The cameras you use

[michael23]

hi everyone, i have been thinking of upgrading my dslr (when i get the cash to do so of course!)
I would like to here your comments and thoughts on the quality and pros and cons of the dslr you have. Its fine reading review after review but I dont think that the "real world" is covered enough.
The dslr I use is a canon 350d with 18-55, sigma 70-300 apo, canon 200mm f2.8. At bempton the other day i wanted to chuck it in the sea when the body and sigma lens decided not to respond until after the oppertunity had gone. In decent light it provides some good images with the 200mm, but i do find it inconsistant in what it produces.

So lets see whats said, all of which i will take on board to help me decide!
:smile::beer:

[Colin Key]

Michael,

My main birding gear is a Canon 1D MkIII, 500mm f/4, 400mm f/5.6 and the 100-400 Canon zoom. I also use a Canon x1.4TCII with all of these lenses.

I also have a Canon 400D which I use mainly for "location shots", but it also produces wonderful images with "L" lenses.

I you were upgrading from your present kit I would suggest a 40D (many say it is better then its 50D successor for birding) and a 400 f/5.6 (and possibly a 1.4 TC, although you lose AF with the 40D and this lens). An alternative lens would be the 100-400 zoom; I never use mine now as I much prefer the sharpness and faster AF of the 400 prime.

I would never use a third party lens - the Sigma and Tamron lenses I have tried have been very "soft" and incapable of giving sharp images on even a 1D series body.

You might have opened a "bucket of worms" with this thread!! :eek:

Colin

[FayJ]

I am using a 40D with 70-200mm and 400mm lenses. I can't fault it.
Reading your comments, Michael, I think that upgrading your lenses to either the 100-400mm or the 400mm prime, might be a good idea. I have used Sigmas in the past and why they are capable lenses, the AF leaves a bit to be desired.

[AliBenn]

Can of worms opened for sure....

It really depends on what you want to shoot and what your overall budget is. My main lens is the 500/4 IS usually with a 1.4x. My wife uses a 300/2.8 with a 1.4 or 2x on it. In most cases the words "you can never have too much focal length" are very true, especially where we live in SW China.

People have been getting great bird images with 10D's, 20D's, 30D's etc for years. My "main" body is now a 50D and I am very happy with it in most situations.

However, if you want to shoot birds in flight, the AF capabilities are soon apparent, although it can be done!!

For this, there is no substitute for a 1D series body, anything from the 1D2 onwards. I also have a 1DsII and the AF on that with the 300 or 500mm is amazing.

I would say, for a reasonable price, something like a 40D or 50D and a 400/5.6 is a pretty decent rig. (I prefer the 50D to the 40D) I'd put the cash into the lens first, then the body. The advantage with a rig like that is you can walk around all day with it and enjoy your birding.

Getting in more seriously than that requires a very substantial investment indeed.

[Colin Key]

Getting in more seriously than that requires a very substantial investment indeed.

I think that Alister and I are on the same wavelength. You really need to decide whether you are a "birder" who takes photographs or a "photographer" who likes to shoot birds - there might be some intermediate ground, but I personally cannot see it. My digiscoping experience (with the best possible kit) left me very disillusioned - there are some excellent digiscoped images, but they are the exception and normally of static birds.

I honestly do not think you can be a "birder" and a "photographer" at the same time - I go birding and take my bins and Swaro 'scope and tripod and look for birds; if I go out to photograph birds I take a huge amount of gear (1D Mk3 + 500 f/4 lens + tripod is my main "rig", plus another body and two other lenses) and my concentration is on getting "the" image, not on seeing the birds. Unless you have done this, you do not understand.

Regrettably, now is not the time to begin indulging in high-level photography due to the strength of the Yen against most other currencies. I have been trying to buy the Canon 800mm f/5.6 lens for almost a year but it is not avaialable from my usual supplier. The price a year ago was just over £7,000, now the Cannon recommended retail price is almost £15,000 (and still no stock in the U.K.) - when I was a lad this would have bought you a bloody nice house!!!

Colin

[michael23]

Thank you for the thoughts,
I have been brought up with ornithology ever since I was a little lad! I love and enjoy my birdwatching, and also, I love and enjoy my photography, So if I had a lot of spare cash, i would love to buy a 1d series body and a top prime lens, but unfortunately unless lady luck shines upon me, i wont be doing that for a while, I want to acheive better quality images, and i need better than what I have. I would most probably be perfectly happy with a 400mm and a tc with a decent camera body. A setup of this sort would allow me to acheive both my goals, seeing the bird and making a photographic recored of what i have seen,:smile:
I am starting to get annoyed with digiscoping, mainly because my Fuji F40 has developed and under exposing problem, when attached to my scope!

[Colin Key]

Thank you for the thoughts,
I have been brought up with ornithology ever since I was a little lad! I love and enjoy my birdwatching, and also, I love and enjoy my photography, So if I had a lot of spare cash, i would love to buy a 1d series body and a top prime lens, but unfortunately unless lady luck shines upon me, i wont be doing that for a while, I want to acheive better quality images, and i need better than what I have. I would most probably be perfectly happy with a 400mm and a tc with a decent camera body. A setup of this sort would allow me to acheive both my goals, seeing the bird and making a photographic recored of what i have seen,:smile:
I am starting to get annoyed with digiscoping, mainly because my Fuji F40 has developed and under exposing problem, when attached to my scope!

Hello Michael,

Please take some consolation in the fact that whatever gear use, you can actually use it to hone your photographic and post-processing skills. In the future, better body and lenses are something to look forward to.

Best wishes,

Colin

[AliBenn]

I think that Alister and I are on the same wavelength. You really need to decide whether you are a "birder" who takes photographs or a "photographer" who likes to shoot birds -

Colin

We are Colin, in various articles I have written I suggest there are three ways to shoot...

1: The Walkabout...
2: The Stake-out and
3: The Set-up.

Most "birders" will elect for route 1, as will many "not-so-serious" bird photographers. Once you start on 2 & 3 you enter the realms of hard-core bird photographers. And of course get shots that are pre-planned and pre-visualized.

I had a 400/5.6 for a while as a walk-about lens and got perfectly satisfactory results with it on a 40D. I wouldn't be too quick to sing its virtues with a TC though... At Bempton though, 640mm effective focal length would give you very pleasing images I suspect.

lens first, body second would be my suggestion...

[FayJ]

You really need to decide whether you are a "birder" who takes photographs or a "photographer" who likes to shoot birds - there might be some intermediate ground, but I personally cannot see it.

I think you can straddle some intermediate ground, to an extent. Some days I go out birding, and take my camera and long lens for record shots (blog-illustrating shots, which is how I came to bird photography in the first place) and other days I take the camera out purely to take photos and don't do much actual birding.

As for digiscoping, I agree with Colin, I have tried it and found it frustrating and fiddly in the extreme and the results are always .... - definitely record shots only. I have seen good digiscoped shots on the net, but these usually involve top-of-the-range scopes such as Swarovski, Leica and Zeiss, etc.

When it comes down to it, you have to do what makes you happy.

[Colin Key]

I had a 400/5.6 for a while as a walk-about lens and got perfectly satisfactory results with it on a 40D. I wouldn't be too quick to sing its virtues with a TC though...


Just a couple of BIF shots with the 1DMk3, 400mm f/5.6 + 1.4TCII:

http://www.pbase.com/accentor/image/103980334.jpg

1/4,000s f/8.0 at 560mm ISO 800


http://www.pbase.com/accentor/image/108845882.jpg

1/6,400s f/8.0 at 560mm ISO 400

The egret had about a 10-20% crop, the gull 40%. But, the big advantage I have is superb light (look at the shutter speeds).

Colin

[FayJ]

Mind you Colin, you get AF with a TC and the 400mm on a 1D-series camera which you don't get with an XXD or an XXXD. Manual focusings doable of course, but leaves something to be desired without a split screen.

Agreed, in Portugal you get superb light, something the cloudy old UK is sadly lacking in for most of the time, which I do find incredibly frustrating.

Cracking shots, by the way.

[michael23]

I had been wondering if you had any images taken with the tc, they are very impressive! I would love that superb light you have over hear, any chance you could send some over?:laugh:
I certainly think i will be going to buy the prime 400mm at some point, its just mustering the cash up, the price rise has shocked me, hopefully it will lower at some point. Seems strange though that the price of the 40d doesnt seem to have been affected? I have seen it for £558.99 at park cameras (uk)
Its terrible! I need to buy a new tripod too, :cry:
It always all comes at once doesnt it.

[Colin Key]

A couple more of a Caspian Tern with the same set-up, both are heavily (>50%) cropped.

http://www.pbase.com/accentor/image/103980052.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/accentor/image/103980085.jpg


And this is a Red-rumped Swallow with the 1DMk3 and 400 f/5.6 but without the TC:

http://www.pbase.com/accentor/image/102160345.jpg

As VB rightly says, on a non-1D series body you lose AF with a 1.4TC (can be overcome by using a non-reporting TC or "pin taping", but not hugely successful) and even with a 1DMk3 I am reduced to using centre AF point only - but, it really is an excellent lens.

Colin

P.S. Michael, if you are considering buying this lens I would think about a monopod rather than a tripod.

[FayJ]

That Red-rumped Swallow shot is a cracker!

[Colin Key]

That Red-rumped Swallow shot is a cracker!

Thanks Faye.

Colin :notworthy:

[AliBenn]

I am obviously not saying great shots can't be achieved with the 400/5.6 and a 1.4 the key point is on a 1D series body you still have AF. The other is light. Portugal, and SW China for that matter have great light. The north of England on a damp February day, forget it....

In good light with good gear anything is possible:

Red-rumped Swallow and Whiskered Tern with 1Ds 500/4 (tern with 1.4x)

Wood Sand: 40D 300/2.8 + 2x fill flash in rubbish light.

Bar-tailed Godwit: 50D 500/4 +1.4x garbage light, no flash.

[michael23]

Ali, what flash did you use for the fill in?

[AliBenn]

Ali, what flash did you use for the fill in?

Either the Canon 550EX or the 580EX, with a better beamer flash extender. The latter exponentially increasing the useful range of your flash. There are two main uses for flash:

1: Flash as fill, where you have sufficient natural light to take a satisfactory shot, that is a sufficient shutter speed.

2: Flash as main source, where it's so dark, the shutter speed would be so low the chances of a sharp shot are nil.

The Wood Sandpiper above probably falls into the latter category. With flash I was able to shoot at 1/2000 @ f5.6.

Using flash effectively is a real learning curve, and one I am still climbing!!!

The shot below is of a White-browed Shrike Babbler near our home. This is a far better example of "fill flash" where it looks very natural, but the shadows have been opened up.

[Colin Key]

The north of England on a damp February day, forget it....



I did (I am from Cumbria), that is why I am here:laugh::laugh::laugh:

Some very nice images there Alister, especially the Wood Sand. - I have not ventured into flash but I am considering doing so for owls, nightjars, and such.

Colin

[AliBenn]

I did (I am from Cumbria), that is why I am here:laugh::laugh::laugh:

Some very nice images there Alister, especially the Wood Sand. - I have not ventured into flash but I am considering doing so for owls, nightjars, and such.

Colin

LOL, and why I am in South West China!!! Scotland is soooo famous for it's good weather!!

There is a good argument to use flash "always" but it really does add a hassle factor, a bracket to "raise" the flash head above the lens reduces "red and silver eye" and they ain't cheap!!

Then again, what is about bird photography these days... except CF cards!!

[FayJ]

I did (I am from Cumbria), that is why I am here:laugh::laugh::laugh:

Yep and the poor British light's a reason I am considering quitting the UK in a few years. :cool:

I may be from the south coast of England but the light's still .... in the winter. :laugh:

[MichaelF]

The shot below is of a White-browed Shrike Babbler near our home
Very nice! Perched in an Abies delavayi, so I'd guess you were quite high up in the mountains there.

[AliBenn]

Very nice! Perched in an Abies delavayi, so I'd guess you were quite high up in the mountains there.

Lijiang is about 2400m, which is about the altitudinal limit of this species in China. It's as high i've seen it anyway...

[MichaelF]

At the lower altitude limit for Abies delavayi too (2400-4300m), so the one can't be in the other all that often!