Long lens

[squidfish]

Hi

At some point I am looking to purchase a long lens for shooting birds, trips to the zoo etc. Wondered if anyone had any reasonable priced suggestions to go with a 20d. Also are their any to avoid!!!!

cheers

Rich

[paradise]

Rich, I dont have much experience with long lenses, but I just used the 100-400 IS at the zoo and was very happy, it's a great lens. It's not very heavy (by the "heavy" standards) and once you get used to the pull out zoom, it's actually quite comfortable. Not cheap ($1200-1400) but by long standards not that expensive.
Suggestion, find a place that rents them.

[Ibn]

Good suggestion. Take a couple of these long lenses out for a shoot and see how they work for you. Just make sure that you bring a tripod along for testing so that you can see how sharp the lens can be. Remember to use proper long lens technique. Start out with the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM; I've seen some great shots that others have taken with this lens. Also for the price, it's worth the look.

[Truffle]

Hi there

I have the 100-400is usm L canon lens on a 20d. My copy is great until you get above 350mm -it becomes a bit fuzzy. Having said that i am shooting in the UK with low light. Here are some photos that i have taken with it.

http://www.hurstpointyachts.com/Avatar%20Page/Surfing/surfing%201.jpg

http://www.hurstpointyachts.com/Avatar%20Page/Surfing/surfing3.jpg
These are at 400mm, ISO800, 1/1000 I think!

I also have use of a 300 f2.8L Such a difference in performance, especially in low light but the quality of the shots is different class. The enhanced performance comes with an enhanced price tag.

Here are some other shots taken on my first outing with the lens -baring in mind that I am new to photography and nkow nothing of "long lens technique"

http://www.hurstpointyachts.com/Avatar%20Page/wader.jpg

http://www.hurstpointyachts.com/Avatar%20Page/swan86.jpg

Whilst i was taking shots of the surfers, two pros joined me, one had a 20D with a 600mm prime and the other was using the 70-200 f2.8l with a 2X converter. He recons that that set up is better than the 100-400mm as the 400mm end is much sharper with his setup -in fact he sold his 100-400 to get the 70-200.

This is just my 2 pence worth. The only trouble with having the 400mm is that you always want more - now where was that 600mm...

[Schnauzer]

I am going to order the 75 - 300 f4.0 -5.6 IS USM monday along with my flash and ST-E2 controller . I will soon be able to give it a try .
Actually I was going to order late last thur. but B&H won't be open again until next Monday . As soon as I get the lense I am going to try it and if I don't like it , it is going back .
I was going to order that 100mm macro Ed has also , but a friend has the Tamron 90mm version and said I could give it a try first .

[Truffle]

Hey schnauzer,

Chack out the link below, you get honest advice on each lens from people who use them. My only criticism of the 70 -300 is that it is not 2.8. I wish htat my 100-400 doesn't handle the low light conditions too well.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/index.php?cat=45

Enjoy

Tristan

[Schnauzer]

Thanks Truffle . I have been looking at those reviews for 2 months trying to make up my mind . So many choices and no place around here where you can rent any .
Actually I have the lens here right now trying it . It belongs to a friend of my daughters . I took some pics last night at 75mm and 100mm with a just a 20 watt tank light and they came out good at 1600 with no noise . I would show them but the tank is scratced so bad I think everyone would notice the scratches instead of the fish .
He also left the 2X converter .

[hir0]

i think if you really want a lens for birding - 300mm would be the absolute minimum. i really think 400 would be much much better. if i were a canon shooter i'd probably look long and hard at the Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM. the 100-400 is a good suggestion also. a 300f4 with a 1.4 would get you to 5.6 anyways - i cannot say what combination would be sharper - but the zoom would definitely be more convenient.

[Ibn]

300mm is definitely an absolute minimum if you're looking at some decent size birds. Actually quite a few also haul around the 300mm f/2.8 with 2x TC to extend the reach to make it a 600mm f/5.6 lens. The only problem with this is the price of a 300mm f/2.8 lens. The 300mm f/4 lens is said to be one of the best value lens for what it does and still autofocuses with the 1.7x TC attached.

If they're smaller, I'd take a look at 500mm+. For something reasonably priced, might want to take a look at the Bigma (50-500mm); there's at least two members on this board who owns it. Or if you've got a bit more money to spend, there's always the Beastma...