Skip to Content

Canon Lenses

Discuss and share your wildlife photography, filming and equipment

Moderator: lion queen

User avatar
DuQues
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Posts: 17940
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Red sand, why do I keep thinking of red sand?
Contact:

Unread postby DuQues » Wed Jul 19, 2006 12:24 pm

Here you go. As you can see it could be a bit sharper, but it was quite far away.
Steps taken: Converted the rawfile to tiff, no sharpening or anything. Cropped it, saved it as tiff, again nothing else.
Imageshack made a png of it. :x

Exif: f/18, 1/25 sec @ ISO 100

Image
Arriving currently: The photos from our trip! Overhere! :yaya:

Feel free to use any of these additional letters to correct the spelling of words found in the above post: a-e-t-n-d-i-o-s-m-l-u-y-h-c

User avatar
madach
Senior Virtual Ranger
Senior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 769
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 9:55 pm
Contact:

Unread postby madach » Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:08 pm

DuQues wrote:I can put up a 100% crop of a photo made @400mm with the 100-400, maybe j-ms can do the same with the prime?

Should I confuse matters further by posting a 100% crop of the 300mm f/2.8 + 1.4x converter?

User avatar
bwana
Senior Virtual Ranger
Senior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 403
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 12:55 pm
Location: Neither here nor there.

Unread postby bwana » Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:41 pm

madach wrote:
DuQues wrote:I can put up a 100% crop of a photo made @400mm with the 100-400, maybe j-ms can do the same with the prime?

Should I confuse matters further by posting a 100% crop of the 300mm f/2.8 + 1.4x converter?


Yes!
All your snakes are belong to us.

User avatar
j-ms
Junior Virtual Ranger
Junior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 303
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:55 pm
Location: Schoenmakerskop (near Port Elizabeth)

Unread postby j-ms » Wed Jul 19, 2006 3:20 pm

At the risk of joining a P&*^%ing competition ...

Canon 400mm F/5.6 L at 5.6 and 1/640s ISO 200 handheld.
100% crop from near centre frame. No sharpening or contrast/saturation adjustment, either in camera or post processing (ie camera setting 0,0,0 using Adobe RGB). Simply converted from CRW to JPG using RSE.
Image

User avatar
j-ms
Junior Virtual Ranger
Junior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 303
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:55 pm
Location: Schoenmakerskop (near Port Elizabeth)

Unread postby j-ms » Wed Jul 19, 2006 3:22 pm

I'll post comparisons between my 400mm and the 400mm plus 1.4 convertor in a minute or two.

User avatar
j-ms
Junior Virtual Ranger
Junior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 303
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:55 pm
Location: Schoenmakerskop (near Port Elizabeth)

Unread postby j-ms » Wed Jul 19, 2006 3:38 pm

I did a little test for myself to see the effect of my TC on the 400mm versus what my 75-300 could do. The results are not surprising

Canon 75-300 F/4.0-5.6 EF III USM at 300mm at F/5.6
Image

Canon 400 F/5.6 L
Image

Canon 400 F/5.6 L plus Sigma EX 1.4 TC
Image

In any given situation, I would choose the prime without the 1.4 TC (although the effect isn't too great - I tape the 3 leftmost pins so I still get AF, albeit slow and unreliable). I won't use the zoom unless I have too.

User avatar
j-ms
Junior Virtual Ranger
Junior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 303
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:55 pm
Location: Schoenmakerskop (near Port Elizabeth)

Unread postby j-ms » Wed Jul 19, 2006 3:40 pm

BTW, the test above was done by varying the subject distance to ensure the same image size on the sensor - there was no image manipulation. As before, no sharpening or saturation/hue/contrast manipulation.

User avatar
richardharris
Junior Virtual Ranger
Junior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 537
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 3:04 pm
Location: Nottinghamshire UK
Contact:

Unread postby richardharris » Wed Jul 19, 2006 5:07 pm

I changed from the 100-400 to prime lenses (I initially went for the 300IS and the 135 2.8) when I changed from a 300D to the 20D. There seemed to be a real problem with this combination with focus - I had many very poor results, much worse than with the 300D.

Having said that, I am much happier with the primes - as has been said, you nearly always use the lens at maximum. I may have been lucky, but don't find dust a major problem despite changing lenses.

I still use a zoom at the lower end (24-70) as that does provide a needed versatility.

Richard

User avatar
madach
Senior Virtual Ranger
Senior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 769
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 9:55 pm
Contact:

Unread postby madach » Wed Jul 19, 2006 9:16 pm

Here are two pictures taken with a 300 f/2.8 IS L, one without a converter and one with a converter. The pics were taken from a tripod using a remote release and mirror lockup. No sharpening was applied during conversion from RAW to TIFF. Both pics are 100% crops.

Image
100ISO, 1/5 sec @ f/11. No converter used

Image
100ISO, 1/4 sec @ f/11. Canon 1.4x converter (Type II) used

The loss of sharpness due to the use of the 1.4x converter is very noticable, it's much worse than I'd expected it to be. I'll do some more tests tomorrow using faster shutter speeds.

User avatar
delboysafa
Junior Virtual Ranger
Junior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 218
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 2:48 pm
Location: From East London S.A., but living in Surrey, UK
Contact:

Unread postby delboysafa » Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:30 am

I can really recommend the 100-400mm IS. In a trip to the Kruger 3 months ago, it was definately my most used lens and the results were very favourable with my 300mm F4 L and 200mm F2.8 L.

The flexibility of the zoom was the key for my purchase and I dont regret it at all.

The image quality of this lens is very good, yes, I bit soft at the short end, but overall very happy

You will not regret your purchase at all.

Feel free to have a look at
http://delboysafa.smugmug.com/ for some of the pics I took with it

Good Luck.

User avatar
j-ms
Junior Virtual Ranger
Junior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 303
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:55 pm
Location: Schoenmakerskop (near Port Elizabeth)

Unread postby j-ms » Thu Jul 20, 2006 8:36 pm

A bit more ammo for the prime afficiandos - check out this post on Hedrus's site.

I know this is all "laboratory" stuff but it matches my real-life experiences.

User avatar
Willowmoon
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 4:43 am
Location: Canada

looking at the new canon EOS digital Rebel XSi and lenses

Unread postby Willowmoon » Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:11 am

I am looking at the new Canon Rebel XSi any opinions on it??

also,what is a good canon lens to take lots of wildlife photos in and around the park? I was looking at a few different ones but not sure what will work best?? what are your opininons?? does having the IS in a lens make much of a difference with a good camera considering it is a DSLR?

EF 70-200 f/4.0 L USM
EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM
EF 70-200 f/4 L IS USM
EF 70-200 f/2.8L USM
EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM
EF 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM
_________________
Going on my first trip to South Africa ~KNP in Oct. 2008 :)

User avatar
richardharris
Junior Virtual Ranger
Junior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 537
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 3:04 pm
Location: Nottinghamshire UK
Contact:

Unread postby richardharris » Mon Apr 21, 2008 8:54 am

IS is of benefit whatever the camera. Its becoming universal now, either in lens or in camera. If you can afford the extra, go for IS especially with longer lenses.

As for the lenses you mention; L are definitely better. Most are sealed better against dust and rain. More robustly built as well. And if you want to print A4 and bigger, you will get better pictures too.

Which one though?! With the increasing problems of carrying bags on planes, last trip I took a 70-200 F4 L IS and a 500. The 70-200 is a stunning lens, producing photos just as sharp as the 135 and 300 I did not take. And gives the flexibility of a zoom. After all, you cannot always position yourself for that perfect shot in the Kruger!

Richard

User avatar
DuQues
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Posts: 17940
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Red sand, why do I keep thinking of red sand?
Contact:

Unread postby DuQues » Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:45 am

Hi and welcome Willowmoon!

Have a look through the topics here, you'll find that all these lenses have been talked about a lot!
Arriving currently: The photos from our trip! Overhere! :yaya:

Feel free to use any of these additional letters to correct the spelling of words found in the above post: a-e-t-n-d-i-o-s-m-l-u-y-h-c

User avatar
Neil Crawford
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 12:04 am
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Unread postby Neil Crawford » Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:28 pm

We have one of the lenses you mention, the 70-300DO IS, and it's a very good lens.
Many of the critics fail to realise that image quality isn't everything, although there is
nothing wrong with it's IQ. Where the lens shines is it's combination of fast autofocus,
excellent stabilization, low weight, good balance and handling. We use it as a general
travel and walk-around lens, when we don't want to lug around the heavy metal.
The problem with all the lenses you mention is that they are all too short for birds,
and even most animals. The 70-300 is perfect for Elephants, Giraffes, and big
birds if you can get really close. We also got good photos of Lions and Leopard, but
undoubtably the longer lenses are better. Heres one of my wifes Leopard photos with
the 70-300DO:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2067/217 ... 0a16_m.jpg
Image

and this one is also using the 70-300DO (but its not from South Africa so only look at
it for research purposes!). It does show that even birds in flight are possible.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/22594688@N08/2407266357/
/Neil


Return to “Wildlife Photography Enthusiasts”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests