Inexpensive way to improve my telephoto situation?

[erisian pope]

I'm hoping someone can offer me advice. I have taken up a bit of an interest in bird photography. I shoot with a Canon 20D, and my current lens options are my Canon 55-250 IS and my Canon 70-300 IS. Both lenses consistently give me soft photos. Using sharpening in my post production can improve the look of the image, but it doesn't actually improve the details of the image.

I don't have any sample shots from my 70-300, but here's one from my 55-250. (The 55-250 is consistently sharper than the 70-300, for what that's worth). The image was shot handheld with IS enabled, 1/200 sec, ISO 800, F11. This is a 1024x768 crop at 100% zoom with no post-production on it.

I am open to suggestions on my technique, if technique is a better improvement than equipment. Otherwise, I would love your advice on equipment.

I am considering alternate lens options, including possibly trying an FD-mount lens with an adapter (I have read countless posts on this setup, and believe it's possible to get adequate results by adjusting the little lens in the adapter). Has anyone had a good experience with a quality FD lens and an FD-EOS adpater?

For little birds I need speed and mobility (ie - no tripod, possibly a monopod would be ok?) and also need reach - 250mm works but feels short. If I could go longer that would be awesome. The 55-250 won't work with a teleconverter, but the 70-300 will (if only it were a sharper lens!)

I don't have much money to spend, so price is a real concern. However if there's something worth buying under the $2000 mark I would be happy to try to sell my other two telephotos.

Obviously my thoughts are all over the place on this - can anyone set me straight?

Thank you!
Christian

[Tom]

The image was shot handheld with IS enabled, 1/200 sec, ISO 800, F11. This is a 1024x768 crop at 100% zoom with no post-production on it.

There is no reason to shoot at F/11. Open it up and get some more shutter speed to stop the motion.

The general rule of thumb is you want a shutter speed at least 1/Focal length.

So 1/500th for a 500mm lens.

However, you are using a 1.6x crop body, so factor that into it.

300mm * 1.6=480 so use 1/500th s.


Long, fast glass is expensive. A 300mm 2.8 would be ideal, and you could get a Sigma for under 2000. Other options are something like the 50-500mm sigma.

[zeroendless]

With that lens, forget about extender, TC and whatno. It's a waste of money. There's not much you can do for small/song birds anyway. Your only option is shooting from a blind, as close as you can get. For decent small birds photography, even 500/600 users have to do that approach with set-up.

[erisian pope]

Thanks for the responses, both of you. I appreciate it.

Thomas - I chose F/11 for the wider DOF and to try to be close to the lens's sweet spot (I have not done testing to isolate it - I should). Most people tend to argue that wide-open is usually softer on most lenses than you can get by stopping down. However F/8 might have been a better choice. Since it's 250mm I relied on IS, and perhaps that's another issue. I have seen various people with good results and others with bad results relying on lens-based IS.

I'll try again in similar conditions with the lens stopped down to somewhere between 6.3 (1/3 more closed than wide-open) and f/8 while trying to keep the shutter speed fast enough for hand-holding (250*1.6=400, so 1/400sec at least) and also try monopod.

Daniel - I agree that a blind is ideal. I'll look into that option (heck, even a stool and neutral earthtone clothing and just sitting there for an hour might be an improvement). Currently I have this fantasy about nabbing "better than I currently take" shots of small birds while on a short break during my workday (I get a huge range of diversity at a pond immediately behind my office). Perhaps this is the best I can get in those conditions.

I read reviews of the 50-500 and am not impressed (people complain about softness while at longer focal lengths) but I'll keep my eye out for a used copy of a 300/2.8. Glass that fast tends to be outside of my price range, but I'll see what I can find.

Am I right in thinking that I could get sharper images than the picture I posted by using better glass?

[digidawg87]

Bird Photography Near Feeders
A great article on just that!

[GypsyHighSide]

I think a tripod would be a good start. I know you said you wanted to be mobile, but when you start using super-tele's you just can't get away from using a tripod with a good head. As for another lens, you can't go wrong with Canon's 400mm f5.6. You should be able to find one used for under a $1,000. Check the "Buy / Sell" section, I saw one listed a month or so ago by J.Eddington. It may still be available. I hope this helps.

[Jim Victory]

First don't waste your time on an FD/EOS adapter expecting better results with FD glass. I have a bag full of FD glass and even the Canon converter can't make up the difference in IQ using an EOS mounted camera.

My wife has a 70-300 IS she uses on a 1.6x camera and gets excellent results so maybe your lens needs calibration. In addition shooting small birds, as Daniel pointed out, is difficult even with a 500 or 600.

If your serious about bird shooting the best low budget lens for shooting birds is the 400 f/5.6L. You should be able to find a good one used in the $950 range.

The 400 f/5.6L doesn't have IS but it can be shot wide open at f/5.6 with excellent results. It also takes a TC very well with very little loss of sharpness wide open.

Another option would be the Canon 100-400 IS which gives you IS and a zoom range but it is more expensive.

Then there is the 300 f/4L IS that is sharp wide open at f/4 and will give you a 420mm lens with a 1.4x TC. It can usually be found used in the $1000 range.

[Tom]

I read reviews of the 50-500 and am not impressed (people complain about softness while at longer focal lengths) but I'll keep my eye out for a used copy of a 300/2.8. Glass that fast tends to be outside of my price range, but I'll see what I can find.

I have a Sigma 300mm 2.8 that is sharp, but will not lock focus. Lots of Birders are focusing at infinity, so a lot opt for a MF lens to save money. I'll include a 1.4X and a 2.0X for $1200. Precision camera quoted me $380 to fix the AF, I just have never sent it in.

I shot the Texans-Patriots game with it last year after the AF went out. MF is a hell of a lot more difficult for sports action, but I made it work.





If you are in Houston and want to try it out, let me know. I won't be in Austin until the weekend of Dec 17th.

[erisian pope]

Correction - my second lens is the 75-300/4-5.6 IS and is not the 70-300.

Thank you all for the responses - I'll focus on technique for now.

Thomas - I appreciate the offer, but $1200 is something I'll need to save up for. It's outside of my budget for the time being.

Donny - thanks for the link. I'll dig into that.

Jim and Rob - thanks for the suggestions.

[NintyLx]

I have both the Sigma 150-500 and the 70-200 f2.8 and love them both for getting in close to the action...

[dliveleyphotography]

I use a canon 400 5.6L and have been very happy with it, I even use it with the 1.4x on my 1D and AF is still pretty fast and pics remain sharp.

[DEMDeepEllumMusic]

I'm suprised no one has brought this up, PRIMES tend to be sharper than zooms in most cases (fewer pieces of glass inside). So I would look at a prime in the 300 or 400mm range and use a tripod. (You could go with older glass that is manual focus which is mentioned above since most of your shots will be in the infinity distance anyway).

[RRcoleJR]

I posted some photos with my Sigma 150-500 taken at the air show. There are photos from 150 to 500. The lens really impressed me with its sharpness all the way through the focal range. You can see the photos here http://www.TexasPhotoForum.com/forum...dg-os-hsm.html

All photos shot hand held.

[erisian pope]

The 150-500 is a good suggestion, and all the sample photos here look way better than what I get from my 55-250.

I am definitely considering prime lenses, and had even found a 400mm from sigma that I could afford today, but it was low-price due to the whole fimrware update issue (no more updates available since it's an old lens) - it probably won't work on my 20D and I'm not willing to buy it to find out.

So I am keeping my eye open here, B&H, Adorama, KEH, and Craigslist for used primes as well as the 150-500.

My fingers are crossed. Thank you all!

[janikphoto]

The problem with getting into specialized photo subjects, is they usually require specialized photo gear. Wildlife is one of those situations. It requires fast glass with a big zoom, to put it in layman's terms... It's pretty hard to get around that fact. At least with other specialty subjects, like macro work, there are a few cheap alternatives to get you by. Or, with architecture, you can replicate many of the swing/tilt movements of expensive gear by using Photoshop.

Now, one trick you can try, as mentioned above, is to look at some of the older manual focus lenses that can be adapted to the EOS mount. It may save you as much as 50% off the cost of a comparable modern lens, and you only give up the auto focus feature. If you search ebay, you'll see that lens adaptor mounts are made to attach almost any lens mount to the EOS system... from the Hasselblad lenses to the cheap russian lenses.