-
Senior Member
Re: a lens for Wild life in a bit tight budget
When I started out shooting wildlife I had a 55-250mm lens. One of the biggest draw backs was I found myself cropping way to much to get the picture I wanted. So I bought the 100-400mm and was real happy with it (with and added benefit of better IQ). You cannot always get close enough to animals to get a good clear view of there eyes which seems to really enhance the picture. So the extra reach does help a lot. In fact, I find myself at 400mm most of the time. You can go with a 400mm prime, but I also find the zoom to be handy because the 400mm was to big for shooting things like my kids soccer games (sports with good light outdoors). So the 100-400mm range worked good for me (although I would love to have the 500mm, it is a bit out of budget for me).
On of the big complaints I hear/read for the 100-400mmis the push/pull zoom action, but it was never really an issue for me.It was something that I got used to quickly, and it never really bothered me. I used this lens so much that when I got other lenses I had to get used to the rotational zoom action again.
Just my two cents for what ever it is worth.
Pat
5DS R, 1D X, 7D, Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6
, 24mm f/1.4
L II, 16-35mm f/4
L IS, 24-105mm f/4
L, 50mm f/1.8
, 100mm Macro f/2.8
L, 70-200mm f/2.8
L IS II
, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6
L, 580EX-II
flickr
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules