[Chomp]

Hi! What's the minimum focal length I should get for wildlife photography? Should I get zoom or non-zoom lens?

[EnglishBob]

In my limited experience I have found zoom useful for framing the subject, plus if something is moving towards you and you only have one camera, switching primes isn't practical.

I've been using 300mm and will be getting a 400 or 500 ASAP as I feel they lack the reach for most wildlife shots.

[slejhamer]

Welcome Chomp.

I agree with Bob's comments.

[Chomp]

Hi thanks.

Should I get a Tamron 28-300?

Or a Canon 100-300?

The Tamron 200-500 sounds good but would be out of my price range

[selphy]

Come on, get the big gun. You will only regret it later if you buy something which does a half-hearted job. Consider it an investment.

[slejhamer]

If your budget is limited, the Sigma 50-500 ("Bigma") is considered by many to be the best value. If you can spend a bit more, the Canon 100-400 is better still.

[EnglishBob]

I've not heard good things about the Tamron 28-300, the 70-300 is better, though that is still pretty soft at the long end.

[Chomp]

I've not heard good things about the Tamron 28-300, the 70-300 is better, though that is still pretty soft at the long end.

Hey Bob - sorry I did not understand you.

Did you mean "I have not heard any good things" or "I have heard not good (i.e. bad) things" ?

[EnglishBob]

I meant I have heard bad things about the Tamron 28-300... very soft at anything over 120.

[Peted]

Was that the XR Di? or the non digital?

[EnglishBob]

None Digital.

[Peted]

Okay, the XR Di or the Sigma DC's look better but are not yet available in the larger sizes, you need to go to the EX or APO's and for some they are just too expensive. Perhaps one of the mirror 500mm's might be okay to "play" with until you decide what you really "need"..

[Peted]

Saw a 135-400mm Sigma on Ebay, wants US$250 but will only sell to US, might see if I can sweet talk him, would be a great lens at a great price.

[Peted]

Or maybe just a Kenko MC7 2X converter, they are about AU$260 locally but have not seen them on Ebay at good price yet.

[shuttertalk]

Hmm... you've sparked my interest about mirror lenses.

Must find out more...

[loopy]

G'Day Chomp,

Mate I'd suggest that there are a lot of factors that go into which lens is most suitable for you. These are based primarily on the type of wldlife photography you want to do and your budget. Two major considerations would be:

a) Are you after static or dynamic shots? By this, I mean are you interested in photographing say a kangaroo lying asleep in the grass, or are you after a shot of a lion taking down a zebra? Faster shots call for faster lenses (ie ones which have a much wider maximum aperture), which are much more expensive. A more dynamic shot would also call for a more sophisticated auto-focussing system (if you're not using manual, which can be hard to do with speed and accuracy). Again, this equates to more money.

b) What subject are you trying to photgraph? Taking a shot of a sparrow at 100 yards and an elephant behind the zoo fence requires different lenses. As a guide, I've found that at 300mm on a D70 (so 450mm equiv. for a 35mm SLR), I can fill a frame with a kingfisher sized bird at about 5m. An average horse would fill the frame at maybe 40-50m. Because of this, I wouldn't really recommend using a 300mm for anything smaller than about a big dog, unless you're sure you can get close to it. The full frame photos I have of kingfishers were taken inside of my parents house, through the window at the birds sitting on a fence. I had about two seconds to pop my head up and fire off the shot before they flew away.

Bob - I bought a Tamron 75-300 about a year ago, based mainly on price and availability at the time. If I were to buy another lens for similar purposes in the near future, it probably wouldn't be my first choice, but as a general lens that you can throw in the bag in case you need that extra length, it does the job well. I'll try to upload some photos after I get back from Easter.

Cheers,


Brad

[Peted]

Agree about the 70-300, seems to be a good compromise and very good value. On the digitals it ends up a 105-450 mm or there abouts and is still okay as long as you don't use too slow a shutter speed.

The larger (135-400 and 170-500) start pretty big and that is what is making me think that a fixed larger one at a cheaper price could be the good cheap option.