thru Topaz Clean for a wee bit of "curly smooth".) This is scoping distance, and gives me a way to check bands on some of those high or distant nests.

I may live long enough for this lens to surface!

Just what I want/need....I think.

This is the first I've heard of it for some time now....so I thought I would share it.

I think it has the potential to be a great wildlife lens.

Originally Posted by Ric Grupe I may live long enough for this lens to surface! Just what I want/need....I think. This is the first I've heard of it for some time now....so I thought I would share it. I think it has the potential to be a great wildlife lens.

Where've ya been, Ric. This thing was announced almost two years ago. Certainly the ultimate safari lens. But, not sure about general wildlife, and certainly not birds. You'd be far better off for birds with a 500 or 600 F4, which you can then put a TC on and have way more reach than this and at the same aperture. Price will most likely be in the $10-12K range, so probably more of a special occasion rental for most of us.

When not doing macro, started off with a 40D + 400 /5.6 ...but no IS and no AF with a 1.4x. Eventually bit the bullet and bought a used 500 f4.

V. rarely use anything else these days (with 1Dm3 now) except when circumstances allow for the 'ol 40D with a 300 f4 (non IS) which allows me to get even lower / closer to water level because of smaller body form factor / lens dameter.

200 - 400 price is way out of my reach ... and not as useful (for me)

pp

Originally Posted by kdog Where've ya been, Ric. This thing was announced almost two years ago.

Hence:

I may live long enough for this lens to surface!