I have the Canon 50mm f1.4- love it. But recently acquiring the 85mm f1.8 I have to say it's my new fave toy to take out all day!
Ray Allen I like your wildlife pics very much. Any advice on the best start off lens for a 5D for wildlife photography? There are Peregrine Falcons nesting near my house and I haven't had much luck with my most appropriate lens that I own atm- the 28-70mm f/2.8
I sold mine but if you want a budget lens the Canon 70-300mm IS has the length birds generally need (300mm). If you need something with a wider aperture you might use a Canon 70-200mm or for greater telephoto range you can try Sigma or Tamron offerings to 400mm or 500mm.
I actually had the 70-300 but did not get on with it at ALL. The zoom and the focus was clunky and loud, at the end of the focal range all sorts of problems crept in......I ended up selling it and have actually bought the Canon EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM second hand for super cheap. It may be I was unlucky with the model but funnily enough after I sold it I watched this video which matched my experience. Not to say at ALL that everyone will have this but I'm looking forward to a change lol
Not the 75-300mm, it gets poor reviews compared to the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (covers all formats, 58mm filters, 22.2 oz./630 g, 4.9'/1.5 m close focus), check this model out, gets some good reviews.
I can understand why you like the 85mm f1.8 as that is a great focal length on full frame. I have an 85mm f1.9 but it is a much older Asahi Pentax Super-Takumar made sometime between 1964 and 1971. It is manual focus and screw mount but with an adapter and a bit of patience I can use it on my full frame 1Ds. I must get out with it soon.
Thank you for your kind words. Full frame cameras like your 5D are great but APS-C cameras with their crop factor (Pentax is X 1.5 and Canon is X 1.6) are better for wildlife. That shot of the duck was taken with my Sigma 150-500mm at 500mm which is 750mm on my APS-C Pentax with the crop factor applied. The latest version of that lens is 150-600mm and even then you will fall 150mm short on full frame. And that lens is not cheap. I am sure that by now you can see that a 28-70 on FF is not going to cut it for bird shots.
I have the Canon EF 75-300mm which I use on my 20D and with Canon's 1.6 crop factor I can get an effective 480mm. I work to a very tight budget for my Canon gear and I got that lens new for a bargain price on eBay and I have been very satisfied with it. Here are some images from a recent event on our lake with RC boats:
Hi Robert, Yes, I'm sure the 75-300mm non-IS lens gets poor reviews compared to the 70-300mm IS USM which is considerably more expensive and rightly so but when used with care and appropriate camera settings it has produced results much better than I expected and was very good value for money and I can use it on both FF and APS-C cameras. Bargain!
I shy away from describing them as such as the magnification doesn't change, the oly difference is the sensor is smaller and only can see 2/3 of the viewing area, so yes in even a 200 does feel like a 300 on a crop camera. But all you really getting as a cropped image compared to the full frame. I don't bird watch but imagine 400-600 would be an ideal range, i guess on a budget I would slap a teleconverter on a 200 or 300 zoom.
Favorite lens, while I love my 50 and 85mm primes,I have to go with my 17-40. That lens spend the most time on the camera out of all of them. I like shooting wide, but it also can be shot really close about 1 foot so you can use it for environmental portraits as well. Its also small and light for a L zoom. All around a pretty decent walk around lens.
Recommendations. If your hobby is wildlife, what sort of wildlife are you going for? Take into consideration where this wildlife lives, how close you can get to it, how large the wildlife is, and the conditions that you are going to be shooting in. Are you driving to the location, or do you have to walk some distance? Lugging a long heavy lens around while walking with some form of lens support is not that much fun. Some form of weather sealing is worth it's weight in gold if you are going to shooting in the rain, or you will need to keep your equipment as dry as possible with a bag to keep your camera in when you are not using it. If you can give us an idea of what you will be shooting and where, I could put forward some ideas for you. So these are taken with a Tamron 70-200 f2.8, it is not weather sealed, so my camera stays in my back pack until I use it, and then it gets put back in under cover. (Pentax K3 aps-c). All of these images have been taken outside in the "wild" so to speak. Take a lens cleaning cloth to clean the front element if you need to. Fine sea spray and mist can end up on the lens, and you don't really notice it at first. Just periodically check the lens. Sometimes this lens is too long. But depending on how close you can get, and the size of the subject, a 70-200 is not going to cut it. 7D and a 400mm F5.6 L, and a cropped image. So one lens will not cover all situations. I am not sure if I lashed out and brought a 1.4x converter if my 7D that is would autofocus with the 400mm. Body wise, if I were you, I would look at a second body. An aps-c body will give you more reach. To get 18mp from my 7D, you need to start with something like 36mp from a full frame camera. If your wildlife moves at some pace, think about a camera with a high continuous shooting rate. Also buy fast memory cards. I hope that there is something in here for you to think about. Gary
Top photos Gary, I particularly like the last one, there is not much more I can add to your advice only if Amy does go into a woodland environment take cold and wet weather gear with her as it is not much fun being cold and wet while out taking photos. In Tasmania the conditions can be nice one minute and a few hours later hypothermia can becomes a issue.
Cheers Craig. I do like doing wildlife photography, but I have not done any of it for a while though. Gary
Adore the whale! Amazing shots. Whilst newborn photography keeps a roof over my head, I can now afford to progress in wildlife photography which is my fave hobby. I want to buy a cheap to middle budget second hand telezoom or suitable zoom lens to get me started (as You can see my kit is geared totally towards newborn photography). Advice please! to start, opinions on the 55- 200mm EF as a option?
Wildlife by it's nature does not like people. so photographing at a distance is a necessity. Lenses 300 mm or longer are needed. The cheapest are old film lenses with a adapter. As someone who has grown up and worked in the wilderness of Tasmania I give this advice. You will see more if you sit and watch for a period of time, than walking around. Your scent and the sound of your walking is carried on the wind. Take something to eat and drink and sit down under a tree, keeping still. The tree will help breakup the outline of your body .This is also good for landscape photography as you have time to see how light changes on the hills and mountains especially on a cloudy day. Lastly learn how to read a map and navigate research the area you are going into , you don't want to ruin your day getting lost.
I think that the 55-200mm is going to be a little short for what you are looking for. I think that you will be disappointed with the results because your subject matter will be small in the final image. By all means, buy it and try it. At least it will give you a benchmark to work with. I would recommend something 300mm or more for starters. Depends on the quality of image will dictate how much money is spent. A general rule of thumb is that the image quality will decrease the longer the focal length is with a zoom lens. I don't know what sort of money you are looking at spending, but a short list of lenses (used) that spring to mind would be the Canon EF 100-400, Sigma 50-500, Sigma 120-400, and Sigma 150-500. These are all slightly older lenses. In a modern offering, what about taking a look at the Tamron SP 70-300mm f4-5.6 Di VC USD. It seems to be an affordable and a good performer. As mentioned, have a look on the Lenstip lens website. Once you get the bug, I am sure that in time you will upgrade your lens to something that fits your needs. One last thing, if you go looking for wildlife, take your marco lens with you. Gary
Gary is right in his suggestion about the macro lens as you will see a lot more insect life than bird and animal life. especially if you are sitting quietly under a tree or beside a bush. If you luck out with the wildlife then the trip will be worth your while. Now to throw a fly into the ointment I have a cheap alternative for a long focal length lens. I use a Tamron 500mm mirror lens with a Adaptal2 to EOS adapter. Mirror lenses are cheap and I get good results with them. They have limitations such as you can only have a aperture of F8 and no auto-focus. You can get around this by adjusting shutter speed and ISO. If you use this lens you will need a sturdy tripod to prevent blur, being a long focal length it is a inherent problem unless you have stabilization , then with this feature you are getting into a much more expensive lens . I have just checked on EBAY and the prices range from 100 dollars australian to 250 dollars.
