Which 300mm lens? / Camera settings (1 Viewer)

[kilianwasmer]

Hi there.

I just bought a Canon 400D.
Now I am looking for a new telephoto lens but it's not easy to decide. So I have two main questions:

1.) Which lens?

At first I thougt of buying a Canon 4.0-5.6/70-300 IS USM because it's light weight, small, quite good optics and good value..
After reading reviews and talking to friends I now think of perhaps buying the Canon 4.0/300 IS USM or the Sigma APO 4.0/100-300 EX DG IF HSM. I think their optical quality will be better and the autofocus faster (for birds-in-flight photos).
One the one hand, the 300/4 is lighter than the Sigma, on the other hand you got more flexibility with 100-300 (other wildlife shots, landscape..). Or would the 70-300 be a good 300mm lens, too? (I also noticed the 400/5.6 and the 4.0-5.6/100-400 but I refuse to use a tripod and the 100-400 IS USM is said to lack some sharpness...)
Which one would/did you choose and why?

2.) What camera settings

Another question is: What camera settings do you use for bird photos (AF-Area-choice, ISO, exposure metering, sharpness, contrast, white balance, etc.) for
a) resting birds
b) flight shots
I don't know which is the maximum ISO you might use unless there's too much noise/grain and on the other hand which is the maximum exposure time you need to "freeze" a flying bird.

Thanks for your help!

 

[hollis_f]

1. If you read through some of the posts you'll see that the two lenses you've rejected are two of the most popular with bird photographers. The 100-400 should be sharper than the 70-300, as well as having the extra reach. As for the 400 f5.6, quite a few people use this without a tripod, it's just a matter of getting the shutter speed fast enough.

2. Can't help with settings like contrast, white balance, sharpness etc. as I shoot in RAW mode where all of these can be changed in post-processing.
In common with most birders I use Av mode - setting the aperture and letting the camera set the fastest possible shutter speed. Normally I shoot ISO400 - dropping to 200 when it's very bright and going to 800 when it's very dark. I normally shoot using just the centre AF point using Partial Metering (I have a 20D otherwise I'd probably use Spot Metering).

With static birds the only real difference is that I'll use One-Shot focussing. With birds in flight I'll use AI Servo, If they're against the sky I'll also dial in some exposure compensation to overexpose by 0.5 to 1 stop.

 

[postcardcv]

Of the 300mm lenses I would narorw the choice down to the Sigma 100-300 f4 and the Canon 300 f4 IS as these can both be used with a 1.4x tc when you need more reach (as you probably will for birds). I had a Sigma 100-300 f4 for about a year and really liked it, AF is fast and acurate and image quality was very good. However the AF speed fell away a bit when using the 1.4x tc (which was normally on it) so I decided to look at 400mm lenses.

I narrowed my choice down to the 400 f5.6 or the 100-400 IS, both are excellent quality lenses with fast AF and good sharpness. I went for a 100-400 IS as I liked the better MFD and fancied trying an IS lens. I've had this lens for a few months now and am very happy with my choice. The AF is faster than the Sigma 100-300 f4 was, the images seem a bit sharper (probably dues to IS) and the extra reach is very handy.

 

[erwinx]

I would pick the 300 f/4 IS. I find this a very nice lens to handhold and it has superb image quality with or without a 1.4x TC. In good light, you can good images with a 1.4x and 2x TC stacked. Then there's its 1.5m minimum focusing distance which means that with a short extension tube, it's great for butterflies as well.

As for camera settings, best to learn by looking at actual photos and the settings used and then practising a bit. I started off in Av mode but now use manual mode most of the time... use whatever you are comfortable with at your current level.... even program mode if necessary...

 

[kilianwasmer]

Thanks for all your help!

I narrowed my choice down to the Sigma 4/100-300 EX APO HSM (due to more flexibility and less expense..)

In your experience: Is it possible to use this lens as a standard lens on birding trips without tri- or monopod? Since it lacks an OS/IS I wonder if it's still possible to take hand held shots with 300 mm (x 1.6). What about flight shots? Is the auto focus fast enough?

(I know, "It depends..". Actually it won't be possible in a dense forest and will be for shooting snow geese flying in a brightly lit desert. Just tell me what's possible in average birding situations... ;-) )

 

[Nikon Kid]

When you are talking 300mm 400mm what does this mean
in terms of zoom/magnitude like on my compact I have a
3 digital zoom and I really need a 10 or 15 zoom to get
a nice close up of a Dragonfly or Damselfly I have been
thinking about getting another camera for this type of pic
also my compact suffers with close up shots always blurred

 

[mike from ebbw]

Put simply it means that 50mm is equal to as you would see the subject through your eyes with no magnification.Therefore a 300mm lens would be 6x magnification,a 400mm lens would be 8x magnification and so on.

 

[Nikon Kid]

So a bit simular to looking through my 8x42 nikon bins

Thanks

 

[macshark]

Put simply it means that 50mm is equal to as you would see the subject through your eyes with no magnification.Therefore a 300mm lens would be 6x magnification,a 400mm lens would be 8x magnification and so on.

I don't know the source of this myth. Magnification of a lens/camera combination, lens zoom ratios and magnification of a pair of binoculars or a scope are all different things.

Note that the same 50mm lens will give you totally different apparent magnifications depending on which camera's viewfinder you are looking through. Not only is the FoV different based on the sensor size (1.6x, 1.5x, 1.3x, 1x, etc.) but the viewfinder magnification ratio can be different among DSLRs with the same sensor size. For example, compare the view through a EOS350D/400D viewfinder to a 20D/30D viewfinder.

The (whatever)X number is simply the ratio of longest focal length over the shortest focal length for the particular lens used in that digicam. Therefore, it is really not an absolute measure of magnification. This is different from the (whatever)X number that is used for binoculars and scopes. Binoculars and scopes form a "virtual" image in your eye through the viewfinder. Cameras use an image on the sensor. For DSLRs, they form a real image on a piece of glass behind the viewfinder, so the magnification observed at the viewfinder is typically much less.

Most 12x ultrazoom compact digicams have FoV equivalent to a 432mm lens on a 35mm film camera. Sony and Olympus have a few models that can get close to FoV equivalent to 500mm.

• Canon S3 IS (12x): 432mm
• Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (12x): 432mm
• Sony DSC-H7 (15x): 465mm
• Olympus SP-550 (18x): 504mm

If you put a 300mm lens on a 1.6x crop body (20D/30D/350D/400D), the FoV will be equivalent to a 480mm lens on a 35mm film camera, so the magnification you observe in the pictures will be higher than almost all ultrazoom digicams. A 400mm lens on a 1.6x crop body will give you FoV equivalent to 560mm, which is better than any ultrazoom digicam, even better than high end HD camcorders that have 20x zoom lenses.

Moreover, with a DSLR and a high quality telephoto lens, you can significantly crop the image and still get very high quality prints. A picture taken with a 400mm f/5.6L and a tripod looks very good quality even when viewed at 100% resolution on a computer display.

 

[mike from ebbw]

Thanks Macshark,but I didnt want to confuse NK with sensor ratios etc.I just answered the question that was asked."When you are talking 300mm 400mm what does this mean?"