I shoot with Canon 500d or Canon 40d with sigma 150-500 lens. My favourite setting is AV -centre spot focus- Al servo. I always try to get the eye sharp and centre spot focus works for me. Then of course the light can make a difference.
Good luck with your new gear - I certainly gets lots of pleasure from my set up.
May I also recommend a sturdy monopod - I use a manfrotto. It helps to carry the bulk!
Regards and good photoing
I got some good shots of waxwing today in very poor light.
John T
.

---

Don't forget the Sigma 150-500 os,a third less than the Canon,work in any light,and all my shots in the Gallery are taken with it,and better still you don't need to go to the Darkside (Canon),you could Buy the new Nikon D7000 & the Sigma for about
£ 1800.

---

John,

Took your advice and finally went for the Sigma 150-500mm. I'd be most grateful if you could give me some advice on settings and the like. My camera is a Canon 500D by the way. Cheers in advance!!

Nick Isherwood wrote:

---

Thanks for your advice Adrian.

To be honest, I think most of my birding photography will be done in and around GM and the north west and my main reason for wanting to get into photography would be mainly for record shots (this may change when I get more into it of course). I've had a good few situations lately where I've seen a bird that I've struggled to ID with just the momentary views I've had of it. A camera in these situations would have been invaluable.

As you, and others have said the 400mm prime lense is excellent for the flight shots but not good with poor light. I think, given your recommendations that the 100-400mm would probably be a more suitable choice for me and my needs and would cover more situations perhaps.

Many thanks for your help on this really confusing matter!!

---

Don't forget the Sigma 150-500 os,a third less than the Canon,work in any light,and all my shots in the Gallery are taken with it,and better still you don't need to go to the Darkside (Canon),you could Buy the new Nikon D7000 & the Sigma for about
£ 1800.

Nick

There is absolutely no doubt that the 400 prime is a razor sharp, fast focusing lens, it is light to carry around and 'received wisdom' is that it is the best flight lens there is and I do not disagree with that (and I want one). If you are to hand hold the lens you will need good light and that is even more true with higher resolution cropped sensor cameras that are out now; they will reveal the slightest bit of shake. Your problems with low light will be greatly mitigated if you are able to use a tripod or steady the lens using solid platforms that may be available to you where ever you might shoot. It is of a course a great lens to take abroad where you will often get bright light. But remember bright light is not always good light.

However if you are going to do most of your photography in Greater Manchester where we seem to have more grey days and cloudy skies than they seem to have elsewhere then I have no hesitation in suggesting you give serious consideration to using the 100-400 so that you get the benefit of IS and the zoom that will enable you to compose. If like me you want to shoot (hand held) in urban areas or in woodland where shade is guaranteed then in my view there is no other option but to get a lens with image stabilisation. If you don't feel comfortable with the 100-400 you can consider the 300f4 which when coupled with a 1.4 converter still gives razor sharp images and the equivelant of a 420mm focal length. Of course as a prime 300 you can shoot at f4 which can be a real bonus.

I use the 100-400 a lot and whereas it is not quite as quick on intial focus as the prime (and we are talking nano seconds) it is still fast enough in most situations....I use it for peregrines and they move at some speed! I find once on the birds the lens does not loose track. I also shoot a lot at the full range of zoom i.e 100 to 400mm and often shoot at around 200-250mm, so for me I simply would not be without my 100-400. The flexibility obtained with the zoom for me is just too much to give up. I like to shoot pictures of birds in their landscape whenever possible...it's not all about feather detail and in my view the best bird pictures are where the bird is small in the frame. Having the zoom enables you to frame up your compositions so that you end up with a nice picture rather than having to crop.

Incidentally I use a 40D and have not found it to be slow when coupled with the 100-400.

Over the years when I have been out taking pictures I have never asked anyone that I was with, if I could use their prime, but I have on several occasions been asked if they could borrow my zoom and just this weekend when I was doing lapwings on roof tops in crap light I was offered the use of a prime ...I declined replying 'my zoom is the tool for the job'


What ever your choice just think about what circumstances/conditions you will be photographing in, where and when etc. Don't make your decision based on internet comparisons and some mickey mouse test charts (where in any event there may be hidden agendas) Real world shooting is what it's all about. All the above leses are fit for purpose. You have to decide what the purpose is.

Final word, whilst I am a big fan of the zoom I have on occasions recommended the prime to various individuals including my best mate....so at least I can't be accused of being biased :)

Good luck

AD

PS if you really want some good advice, give up while you have the chance, lest you want a life full of frustration but then again how can you say that to a birder!

just my fifty p worth of advice,

I own the 400mm 5.6 canon prime lense, it is by all standards a superb lens for the money, also very light and you can carry it all day without too much hassle, for birds in flight it is excellent, the focussing is very fast when in 8.5 to infinity mode for BIF shots, there isent really anything better in the price range i feel, there is no IS but for fast shooting flight shots you dont really need it, for slower speed shooting you need a steady shot using a good position or possibly a tripod,


now for the negatives

only really two to mention, one is the focussing is not short, 3.5 m so be aware sometimes you can get too close and need to step back, you can buy extenders that will shorten the focusing distance, but its biggest failing is it really does need good light to perform, in dull light it is very hard work, in a dark woods, you can pretty much forget it, even at 6400 Iso which you dont want to shoot in really you will still be down to 15 fps which will never get a good shot, it just cant perform in dull light, this lens needs good light and without it you are really struggling


the only comparable lens and not to be discounted is the 100mm-400mm canon lens, i also use this lens and usually when the light is not good as this lens is twice as fast as the prime lens, also the focussing distance is 1.8m, half that of the prime, the prime is as you would of read a lot lighter and a tad sharper and a little cheaper,

Finally on the camera front i would also look at the 550d as a comparison to the 500d, read some compare reviews of the two cameras together, i have not used a 500d so i cant comment but the 550d is a beltin camera for the money, you should have a close look at this camera too, i hope my thoughts help,

best Dennis

I've an elderly 350d which focuses the 100-400 no problem

Nick Isherwood wrote:

---

I'm looking to get into bird photography (something I've been itching to do for a while) and I've now decided to take the plunge. I've done quite a bit of research on cameras and lenses and I've decided to go with a Canon 500D body and a Canon 400mm f5.6 lense.

Can anyone recommend a good retailer where I can purchase these items?

---

Hi Nick,

I've just sent you a PM

Cheers, John