Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Canon lens for wildlife

Reply
Thread Tools

Canon lens for wildlife

 
 
roy@carealternatives.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-27-2005
I am a new photographer. I have chosen to go with the canon 20D. I am
considering the canon 100-400 IS usm-L lens. My concern is that it may
be too slow at f/5.6. I am shootng large animals, bears, moose, etc.
Canon says it is great for wildlife.
Thank you

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Charles Schuler
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-27-2005

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
>I am a new photographer. I have chosen to go with the canon 20D. I am
> considering the canon 100-400 IS usm-L lens. My concern is that it may
> be too slow at f/5.6. I am shootng large animals, bears, moose, etc.
> Canon says it is great for wildlife.


And it is. Boost the ISO to 200, 400 or even 800 when you must to
compensate for this slower lens. You will like the results, under most
conditions.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Malcolm Stewart
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-28-2005
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
> Canon says it is great for wildlife.
> Thank you


Canon also claim that their white balance is good - see link below

http://www.pma-show.com/canon/004_di...ge_sensor.html

I'll leave you to be the judge when you use your 20D for real. As for me,
I'm using manual settings more and more. (10D and 5D owner/user)

--
M Stewart
Milton Keynes, UK
http://www.megalith.freeserve.co.uk/oddimage.htm



 
Reply With Quote
 
SamSez
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-28-2005
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) wrote in news:1133133989.467411.278520
@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

> I am a new photographer. I have chosen to go with the canon 20D. I am
> considering the canon 100-400 IS usm-L lens. My concern is that it may
> be too slow at f/5.6. I am shootng large animals, bears, moose, etc.
> Canon says it is great for wildlife.
> Thank you
>


Unless you are shooting in the dark, I think you will be quite happy with
the results. Except for very fast moving subjects, the IS will give you
those few more stops that can otherwise only be had with a much more
expensive [and heavy] piece of glass. The push-pull zoom may take a little
getting used to, but I have found the 100-400's one-ring zoom/focus to
actually be an advantage for wildlife shooting over separate zoom and focus
rings. I have been quite happy shooting hummingbirds with this lens on the
20d, and I suspect that 'large animals' [i.e, slower moving] would only be
better. I even use this lens with the Canon 1.4 extender, and, while I
have to give up auto-focus [the scotch-tape hack to restore AF just doesn't
work well], I still get results that I think are better than an equivalent
crop.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bill Hilton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-28-2005
>I am a new photographer. I have chosen to go with the canon 20D. I am
>considering the canon 100-400 IS usm-L lens. My concern is that it may
>be too slow at f/5.6. I am shootng large animals, bears, moose, etc


I have a 100-400 and also the 300 f/4 L, 400 f/5.6 L and 500 f/4 L IS
.... there is no question that the 500 f/4 is a much better lens for
wildlife, but it costs almost 4x as much as the 100-400 ... the other
lenses I mentioned have better image quality but this is off-set by the
lack of IS (I have the non-IS 300) and lack of zoom ... the 100-400 is
OK as a starter lens but a stop slow, though as others mention you can
just bump up the ISO to get the desired shutter speed, within reason.
To me the lens doesn't have high enough contrast or image quality as
the corners compared to the other lenses I use, but it's OK. Not
great, OK ... At least compared to the fixed focal length
tele-photos I prefer using ... someone coming from one of the cheap
consumer grade zooms like the 75-300 probably like the 100-400 a lot
more.

Here are about 40 shots I took mostly last spring, mostly of birds in
the desert near where I live ... most were made with the 500 and a 1.4x
t/c and a 1D Mark II (ie, 700 mm optical, about 910 mm 35 mm equiv
f-o-v). If I had used the 100-400 I doubt I would have gotten five of
these and none would look as good due to the lens quality and more
out-of-focus backgrounds, I feel ...
http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/desert/index.htm

Since you mentioned bears and moose (Alaska?) here are a couple of bear
shots from Sept (and a couple from years past) with basically the same
gear ... I had the 100-400 along on this trip and shot about 20% with
it but prefer the longer lens ...
http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/bear_D2614.jpg
http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/yogi.jpg
http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/bear_D2663.jpg
http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/bear_W2651.jpg
http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/D3882_wolf.jpg
http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/D4025_grizz.jpg

>Canon says it is great for wildlife.


It's OK but it sure isn't "great", at least in my book.

Bill

 
Reply With Quote
 
JohnR66
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-28-2005
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
>I am a new photographer. I have chosen to go with the canon 20D. I am
> considering the canon 100-400 IS usm-L lens. My concern is that it may
> be too slow at f/5.6. I am shootng large animals, bears, moose, etc.
> Canon says it is great for wildlife.
> Thank you
>

300mm f/4 IS. Sharp wide open, a stop faster than the zoom.
John


 
Reply With Quote
 
Dirty Harry
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-28-2005

"JohnR66" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:s2tif.99434$(E-Mail Removed)...
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
> >I am a new photographer. I have chosen to go with the canon 20D. I am
> > considering the canon 100-400 IS usm-L lens. My concern is that it may
> > be too slow at f/5.6. I am shootng large animals, bears, moose, etc.
> > Canon says it is great for wildlife.
> > Thank you
> >

> 300mm f/4 IS. Sharp wide open, a stop faster than the zoom.
> John



For someone new I would think the 100-400 would be a better choice. The
300f/4 is great but no zoom can make framing things a bitch, its also a
tank. For pros who can afford a range of primes sure...for someone new
something more versatile would be better. The 100-400 isn't going to need
to be ultra fast since most wildlife photography happens in the day with
lots of light.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Jim Townsend
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-28-2005
(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

> I am a new photographer. I have chosen to go with the canon 20D. I am
> considering the canon 100-400 IS usm-L lens. My concern is that it may
> be too slow at f/5.6. I am shootng large animals, bears, moose, etc.
> Canon says it is great for wildlife.
> Thank you


I've got a Canon 100-400IS lens.. It's great for daytime wildlife
shooting. I'm pleased with the quality of the images.

But to address your concern, I do find the f/5.6 at the long end starts
getting noticeably slow as the sun sets or on dark heavily overcast days.




 
Reply With Quote
 
Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!)
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-28-2005
On 27 Nov 2005 15:26:29 -0800, in rec.photo.digital
(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

>I am a new photographer. I have chosen to go with the canon 20D. I am
>considering the canon 100-400 IS usm-L lens. My concern is that it may
>be too slow at f/5.6. I am shootng large animals, bears, moose, etc.
>Canon says it is great for wildlife.


Under cover of forest? During what time of day?
--
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ((E-Mail Removed))
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photog...ral/index.html
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bill Hilton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-28-2005
>Harry writes ...
>
>The 300f/4 is great but no zoom can make framing things a bitch


I agree with this part ...

> ... its also a tank.


But not this ... the 300 f/4 is a bit smaller than the 100-400
extended, weighs about the same or a little less, and transports easier
because the hood is built-in while the 100-400 hood isn't. Maybe you
were thinking about the 300 f/2.8 L, which is much larger?

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon 17-85mm IS Lens vs Canon 17-40L Lens Tom Digital Photography 19 05-21-2005 12:16 AM
video taping wildlife ??? dh_ld@nomail.com DVD Video 25 11-21-2004 08:24 AM
Wildlife photos from Melbourne Zoo Lionel Digital Photography 0 01-17-2004 11:42 AM
free wildlife photo contest with prizes DT Digital Photography 1 08-19-2003 02:30 PM
garden wildlife... Richie Bee Digital Photography 4 08-06-2003 12:31 PM



Advertisments