DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> The old 400mm problem
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 49, (reverse)
AuthorThread
09/23/2010 07:30:13 AM · #1
There don't seem to be as many posts as you might think on this subject.

Currently I can only manage 280mm with my gear (70-200 + 1.4 extender). It works, but I want the extra reach - for wildlife and birds mainly, but frankly even at the zoo it would help isolate faces on the Bristol Gorillas (a resource I haven't succesfully tapped yet!)

My options seem to be:

Canon 100-400mm (f4.5-5.6) - approx £1100
Canon 400 prime (f5.6) - approx £900
Sigma 120-400mm (f4.5-5.6) - approx £550
Tokina 80-400mm (F4.5-5.6) - Approx £500

The reviews are really all over the place - no-one seems utterly convinced by the Canon L zoom, the Sigma zoom gets mostly pretty good reviews, but many say 'if you can't afford the canon'. The Tokina I have no idea about. The possible red herring is the canon prime, which gets strong reviews but do I want to give up the zoom? Hmmm.

The Sigma is currently my front runner, but there are only 10 users on here and none are particularly active, so difficult to get advice. Of course it does mean that I could 'own' it! ;o)

Thoughts?
09/23/2010 07:38:17 AM · #2
I am having the same dilemma Frank, can't afford it yet, all depends on a possible bonus, but promised I woudl treat myself if I get it!!!

I was also looking at the Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 OS DG APO HSM Canon ( //www.dpchallenge.com/lens.php?LENS_ID=548 ??? around £1000

Message edited by author 2010-09-23 07:38:38.
09/23/2010 07:49:21 AM · #3
Well I'm waiting on the sale of some parachuting gear going through, so there is not a huge rush! i considered the 150-500, but reports of the IQ seem a bit iffy, while the 120-400 seems quite promising (I found some great reviews on warehouse express).
09/23/2010 07:50:59 AM · #4
Originally posted by FrankRobinson:

Well I'm waiting on the sale of some parachuting gear going through, so there is not a huge rush! i considered the 150-500, but reports of the IQ seem a bit iffy, while the 120-400 seems quite promising (I found some great reviews on warehouse express).


Yeap, agree ref the 150-500, but easy tiger..this is the 50-500 (F4) ;-)
09/23/2010 07:59:02 AM · #5
I love my 100-400. I'm still wondering if it's a tad soft when fully extended. But it's completely possible that I'm just not steady enough. I don't care. I still adore the lens. (though someday I should really test it and know for sure)

I haven't owned a sigma in years, so they're probably better than they used to be. But I owned some sort of sigma lens that zoomed out to 500 (300-500? I'm not sure anymore. I didn't work on my digital, so I haven't used it for years.) Anyway, it was a fine lens, took nice pictures, but the focusing was much slower than my canon lenses. It was fun to have that range, but frustrating that it didn't work as well as the canon lenses.

Message edited by author 2010-09-23 07:59:33.
09/23/2010 08:11:10 AM · #6
Yeap, I had the 170-500 Sigma F5.6 and used to get really frustrated with it , was soft and slow at full lenght and of course, like you say, very possible that I wasn't steady enough.
Though one day, even leaning on a fence post, it made up my mind that I didn't like it, when I'd taken some photo's in the nearby woods of some robins and they were very poor. So I got rid, hoping to put the money to a 'better' lens, but never turns out like that eh ;)
09/23/2010 08:15:51 AM · #7
Why not buy a good old reliable 300F4 non IS and use the 1.4 on it? Would save you a ton and you could get a really sharp 300F4, and 420F5.6

09/23/2010 08:41:09 AM · #8
Originally posted by MattO:

Why not buy a good old reliable 300F4 non IS and use the 1.4 on it? Would save you a ton and you could get a really sharp 300F4, and 420F5.6


That's a good option, as is the 400mm prime. Since you already get close to 300mm (280 with the 70-200 + 1.4x), the 400mm prime might be all you need. The difference in framing between 280 and 400 is not that outrageously different, it's like the difference between 70mm and 100mm. The 400/5.6 is not just a good lens it is a stunningly good lens.
09/23/2010 09:03:04 AM · #9
My 400mm f/5.6L is a very sharp lens. It focuses quickly and offers clarity in the subject and a pleasant bokeh. For wildlife, the prime lens usually gives me a full frame image at a comfortable (for the animal or bird) distance. Also, the weight is acceptable for hiking purposes. Sure, I'd like to have a 500mm or a 600mm and may have one soon, but the weight and size of the big guns will restrict where they go with me. And, the extra weight of the larger lenses would mean a heavier duty tripod with Wimbley mount. At this point, I'm pretty happy with the productivity of the 400 f/5.6L on my standard tripod. Rarely do I shoot handheld. But, I have had good success if in great light allowing 1/2000s or faster.

In general, a prime lens is going to be sharper at 400mm than a zoom at full extension. It is a trade-off with the convenience of a zoom. And, I have been caught with "too much lens" in a few situations. I was once photographing the head ramming activity of big horn rams. They started out high on the mountainside, but in a few minutes they had moved off the mountain and were standing within 40 feet of me. My shorter lenses were in the truck a half mile away. So, I was trapped with a great nature moment and couldn't properly capture the scene. In that situation, a zoom would have been very helpful.

The 400 f/5.6L is somewhat slow in low light. But, cameras and apps are getting better at higher ISO speeds, so as long as the image is properly exposed, the electronic noise can be manageable at ISO 1200 or ISO 1600.

I have a 1.4x TC. I have used it on my 400 f/5.6L. It degrades the sharpness. And/or the loss of AF causes me to miss the focus on the subject. At any rate, I don't recommend the 1.4x TC because of the loss of AF and the drop to f/8 at wide open. That's too much loss for my telephoto subjects.

Message edited by author 2010-09-23 09:12:17.
09/23/2010 09:14:11 AM · #10
Am I correct in thinking for auto focus to work with the 1.4 or x2 convertor you need the lens to be F4 or below? So woudl you get AF with the X2 and the Sigma 50-500mm f4??..or am I stupid ;)

..sorry Frank, hope you don't think I am hijacking your thread ;)

Message edited by author 2010-09-23 09:18:50.
09/23/2010 09:31:14 AM · #11
Originally posted by wingyisleeds:

Am I correct in thinking for auto focus to work with the 1.4 or x2 convertor you need the lens to be F4 or below? So woudl you get AF with the X2 and the Sigma 50-500mm f4??..or am I stupid ;)

..sorry Frank, hope you don't think I am hijacking your thread ;)


You need to keep the min aperture to f5.6, the 1.4x takes 1 stop and the 2x takes 2 stops, so with an f4 lens add the 1.4x it becomes f5.6 and will auto focus ... add the 2x and it will be f8 and will only autofocus on a 1 body UNLESS you have a newer body that will autofocus in liveview, it's damn slow but my 7d will autofocus using the live view at f11 (100-400 + 2x)

re the op, I love my 100-400 ... the 400 prime will be sharper but you'd have to carry the 70-200 as well to cover the same (ish) range

Might be worth seeing if your local jessops have them in stock so you coudl shoot a few images and compare sharpness etc
09/23/2010 09:35:48 AM · #12
Originally posted by kirbic:

Originally posted by MattO:

Why not buy a good old reliable 300F4 non IS and use the 1.4 on it? Would save you a ton and you could get a really sharp 300F4, and 420F5.6


That's a good option, as is the 400mm prime. Since you already get close to 300mm (280 with the 70-200 + 1.4x), the 400mm prime might be all you need. The difference in framing between 280 and 400 is not that outrageously different, it's like the difference between 70mm and 100mm. The 400/5.6 is not just a good lens it is a stunningly good lens.


That is actually a pretty good point, which hadn't for some reason occurred to me. Perhaps that lens is back in the frame? (no pun intended!) How well does it do wide open at f5.6? My only other canon prime is the nifty fifty, and I am more than happy with that all the way down to f1.8 so I am hoping that the 400mm prime is equally useful wide open.

And wingy, knock yourself out! It's all about sharing the knowledge. In my case, I wouldn't be adding to teleconverter to the prime since it is a Sigma TC and won't fit. (Doesn't fit my other Canon lenses anyway)

Incidentally, weight is not a concern I have - after 17 years in the Army, hiking with a sack of heavy gear doesn't really bother me! And my new Monopod has really taken the work out of getting steady shots... :o)
09/23/2010 10:58:57 AM · #13
Originally posted by bobonacus:

You need to keep the min aperture to f5.6...


That'd be "maximum aperture" actually; minimum aperture would be f/32, f/22, somewhere in there.

R.
09/23/2010 11:08:41 AM · #14
Originally posted by kirbic:

Originally posted by MattO:

Why not buy a good old reliable 300F4 non IS and use the 1.4 on it? Would save you a ton and you could get a really sharp 300F4, and 420F5.6


That's a good option, as is the 400mm prime. Since you already get close to 300mm (280 with the 70-200 + 1.4x), the 400mm prime might be all you need. The difference in framing between 280 and 400 is not that outrageously different, it's like the difference between 70mm and 100mm. The 400/5.6 is not just a good lens it is a stunningly good lens.


The reason I suggest the 300MM is that the 70-200 in my experience doesn't take the 1.4 very well and slows down the AF considerably. With the purchase of the 300. you could have a really sharp 300MM lens and it DOES take the 1.4X better than the 70-200(in my experience) and would get 420MM.

YMMV
09/23/2010 11:38:40 AM · #15
I say skip the 400 and go get This
09/23/2010 11:42:11 AM · #16
Originally posted by jminso:

I say skip the 400 and go get This


SOLD! Could you buy it and send it over now please?!
09/23/2010 11:44:25 AM · #17
Originally posted by FrankRobinson:

Originally posted by jminso:

I say skip the 400 and go get This


SOLD! Could you buy it and send it over now please?!


lol, yeah maybe next paycheck.
09/23/2010 11:58:56 AM · #18
nevermind.

Message edited by author 2010-09-23 12:04:24.
09/23/2010 12:16:41 PM · #19
Originally posted by FrankRobinson:

Perhaps that lens is back in the frame? (no pun intended!) How well does it do wide open at f5.6?

It's pretty much as sharp wide open as it is stopped down. I have to echo kirbic, it's a stunningly good lens - when I've been off on wildlife trips it tends to live on my camera for >90% of the time.
09/23/2010 12:44:27 PM · #20
I use an older Sigma 400 f5.6 APO, and have been very happy with the results. I generally shoot at f5.6/8 with it, and find that color, contrast, and flare are all well controlled with the lens. Sharpness is better than with my 300mm f4.5 Nikkor ED IF.
If you plan to use the 400 for occasional shooting, a manual model may work well. I believe that with the adapter to EOS, that your Canon would have the "focus beep". I would generally be manually focusing at that range, even with an autofocus lens, because I can select the focus point that I want, even in lower light. The lens is built for manual focusing, with a nice wide focus collar right where your thumb can operate it easily.
You might even save enough cash to buy another lens that you want.
Of course, if you have plenty of cash, one of the zooms may be a better choice because of the flexibility of having the zoom available to frame the shots.
ETA, The one that I use is the early manual model, for Nikon, with no electronics in it. The newer ones have autofocus and electronics, but I don't know if the glass is the same.

Message edited by author 2010-09-23 12:51:47.
09/23/2010 12:56:55 PM · #21
I've done the 300mm f/4 + 1.4x combo and it gives sharp images and does autofocus. However, make sure you are comfortable with a telephoto prime. I find myself shooting near water all the time and I ultimately was frustrated by a prime lens. Not being close enough isn't that big a deal (you can crop), but suddenly I'd be too close to a bird or heron I'd come across and there was little I could do except try to change lenses before the bird flew away.

I'm saving up for the 100-400 and I'm going to go in that direction personally.

Message edited by author 2010-09-23 12:57:22.
09/23/2010 01:02:22 PM · #22
I absolutely love my 100mm prime. Best lens I have -- better than the L series. Primes are amazing.

However...

I love shooting wildlife, but I would never go with the 400 prime -- it's just too limiting. The type of wildlife I shoot, I really need the ability to zoom in and out. I would have missed many shots if I had gone prime. When you're shooting people, you can tell them to wait while you move in and out to use the prime. Wildlife doesn't work that way.

Message edited by author 2010-09-23 13:03:49.
09/23/2010 01:04:41 PM · #23
Thanks Frank for starting this..and all you guys for your responses...I love it here ;-)
09/23/2010 01:45:30 PM · #24


300 f/4 IS with 1.4x TC
09/23/2010 01:58:56 PM · #25
The 300 and 1.4 sounds like an excellent combo. 300 is long enough to get most of what you would want when the trees are nearby, and over 300, you need a lot of light to hand hold, or even with a monopod, 400 is hard to keep still enough for sharpness. In this area where I live, 300 has been the right focal length for getting birds and such while on the move, though I now keep the 400 Sigma in my bag instead, because of the extra reach, and it's sharper. It's pretty rare for the 400 to be too much to get one bird, or a couple at a time at the normal working distance that is comfortable for the birds around here.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 05:12:33 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 05:12:33 AM EDT.