Lens Musings
 

Years ago when I traded in my medium format Bronica SQA kit for a D100, my entry into both digital and autofocus, I got 3 A/F lenses to go with it. 18-35, 28-105, and 80-200. During the years before WPF the 80-200 was hardly ever used, most of my pics being in the range 18 to 50mm. With the advent of WPF and a lot more photography generally, I realised 18mm was not wide enough and traded that for a 12-24 and that has become my favoured out and about lens. The 28-105 still gets a bit of use, and until the 'Shooting the Moon' thread the 80-200 was hardly used. I took it to Titchwell a couple of times but that was really a waste of time as any birds were just dots in the frame. If we were treking any distance I would take the 200 f4 AIS as it weighes a fraction of the zoom and is a lot smaller.

A couple of weeks ago I had the opportunity to swap the 80-200 for an old manual focus 400mm IFED f5.6 lens. There were two thoughts behind going for the swap. I would have a prime for those moon pics, and I would be able to use it wide open for those background blasting shots that are the regular fare of Rob and others. Well it turned into a cloud magnate, so apart from a Starling shot I posted, and a couple of moon shots I have not really had an opportunity to give it a whirl.

At this point regular users of long lenses may be thinking so what, and perhaps 400mm is not that long for bird photography, but a move from 12-24 to 400mm is quite a leap for general photography.

The design of the lens goes back to the 1980's so the minimum focussing distance is 15ft, and at that distance dof wide open at f5.6 is a mere 1 3/4" going up to a massive 3 inches at f8. You have to get to 40ft at f5.6 for that dof to become 12". Infinity dof at f5.6 is quite amusing for a wide angle user, 2820ft or 940yds - infinity. :eek:

Well the cloud curse was finally lifted on Friday. A quick check on the satellite cloud imagary confirmed a good day, so we decided on a trip that would allow a play. Wells Next The Sea on the North Norfolk coast.

Wells was a real eye opener. With the tide out there was no need to trudge through the mud to get onto a sandbank for a picture of the yacht stranded on that sandbank. In fact I had to move back to about 1/2 a mile away to enable me to get the yacht and mast in frame. I tried a shot of an anchor by the harbour masters office to make use of the shallow dof and could get no further back due to a wall, so it is a tight composition, and this is from about 40ft away. I tried a few shots of ducks on the quay side which is also used as a car park. Again moving back far enough to get them in frame was a new experience, with Stevie having to watch my back to prevent me becoming a traffic casualty.

So I now have a whole new learning curve on subject and composition with this lens, and the crazy thing is that my wide is A/F where massive dof could easily cover focussing error, and the 400 is manual focus with non existant dof. Lots of practice needed.

Any long lens users out there that have bought into a real wide angle and are suffering from viewfinder agoraphobia. :)

The attached pics are all full frame. Yacht and ducks at f8, and the anchor at f5.6, an experiment in blowing the background, but f8 may have been a better option at this subject distance.

Don

The anchor is my favourite Don. The colours, lighting, textures and DoF all combine to make it a very pleasing picture. The spider is a nice touch too.

It seems you have a good lens there Don. I also much prefer the anchor photo, it shows real originality. The other 3 are all technically excellent shots but there are so many photos around like them.

I didn't spot the spider on first viewing but yes it certainly adds to the picture. I just love the lighting and texture to the anchor.

Presumably you had the camera on a tripod.

Dave

Hi Dave,

I used a monopod for these. They were really taken as a see what it can do resolution wise hence the ducks plumage. I have to get used to the shallow dof when thinking subject matter and angles. A bit like using a macro in that respect.

They can look fine until you put them up on a pc then out of focus really shows up. :eek:

Don

Whatever you did is lovely, all the shots should make you proud of your new lens. Beautiful contrast on the ducks.

Don,these shots are amazing,so sharp and clear.Could not quite understand which lens you used for them,is it the 400F5.6?.
I use the 400F5.6 Canon for all my birding shots.The lowest priced 400 lens,also very light.But my shots are not so sharp as yours,they are excellent.

Hi Christine thanks,

Yes it is the 400mm f5.6. Its an old manual focus job from the 1990's. I will only get an A/F version if the useage it gets justifies the cost.

Don

The anchor is my favorouite as well that & the detail in the ducks plummage. Your focusing is spot on.

sadly Nikon do not do an AF equivalent. The 300mm AFS F4 + TC14E is the closest match. Sigma used to do a 400mm F5.6 APO Macro AF which is said to be on a par with the manufacturer's lenses and which is inexpensive. (I will soon find out.)

Enjoy your lens. I see you are already squeezing nice sharpness out of it!

Don, you ask if anyone suffers trying to use wideangle. Well I tend to see pictures for telephotos and my Canon 10-22 on a 20d does not see a lot of use as I just struggle to see and compose wideangle shots. I like the anchor shot best and it's certainly a great lens. If Christines Canon does not do as well I wonder if she uses it handheld with no suport so the sharpness is spoilt by camera shake as it has very good writeups in the mags.