I was thinking about how cool it would be to have a 500mm prime, but I was caught wondering if it would ever put you too close to your subject. Has anyone ever slipped on their 500mm and then started tracking your subject only to find that it gets too close to you and you can no longer fit it in the frame??
I have a Bigma on my 30D and I just had my first real outing with it last week in the Florida Everglades. I have to say I am vey disappointed with it. I think, however, that I may have a bad copy. It seems to back-focus. I focus with a fixed focus point, and many of my pictures end up being out of focus on the subject, but in-focus on something slightly behind.
Are you using a sturdy tripod or monopod?
I'm using a monopod, the Trekpod Go!, but I don't think it's enough. I did some controlled tests with the lens last night with a sturdy tripod, and was able to get reasonably sharp (not as sharp as I'd hope, but sharp enough to meet my expectations of the lens) images. Strangely, though. the DOF was different on the right side of the image vs. the left side. On one side, the focused range was farther back than the other side...
Agree with Mike about the support. Most of the problems I've had with this lens (and seen from people complaing) is due to camera shake, rather than lens problems. Looking at the bg branches/reeds in your first two pics, it looks like a bit of camera shake (doubling of the branches/reeds). Keep on practising!
If you have a 500mm or 600mm lens, then even with a tripod can you get steady shots?
Even if the tripod is sturdy, there will be mirror slap, right?
So I guess mirror lockup is a must.
In bird shooting, speed and capturing the momemt is important, so isn't having mirror lock etc., going to "lose the shot".
So a long lens must be stabilized, or you must have a stabilized body, right?
The uber lens for wildlife shooting.
200-500mm at 2.8 and an attachment that take sit up to 400mm-1000mm at 5.6.
I'll be glad to get one and test it for y'all if someone would volunteer to carry it for me.
I think you'd need a bigger beach rolly for that thing Harry.
I'll need a strong, young feller. Somebody used to hardships such as Chicago winters.
...deserves to be printed large and framed -composition, lighting, background, you really nailed it!
I wanted to share a heron photo I captured this January using the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR with the Nikon 2.0 TC. It seems to work well giving me 400mm at f/5.6. I would love to have a 300mm f/2.8 so the 2.0 TC could extend my distance to 600mm at 5.6 except the weight would be a bit much.
Has anyone attempted a TC on the Nikon 70-300 VR? I read a review on B&H Photo about it.
Thanks for your time, Cyn
Is a 300/4 with a 1.4TC a viable bird lens? What about with the 2.0TC which would make it 600/f6?
Question here. I have been using a Sigma 28-300 f3.5-6.3zoom for just over 2 years now with some excellent results. But in some cases I have to sharpen once or twice and I would love to eliminate some of that.
I am content with the 300 mm distance and my pocketbook prohibits lenses running close to $1000. I've been reading some nice reviews of the Canon 70-300 IS USM and am thinking about that lens. I use my Sigma lens exclusively (no changing lenses) and would probably do the same with the 70-300. I am really wondering if the 70-300 with IS would make a lot of difference as far as results go.
I am debating renting a copy of the lens for a week to try it.
You can see some of my photos at www.borderbrae.smugmug.com
Any comments will be much appreciated.
Canon Rebel XT, Sigma 28-300 zoom
Jim T wrote:
I've had my copy of the 70-300 is for almost a year and just love the lens. The IS is very impressive, and if you are looking for a lens you can use for just about everything without spending 1k this is a good choice.
Hope this helps.
I use mainly the 500/4L and 400/5.6L. I haven't used the 400/5.6L for a while mainly because I would feel guilt after spending the big bucks on the 500/4L I often use the 500 in conjunction with extension tubes to get closeups of small birds or other small subjects. I use a tripod with either whenever possible - a tripod will almost always give superior results.
The 400/5.6L is a super nice lens for the money and especially shines for flight shots but is not, as some would claim, a "specialty" lens for just flight IMO. I have used it quite often for stills and I believe my hand-held/tripod use of this lens is 80%/20% on stills. It is as sharp or sharper wide open than any other aperature.
The 500/4L is difficult to hand-hold for flight except for short periods. For longer durations, like when shooting eagles all day, it gets mounted on a gitzo 1325+AS-b1+sidkick - i.e. is gimbal mounted.
I try to avoid using teleconverters to maintain a high image quality. I'd rather try to get closer to the subject and use extension tubes if necessary.
Barnswallow fledgling. 500/4L @ f4.5 with 68mm of extension tubes:
Adult Barnswallow: 500/4L with 68mm extenstion tubes, f8 1/90s:
Black-capped Chickadee 500/4L, extension tubes, f8 1/500s
Snowey Egret, 400/5.6L f6.7 1/3000s
Black-crowned Night Heron, 400/5.6L f5.6, 1/200s