Super Telephoto lens?
 

Hi Forum,

I have a (silly?) question: about two month ago, I bought the Canon Eos XTi with a Sigma 70-300APO DG Marco lens. So far I'm quite happy with this equpment. But now I want to go to an National Park (Banff) and I'd like to capture some animals (if possible moose, chipmunks, maybe bears...). The Sigma lens is really good to take pictures of squirrels from a distance of about 10-15 meters, but I don't really want to come that close to a bear or moose... :eek:

I looked around a little bit at ebay, and they sell 650-1300mm lenses for 230US$. This seems a little bit too cheap. Does anybody have experience with such a lens or could recommend a lens, that won't cost more than 500US$?

I also saw some teleconverters (2x, would mean 600mm * factor 1.6), how good are they?

Thanks for your answers,

Anja

My experience is that you usually get what you pay for. There are some old Nikon lenses that are IMO underpriced because manual focus is untrendy. But otherwise, the old adage holds.

For a cheap 500mm lens your best bet is a mirror lens. The Tamron is said to be okay. But the aperture is fixed at F8, so focussing is hard, it is manual focus and image quality is mediocre, due to low contrast. There might be some mirror lenses that give good IQ, but they cost a lot of money. If your aim is simply to record and/or identify a species, then a mirror lens will do.

Regarding teleconverters, they are only as good as the main lens, and usually a zoom + teleconverter is not a good idea. (There are exceptions.) And usually a 2x teleconverter is a bad idea too, in part because the view finder gets very dark. But also because IQ is often poor. However, I have seen images taken with a canon 600mm lens + stacked teleconverters which are incredibly good. Is that in your price range? :)

Don has been getting good results with a Nikon 400mm F5.6 AIS lens + TC. See the "Lens musings" thread.

In Banff and Jasper you should be able to get sheep, goats and elk with even a 50 mm lens. Bears and moose should be ok with a 300mm. You will have a good chance at bears from your car.

Really that close? That would be great... Thank you.

@Leif: well, the 600mm Canon is about 5000-6000US$... :eek: A bit off my budget... :D I have no experience with mirror lenses, I think, I should learn more about them. It seems to be interesting... There is one 500mm mirror lens in 1:6.3, this sounds pretty good.

Thanks for your answers

Anja

Hi Anja,

Simple advice from me: double or nothing. I think you will find that a cheap long lens will be pretty much a complete waste of money. Much better to either double your budget (maybe a bit more than double) or else do without. Cheap and nasty optical gear is never worth it, in my experience.

Either step up to one of the several well-regarded "cheapish" lenses in the 400mm+ class (Sigma 50-500 and Canon 400 f/5.6 are examples), or else accept that you are limited to 300mm.

You can get away with a cheap little lens (the Canon 18-55 kit lens, for example, costs about US$80 and works just fine) but you can't get away with a cheap big lens.

Maybe you should stick with the lens you have and invest in a pair of running shoes? Seriously, as SnowyOwl suggests, developing field craft is probably your best bet, and confine yourself to non dangerous animals.

Sheep, goats and elk come right out onto the road. Ther's one mineral lick beside the road near Jasper where goats hang out and they can be approached very easily.

Bears are bigger than squirels! You won't have to get so close. A really long lens means tripods and such like so a lot of hassle. I would go for a 1.4 converter at most as a cheap but still good compromise and then it's down to getting near enough - that seems to be the case however long the lens is.

I wouldn't touch the 650-1300mm with a bargepole, that's probably the quality you'd get from it (bargepole), look around for a used Tokina ATX 400 f5.6 SD, (640mm on a Canon) excellent lens with good contrast and definition. You could add a 1.4 converter, that would give you a 896mm lens at f8 constant aperture. I've used this combination on both film and digital, gives very useable results on both!! Don't go for the Sigma 400 f5.6 or 1.4 converter, they dont work very well on Canon or Nikon digital cameras, the Kenco 1.4 converter is the one to go for.

nirofo.

I have just bought the Sigma 400mm F5.6 APO Macro, and it seems to work fine on a D200. I was using continuous auto-focus to track ducks yesterday (first time I've used auto-focus too). Optically it seems okay but not a match for the best Nikon lenses.