How much better will my photos get?

[Jalster]

I am relatively new to wildlife photography and have been shooting birds for about 12 months. I bought a second hand 350d body and was given a 70-300mm EF lens. I had fun at first but quickly found that apart from the birds on my feeder, I was struggling to get near my real passion, birds of prey. Needing a boost I decided to put my hard earned cash into a good lens. So I purchased a second hand Canon 100-400mm L IS USM. Its fantastic! I have now been able to get some decent shots of the Red Kites near my home. But as with most things I am now wanting more. So I was hoping I could get some advice. Will changing my camera body, coupled with my lens deliver even greater rewards? I was considering the Canon 40D. I am keen to open my future options as well, so something that will enable the use of a 1.4x converter etc.

In a nutshell, am I making the most of my lens? Can anyone tell me if I will see a decent increase in sharpness, quality etc in my shots if I upgrade to a 40D or am I looking at a much bigger jump to 1D. I have discounted the 5D due to it’s low FPS.

[Mumby]

Hi,

I own a 350D but have used a few different DSLRs, I'm no expert but here is my tuppence worth: I think the main difference you will find with a 40D is that it just 'feels' nicer, it is larger than a 350D and once you have played around with the 40D for a while, the 350D will feel like a toy in comparison.

The main factor in how sharp your images are is you, then the lens, then the body (in my opinion). The 40D autofocus system is better than the 350D, no doubt about that. But sticking a 1.4x TC on the 100-400 will give you an f/8 lens at 400*1.4 mm, even a 40D is going to struggle to AF with that in anything but fantastic light.

Basically, if I had the money to upgrade to a 40D I would, but I wouldn't expect to immediately see much better and sharper images. I would have a few more pixels and a bigger burst capability though, along with something that feels a bit more grown up

Regards,

Paul

[glsammy]

The most important part re the quality of the image is the lens. Your camera body is capable of producing fine images, with the right lens on it.
The 100-400 is a fine lens, although it's known for quite a variation in sharpness. Some users get really sharp images from it, others don't. It seems it can be prone to losing sharpness over time, or else Canon's quality control isn't quite what it should be.
If you want the absolute ultimate in image quality an L series Prime lens is the only way to go. If you can handle it, the EF 600mm f/4L IS USM, or the EF 500mm f/4L IS USM. The later retails at £5,000!

Once you've got your L prime lens, then the camera body comes into it.
Obviously for the ultimate, a 1D Mk III would be good, provided your pockets are deep enough! Superb low noise levels at high ISO settings, 10fps, the ultimate in image quality. Add around £2,800 for the body. So for the absolute ultimate, provided you can carry it and use it, you'll be spending at least £8,000.

A more sensible suggestion, would probably be a 300mm F4 IS lens, which works very well with a 1.4X TC, retaining all auto functions or the beautiful 400mm F5.6. This isn't image stabilised, but it's a superb, sharp affordable lens.
I'm considering getting one of the above, I just can't make up my mind which one!

[MagpieMick]

Hello Jalster,

Your 350D and lens combo are good, we all want better quality images and the 40D with 10mp would give you a better image that you could crop harder.
But at the cost of £700.00+ .........!!!!

Its not neccessarily what camera gear you've got it's your choice of location,
once at the location most of the time its the waiting game...patience!!!

Your trying for Birds of Prey, which have brilliant eye sight they see you long be for you see them...Once you have a location that you see you target on a regular basis....then hide up in a Bush/hide etc and wait then wait more..
Some species will come to bait to bring them closer to you.

As for using the 1.4x you'll need a tripod 99% of the time to give you better results and with the 1.4x you'll lose image quality slightly.

So in a nutshell if you are loaded then get a new camera !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BUT.....BUT....its more to do with fieldcraft and knowing your target species and don't forget huge amounts of LUCK !!!!!!!!!!!!

Stick with what you've got and practice excellent results can be had from your combo.

Good Luck

Mick..

[willing to learn]

I have just taken up Photography, with a Digital SLR cannon 400d and at the moment using a Cannon 100 - 300 usm. I have ordered the 100-400mm as you are using.(If it ever comes). The lads on here have been a great help to me. I have no problems taking pic of Birds of Prey I have willing subjects at hand. But will be interested in this thread as I am hoping to learn as much as possible on digital photograpy especially telephoto tecnique's to improve my wild bird photograpy.
Regards
Colin

[Jalster]

Wow! You guys are quick. Thank you so much.

I am heading down the field craft route as suggested and getting better. Though the best results so far have been from my car with some leaf scrim net.

The reason the question came up was that I have some nice shots but was concerned about reading that I may only be using 50% of what my lens is capable of due to the sensor on the 350D. Also with a great pixel count, zoom and crop would yield better final shots. It's such a minefield, hence the second hand route, and I know I am still the lowest spec part of my setup .

I bought a battery grip and it has made a big difference to the handling, though I find I m shooting in portrait almost all the time to take advantage of this.

[glsammy]

One of the best tips I can give is be patient. Hang around. Don't go flying around looking everywhere. Find a decent area or site and wait.
A recent example. I was at Whisby a couple of weeks ago. Plenty of camera users came and went from the bird feeding station. Eventually I was on my own, when this chap called in to see me:



Made my day, proving yet again my lazy nature was well rewarded!

Mind you, I've also spent over 6 hours in one hide there to get a Kingfisher shot and got nothing, that's the way it goes sometimes. The good sightings more than make up for the disappointments.

[Jalster]

Great advice. Thanks.

Nice shot by the way. Do you use a tripod or bean bag when sitting in a hide? I have gone down the bean bag route as it's easier to move about. But I have seen a more people using tripods. Am I missing something?

[willing to learn]

Hello Grayham
I managed to spot a Musket to day truding through the woods I found it hard to focus through the cover and was a way off. But I guess movement would have spooked it. The last few years I would of had some great chance's to take pics of hobbies in the late summer, lets hope now I have a camera, and get a good understanding of it, and learn how to use it well things allow me to get some good pics this summer.

[glsammy]

Originally Posted by Jalster

Great advice. Thanks.

Nice shot by the way. Do you use a tripod or bean bag when sitting in a hide? I have gone down the bean bag route as it's easier to move about. But I have seen a more people using tripods. Am I missing something?

I never use a tripod or should I say, hardly ever! At Whisby, this was hand held. The bird was only there for a second so I had to react fast. Nothing at all wrong with bean bags. Far easier and more responsive than a tripod. I will use my monopod when in a hide, it all depends if there's any suitable shelf to lean on. If there is, I'll use that. If not, I use my monopod.