Birding lens?

[Nymph]

The 70-300 isn't giving me what I need as far as reach and time edditing. Does anyone have suggestions for a good lens under 5000.00

I was looking at the 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS usm

[Steve Foss]

Are you seriously saying $5,000 as a ceiling or joking a bit?

There are several options here. Check out the Sigma 150-500 OS (optical stabilization). It's been out a year or less and the reviews are good. Typically, 400mm is considered the minimum for avian photographers who want tight portrait shots, but 500 is even better, and the 150-500 runs about $1,000.

What body are you shooting? If you're shooting Nikon, they make an outstanding 200-400 f4 VR (vibration reduction) lens that you could get used for about $5,000, and if Canon, the 500 f4L IS (image stabilization) can be had used for about the same money.

[Nymph]

I was joking a bit.

I was looking at the 100-400 f4-5.6L is price range.

I am shooting the canon XSI and am looking for better glass as I sold my 70-300 today. Now I don't have a long reach lens.

[Steve Foss]

OK, so you're up around $1,400. The 100-400 and 150-500 are pretty close in image quality. There's no other zoom to 500mm on the market that is image stabilized, which is why I didn't include a couple other non-Canon lenses in the first response.

I shot the 100-400 hard for four years, and have a client who owns the 150-500, so I've been able to compare. It's only pixel peeping, which has limited value in comparing lenses (making actual prints is what really matters), but it looks like, with both lenses shot at max focal length and wide open, they are very close in IQ.

Now, I'm a Canon OEM guy whenever possible. I don't own another brand of lens, but the 150-500 adds that extra 100mm over the 100-400 and gives up only 1/3 stop of max aperture when zoomed to 500mm compared with the f5.6 of the 100-400 at 400mm, and that's not enough to worry about.

So I think reach is what you probably should decide on. How much do you really want? Also, since you're jumping from 300mm to 500mm (or even 400mm), you'll need to practice your steadying technique, because those longer focal lengths really amplify any camera shake and subject movement, and IS/OS won't help in many situations. I'd strongly encourage you to pick up a sturdy monopod, which works terrifically well coupled with IS/OS on those long lenses.

Better in image quality than either of these lenses is the Canon 400 f5.6L, and it costs about $1,100. But there is no image stabilization, and you lose the flexibility you get with a zoom. There have been plenty of times when out shooting birds that I wanted a wider view to include environment rather than tight portraiture, and in those situations the zoom is king.

[MN Shutterbug]

I see you can now get the Sigma 150-500 thru BH, for $879 after a rebate. However, the Sigma weighs 1.2# more than the Canon. To me, the 3# Canon is heavy enough for hiking thru the woods and then handholding, and I handhold 98% of my shots. But then, you may be a larger and stronger person, so the extra weight may not be an issue.

[JohnK]

While I'd like a 200-400 or 600 VR, like you, spending $5000 on a lens just isn't in the cards right now. I do like the Sigma 150-500, especially for the price. Here's a little write up I did on it a few months ago:

http://www.fishingminnesota.com/forum/ub...DG_#Post1527973

[Yellowhead]

I can testify to the weight of the Sigma, I have the 50-500 and it is a hand full when attached to my D90. It doesn't have OS but it just to heavy to think about handholding, but its great on a tripod or monopod.

[Steve Foss]

In the best of all possible worlds, a 500mm lens will be on a tripod. A monopod is a great compromise, particularly with OS/IS/VR. Being able to handhold a 4.25 pound lens with OS and still get sharp images in most conditions really varies from photographer to photographer depending on strength, as Mike mentioned.

[Nymph]

I think with the sensor on the XSI the 100-400 should work. That should get me around 600mm and about a pound less to carry around. I have looked at a lot of images and the IQ is great on both lenses.

I still haven’t totally made up my mind but am leaning towards the Canon.

Nice sunny day today and I don't have a wildlife lens.

[Steve Foss]

You're right with the sensor, Nymph. Plenty of folks on the board shoot that lens off 1.6 crop sensors, and it's got a lot of reach. Good luck!

[Catmendo]

Nymph, I captures these this afternoon. Canon 100-400mm & 50D.

[Nymph]

Cool shots Catmendo. I really like what this lens is capable of doing. I will just have to get the rest of it down to produce the shots.

Thanks for all the replies.

[Steve Foss]

Nymph, there are so many people here who shoot or have shot that lens extensively that we can help you speed right through the learning curve.

[Nymph]

I would appreciate all the help I can get. I think I will pick this one up soon, as I missed a lot of great shots today in the back yard.

[Paul]

I have a 100-400 IS USM L on my Canon XTi, I love it. Had it just about a year now, It has been all over the tristate region and in the sands of Florid's pan handle and so far I am really ahppy with it. I dropped about 1400 plus another 160 in filters.