[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> If I am looking to get a good focal length for birds and want very good, but
> not pro results. . . .
>
> The more I read, it seems like there are no really good solutions for my price range.
Bird photography is a fairly specialized pursuit, in the sense that relatively
expensive equipment is necessary to get the kinds of results you're probably
visualizing. There's really no way around this. IMO the most cost-effective approach
is a second-hand fixed-focal-length telephoto lens, one or two extenders, and practice
on your close-approach techniques and/or constructing a blind. As you will discover,
if you haven't already, birds are much easier to photograph when you let them come to
you.
$850 for the 400/5.6L isn't too bad when you consider that a 300/4L plus 1.4x extender
would be even more. The 400/5.6 + 1.4x extender will get you to 560/8, not too bad
considering that the 300/2.8L + 2x extender only gets you to 600/5.6 for a whole lot
more money. For birds, if the fast teles are out of reach, the 400/5.6L would probably
be a better starting point than the 300/4, since you can get close to 600mm with the
1.4x extender rather than the 2x, which has a more noticeable effect on image quality
than does the 1.4x.
No option is cheap but if you want satisfying results you'll probably have to find a
way to budget about $1200 (assuming you already have a sturdy tripod and ballhead)�a
lot of money, but when you consider that the next step is the 500/4.5L at about three
times the price ($3400 from KEH), it's not such a bad deal if you can swing it. When
budgeting this out, be sure to factor in a copy of George Morris's �The Art of Bird
Photography� if you don't have one already. :-)
fcc
PS: �Pro results��don't kid yourself. Even though you may need the highest level of
technical excellence to *sell* a photo, you don't need that level to meet the quality
requirements of offset printing. Indeed, you probably need a better image for an 11x14
photographic enlargement for your wall than you do to get a decent image on book or
magazine paper�and for newspapers you could probably get away with an Instamatic if
you could get the shot with one. Just because someone is a pro doesn't mean their
photos are great (although of course some are)�it just means they get paid for them.
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
