A Novices lament

[AFFABLE]

At his end of my existence (nearing 70) I have learnt that kit is no substitute for skill - I have never yet taken a sharp bird image (with a variety of film hardware) I could show to anyone else. So I am an experienced digital novice - all the experiences have been bad ones! Currently I am using the WAB threads as a wonderful encyclopaedia formed from the wisdom of others. I have a 400d with Sigma 70-300 and need more mms. The Sigma 1.4x limits me to f8 - in the UK not good. The Bigmas are weigh(!) beyond my manual faciliity. I favour the Canon 400 5.6 on what I have read, but worry about no IS. The alternative is the Canon 100-400 with IS but there are many rumbles about variable quality and wearing bearings. With my skill shortage the refined quality issues ought not to count, but I will probably go for the best purchase I can in case things get better.
All these issues have been well aired so I do not seek more advice about what to do - always welcome however.
I need to study technique on issues like aerial bird shots, aperture adjusting, controlling shake at 400mm - hence my input. Any good literature anybody?

[nightshade]

Go with the 100-400 life is too short to worry about bearings (thats what guarantees are for)

One of our ace contributors has put beginners advice sheets covering photographing birds in flight etc. somewhere here on the site photography beginners advice sheet there are more
Landscape and macro advice sheets - patience mes Amis
photo advice sheets update

[Geoff F]

I have been in the same dilemma for the past 6 months and did a bit of research. As I see it: Canon 100-400 is a good general purpose lens with a reasonable close focusing distance so you can also shoot the butterfly that lands just in front of you.

Canon 400 5.6 is reported as being a good very sharp lens and on a tripod IS doesn't matter so much. But you will need to have a shutter speed of at least 1/500 for hand use. Which can be limiting; and the minimum close focusing distance is over 10ft so you may miss the butterfly or hoverfly. People do say that it takes a converter without much loss of quality.

Another prime option is the Canon 300 IS which has good close focusing and works well with converters, even the x2.

And then there is the Sigma range . . .

You will see excellent photos from all these lenses here. Perhaps increasing your shutter speed will help your quality to improve. Currently, I use the Canon 70-300 IS which is a good lens but I know what you mean about a few more mm's. Because I couldn't decide, I went for more pixels instead and spent the money on a 40D.

[Ollie]

The way I see it is if you are going to use a tripod or monopod go for the Canon 400mm f5.6L USM lens. It's a cracking lens and can be easily hand held for in flight shots.

If you don't want to carry a tripod or monopod go for the Canon 100-400mm with the Image stabilisation. I don't think either lens would disappoint
Roger.

[Steve S]

Affable,

The greatest recent development in lens technology has to be IS (or VR, or whatever flavour you prefer to call it). If you are going for top quality images, go for top quality lenses.

However, if your technique is faulty even IS won't help much. Have you tried taking photos (of anything), with your long lens using a solid tripod? If the results are still below what you find acceptable a new lens is the way to go, if they are sharp then it is your technique that needs to improve and buying another lens at this point would probably be money wasted.

Where do you live? If it's near the top end of North Yorkshire email me (off list), and you can have a go with my 100-400 to try things out.

Steve

[skywatcher]

I've just been through the Nikon D80+ Bigma route and getting a sharp shot of small birds is difficult. I can get fairly close to them but the Bigma is weighty and hard to keep steady handheld. However, a friend lent me a Canon 30D with a 300 F4 IS prime + a canon 1.4 converter. This set up is light (I'm a small woman with quite small hands)and the stabiliser makes a huge difference.I came home yesterday, viewed the shots on the computer and was stunned. Lovely sharp shots of wrens, blue tits etc.Incredible detail and very nice bokeh.
So, I'll leave you to guess what I did today....

Seriously, this is an excellent set up. Essentially, 420mm (+ the crop factor on the camera). Pity Nikon don't do a 300 F4 with VR.

[nutmeg]

Skywatcher, that's the lens and size of converter I'm planning to get. Good to see that you can manage it fine - I'm also a pretty small woman and no way could I handhold a Bigma (lifted one once and realised it was out of the question!).

[colincurry]

I am a mere stripling - only 69 next month. I went through all the same research and ended up with the 100-400 to go with my 30D. I am very happy with it. I use it handheld, with a monopod and a tripod depending on the circumstances. Usually it is hand held (although I will be carrying a monopod) as I tend to walk from place to place rather than stay in hides. I echo the comment about having the flexibility to get good close-ups of butterflies and dragonflies.

Poor pictures, in my case, are always down to operator error and, quite often, being seduced by the high level of performance into attempting something beyond the capacity of my kit.

I am very pleased with the general level of results and the flexibility of the zoom.

Hope this helps.

Colin

[Hobjob]

"The alternative is the Canon 100-400 with IS but there are many rumbles about variable quality and wearing bearings"

I don't think I've read that on this forum, and there are one heck of a lot of 100-400 "pump" users on the list!!!!

You can put a 1.4x convertor on the pump (with taping
of contacts) and get good results.

Even with IS I don't get very good results hand helpd with
the pump - John, however seems to hand hold all the time
and gets superb results ------- gggrrrrrr

[skywatcher]

Affable,
I've pmed you a reply but am not at all confident it's worked. So, the short answer is...yes, I did go over to Canon.
Good luck!!