General > Photography Section
Bird photography
doylebros:
New to the photography but enjoying the posts and education within!
This one has had a few twitchers out for some strange reason!
http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/11042294.Pink_pigeon_spotted_in_skies_above_Darlington/?ref=mr
PND:
--- Quote from: RedRobin on March 20, 2014, 10:18:43 am ---
--- Quote from: PND on March 19, 2014, 07:53:32 am ---Hi Robin
Your latest shots are really good! Are these with a Canon EF 400 mm F/5.6 USM lens? I'm looking at getting one to replace my 100-400mm as I'm nearly always at the 400mm end!
Nice and sharp!
Paul.
--- End quote ---
....Yes, I was interested in the Canon 100-400mm in spite of having the 70-200mm f4L with 1.4x Extender (making it fully functional as a 98-280mm f5.6L) but a very experienced bird photographer friend advised me that the prime Canon 400mm f5.6L USM (no IS) is a 'better' lens - He has owned both.
It would be nice if it had IS (Image Stabilisation for non Canon users) because I reckon my keeper rate would be higher but when I get it right (as the Robin singing shot) it's spot on. I personally find it easier to steady with the tripod ring mount fitted.
I now exclusively shoot RAW and can then enhance what's already captured by the camera body's sensor (Canon 70D). But if it's a turd, you can't polish it!
^ The 70-200mm is shown with the Canon 1.4x Extender fitted. It also fits the 400mm but then makes it a f8L and kills autofocus on the 70D body. You also really need a tripod/monopod to steady it at 540mm (actually more on my crop-sensor body). The Extender works beautifully on the 70-200mm though and lives on it most of the time.
--- End quote ---
Hi Robin
Thanks for that. The 100-400mm has done the job of getting be interested and pointing me down the road I want to follow so it looks like a 400mm prime could be on the cards. I've already got a 1.4x extender as well and f8 is no problem for autofocus on my 5D. :happy2:
RedRobin:
--- Quote from: richwig83 on March 20, 2014, 10:29:16 am ---
Providing you can keep the shutter speed above the focal length of the lens, it pretty much negated the need for IS.
--- End quote ---
....That's a good guide (focal length taking into account body sensor factor) but I'm convinced that IS on a lens can help (unless on a tripod).
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think that the 400mm f5.6L USM was introduced before Canon offered IS. If they ever produce a new version of it what's the betting it will have IS?
Hedge:
No IS on the f5.6 but it is available on the f4 and f2.8 400mm. You don't want to ask the prices of those though. :surprised:
rich83:
--- Quote from: RedRobin on March 20, 2014, 04:35:56 pm ---
--- Quote from: richwig83 on March 20, 2014, 10:29:16 am ---
Providing you can keep the shutter speed above the focal length of the lens, it pretty much negated the need for IS.
--- End quote ---
....That's a good guide (focal length taking into account body sensor factor) but I'm convinced that IS on a lens can help (unless on a tripod).
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think that the 400mm f5.6L USM was introduced before Canon offered IS. If they ever produce a new version of it what's the betting it will have IS?
--- End quote ---
Ohh there is no doubt it helps in certain situations. But, lets you your robin photo. 1/3200 shutter speed. Now... unless you have had 10000 cups of coffee and are "shacking like a dog" then IS wont make a blind bit of difference.
I cant see canon making a 400mm with IS.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version