Hiking and wildlife photography

[buffy1270]

I am interested in a good lens for wildlife photography meaning mostly birds but also mammals.  Some of this photography would be done on hikes and some would be done from a blind or from my deck at my house.  Which of these 2 lens/lens combinations would be the best?  I would be handholding during hikes but could use a tripod in blinds or at my home.

1)  Canon 100-400L,

2)  Canon 70-300 is + 400 5.6 prime,

3)  Canon 70-300 + Tamron 200-500.

I am open to other suggestions also.  Thanks.

[KeithB]

What Camera(s) do you have?

I think the 70-300 will be adequate for hiking, it is about as big and heavy as *I* would like to lug around!

[buffy1270]

Hi.  I have the Canon XSi.  I keep reading that 300 mm is too short for wildlife photography or I would go with the 70-300 alone.

[KeithB]

If the people telling you that 300mm is too short for wildlife potography are using full-frame cameras, note that the 70-300 is effectively a 110 - 480 on an 1.6x APS sensor based camera like yours.

[marcfs]

Buffy, in bird photography big (longer) is always better.  For hiking and hand holding IS is a real plus.  For most bird photography you are shooting wide open.  Here is what I think are the top Bird photography lens:

?   800 – excellent lens; too large to hike with; over $11K
?   600 – excellent lens;  also to large to hike with; over $8K
?   500 – excellent lens;  can hike with, but not convenient; over $6K
?   400 DO -  light, has IS, appropriate for hiking; $5-6K
?   400 f/5.6; light, great for birds in flight; no IS; difficult to use for hiking without tripod unless shooting birds in flight; needs lots of light;        $1.1-1.2K
?   100-400;  good hiking lens; IS is old but effective; slow to focus on birds in flight; not light weight;  very practical for isolating landscape features;  overall a very useful telephoto;                $1.5-$1.6K

?   300 f/4 L IS; light weight good for hiking; effective IS; can add 1.4 extender, but slows down focus speed;            $1.2-$1.3K plus extender

Bird photography has become a lot more expensive in the last few years with the prices of lens sky rocketing.  It can be frustrating if you can’t get a tack sharp image with your camera and lens.

You might want to rent a lens or two for a weekend of hiking and bird photography to see which lens works best for you.

Good luck!!

Marc 

[Bob Atkins]

In your situation I think I'd get the EF 70-300/4-5.6 IS USM and see if it does everything you want. It's an excellent lens (I use one myself), small enough and light enough to carry while hilking, the IS is effective so you can do without a tripod as long as the light in't too low. On a crop sensor camera the reach at 300mm is good. It's reasonably sharp at 300mm and it's not too expensive either!

If you find you need something longer, then you can think about a 400mm or 500mm lens, but you may well find that 300mm is long enough most of the time. The real trick to wildlife photography is getting closer to your subject, not longer and longer lenses (whatever lens you have, you'll want something longer some of the time). If you have a bird feeder at your house, 300mm should be enough for good closeups.

[mitchald]

I have taken some great pictures (I think they are great) with a Canon XTi and a 70-300. Birds in flight, antelope running, marmots sleeping. And it was not too heavy to hike with.

Enjoy the hikes,
Mitch

[buffy1270]

Thanks for your input everyone.  I just got my 70-300 today and I am pleased so far.  I still have a lot to learn about taking good pictures but I was able to get a nice shot of a titmouse in a tree in my backyard.  I can only assume this lens will get better as I get better with photography.

[KeithB]

  I can only assume this lens will get better as I get better with photography.

I can only say that this is one of the most profound things I have read about photography in a while!