Soldato
Another way of putting it is my friend/customer and pro wildlife photographer has a 500mm prime L Canon on tripod and he's about 15 ft away from the pond and bird set up in his back garden 
Body or Lens or Both?
- Thread starter Buddy
- Start date
On a general note, I would suggest getting along to a bricks and mortar store to try out a few lenses before buying (even if you intend to buy online for the best price). So much photography is about finding the right balance, not just with your camera body but with your own body.
For example, having a thumping great lump of L glass hanging off a lightweight DSLR body isn't always that ergonomic (there's a reason the pro bodies tend to be heavier and bulkier than consumer bodies). And some lenses are so much bulkier than others. Some people like bulk and weight as it gives them stability. Others don't because for them it causes shake. Try stuff out.
For example, having a thumping great lump of L glass hanging off a lightweight DSLR body isn't always that ergonomic (there's a reason the pro bodies tend to be heavier and bulkier than consumer bodies). And some lenses are so much bulkier than others. Some people like bulk and weight as it gives them stability. Others don't because for them it causes shake. Try stuff out.
Is decent macro possible with the 70-300mm? Doesn"t the far 70mm focal range make it difficult?
Soldato
You'd need a proper macro lens for macro really, although you can achieve "sorta" macro with a 100-400mk2 with it's super short minimum focus distance.
I picked up a brand new Sigma 105mm IS 2.8 for £326 before Christmas so second hand you could get one probably for around £200-250.
oh i was meaning instead of a poor wildlife option if you are fund limited
Common Lizard 1 - Woodwalton Fen - Cambs by Alex , on Flickrand another one i liked of mine
Dragonfly - Woodwalton Fen - Cambs by Alex , on Flickrmy fav lens the canon 100mm f2.8 Macro L IS
You can't do true macro with a 70-300 because the minimum focusing distance is too long. Some telephoto lenses have better minimum focusing distances than others and can achieve pseudo macro shots of larger things like flowers, small animals etc. But for the really small stuff like insects etc you need a proper macro lens.
i miss that dog. (my ex kept her)
i didnt actually realise you could see them all. i saw you followed. i need to get back out there. i havent updated for ages
youll notice a lot are with my 100mm Macro L
the one you faved is with the sigma art f1.4 35mm - its a very unusual lens
it takes pics like no other lens i have. i find it very difficult to use (it front focuses, so never used it on my 60D, which my 70D can adjust for) but somehow the pictures 'pop' more and i dont know why
Last edited:
Can see why, it's got beautiful colour, sharpness and bokeh.
How well does the IS work for macro shots?
I have a Sigma 150mm f2.8 Macro which can take some lovely shots in ideal conditions. But conditions are rarely ideal with macro and without IS it's too unwieldy to hand hold and a tripod isn't always practical. I've been thinking of trading it in and getting a more manageable macro lens.
Yeap same here. You'll notice the last 2 pics were uploaded just this week. Last ones were in June 2015. As mentioned I went to the wildlife exhibitions which has inspired me to get back into it.
absolutely fantastic
if i remember rightly its 2 axis IS
ive not got any canon latest generation IS but this trounced my sigma 120-300mm IS
this was my very first lens (i had no kit lens) and i didnt know why i was getting so many keepers. until i really understood IS
i do all my macro hand held really so i have to say, to me, its worth more than the premium over the older canon Macro 100mm
my copy of this lens is perfect on focus too. (i went through focus charts after having big issues with my sigma art) and this was spot on target.
called hybrid image stabilization, looks like it was first lens to have it
Last edited:
I bought the older Canon 100mm macro a long time ago but the copy I got had severe back focus issues so I returned it and opted for the Sigma 150mm macro instead. The L version with IS wasn't released back then. If it had been I'd have jumped straight on it given what I've seen here.
Your macro shots are impressive in their own right, but all the more so for being hand held. I know how few keepers I get trying to hand hold my Sigma without IS. Tripod only works for certain situations, not much help when you're chasing a dragonfly around the margins of a pond
Spend your money on glass.
Open your front door? Bird feeder in the back garden? Local park? RSPB reserve in London? Everywhere is a go to place for wildlife photography.
Open your front door? Bird feeder in the back garden? Local park? RSPB reserve in London? Everywhere is a go to place for wildlife photography.
I visited a nature reserve today. The path went around it but the reserve itself was completely cordoned off with either a metal fence or high hedges. There were no viewing boxes or vantage points. The small views you could get were so far from the water fowl it wouldn't matter how powerful your lens was.
Perhaps I should reword the question. Any specific nature reserves people recommend down south?
Of course I will experiment in my garden but there will be a limitation to the species youll come across.
Man of Honour
Where in London are you??
Wallington/sutton
Man of Honour
In that case I can't help 