Spec me canon lenses for the following photography

[413x]

Having committed to raping my wallet by way of photography and being tied to canon I'd like a few ideas to get me started on the following

Macro
Astrophotography - at first just tripod+cam but later mounted on scope
Sports - motorsports
Wildlife - birds mainly
I'll probably want to try filming too

As mentioned in my other thread, due to my gf already having a canon I will be tied to that system although I still need to choose between the 7d and 70d (if I can wait for the 70 that is)

I already have
Nifty 50mm
Canon 100mm f2.8 usm IS L

 

[413x]

Very helpful

Yes, I understand I'd need a tracker, and yes I'd probably be hoping (or at least Iwas) to capture planets, andromeda galaxy, bright nebula in some far from perfect form.
Originally I thought this would simply be (simple as in process) attaching cam to telescope and layering some long tracked exposure pics

Out of interest how much was your refractor?

 

[413x]

Thanks so far guys

Yes i agree i dont need L glass, but its good to get recs for low middle and high for each area

Macro i definitely will not be needing anything else for a long time! as much as i would like a 180 its not something i need as im only starting

astro..this is something that is going to take more thought (and expense) than i first thought. i guess id like to be able to get a nice pic of jupiter for example and have it recognizable for what it is. But is is an area im quite keen on. Pictures of things you cant just see with the naked eye really.

The sports/wildlife seems the hardest to decide choice wise, so 200 may be too short? the 100-400 is very expensive. Also, the IS is very useful for macro, but how important is it for sports/wildlife? or will the camera be mostly on a tripod for this?

i think the filming i will leave till last as im just starting out

 

[413x]

Jupiter is a tough one- small enough to need very high magnification, and be severely affected by atmospheric distortion.

If you use facebook, search for Corin Grieves (pretty sure I'm the only one), I have an album of a few bits and pieces from experiments holding a compact camera up to the eyepiece, to one with my old 1000D attached to the scope. On there is a picture of Jupiter and it's moons, and one of the disc. Pretty underwhelming, and the result of hundreds of attempts. I'm pleased with some of the later moon pics though.

It's extra frustrating because the eye sees a wealth of detail and contrast, you plug the DSLR in and it sees virtually nothing. I tried for ages to get the dark limb of the moon on camera, it's awe inspiring visually through the scope, you can even see craters and shadows, but without HDR the camera just can't do the visual tricks that the eye and brain do.

After that I moved to London, lost the dark skies and discovered general photography

i found you and the pics. I can see what you mean. the lunar pics are very nice but you can see in the jupiter pic the lack of anything. you wouldnt know it was jupiter instantly. maybe just stick with a scope and the eye..and yes it does show you how amazing an eye is with the brain as a processor!! Ill look more into it but try not to get to expectant!

 

[413x]

snip

luckily im quite familar with birds/behaviour and can appreciate the real life distances you will get. Very nice heron!

400mm, grr, thats a hefty bit of kit, both money and weight! Why am i interested in the expensive stuff that i need polar opposite lens for?

problem is i will get more use out of a wildlife lens than a sports lens!

EDT
ive been reading up on TCs and loosing stops and potentially loosing AF at roughly f/8 in certain situations

 

[413x]

I think I've used VC (IS) trackside once, can't speak for wildlife but I expect it will be more useful for that.

im guess with sport (esp motorsport) you can easily set up a tripod and just wait for action thus eliminating the IS need?

nice shots with a cheaper lenss btw

 

[413x]

could you just explain why if the max aperture is f/8 why AF doesnt work?

I have only just learnt about aperture area in regards to focal length/stop value = diameter of aperture! and that f/x results in same light on the sensor regardless of focal length!

so a TC is no more useful than photoshop if the lens isnt resolving the image beyond the sensors resolution BEFORE the use of the TC?
im guessing this is one reason canon only enable TC with high end lenses? (as well as the stop loss)

 

[413x]

thats what i want.
nice pics of green finches and sparrows, i can imagine the annoyance of loosing the female tail!!

i am not amused! i was hoping to get away with less!!
you guys are cruel, you know that?

 

[413x]

btw, these are my first ever shots using a macro and second time with a dslr at all
id appreciate some input
i think they were MF


BumbleBee by Al4x, on Flickr

Peacock by Al4x, on Flickr

i got my best with a nifty 50 in regards to focus, DOF etc but cant post, due to content

 

[413x]

To be fair, that's actually at 400 on FF. So, a 300 on Crop would give you 420, which means you could have the same reach. But, as I say, the bird feeder here is all of 3m from the tripod set up. So, you could test out what you like with a wireless trigger and one of the better 70-300's that other non Canon Vendors do.

As a side point, how do you know that it's female?!

If I'm honest, I was visiting the gf, their parents are quite into birds, have the bird feeder and I saw an opportunity to get some shots, and some experience, but know absolutely nothing about birds... So, tagging etc... the shots is going to be somewhat of a challenge for me

kd

im looking at a 400 arent i? meh!

Its a female because its colours are less vivid (most birds are like this as usually the female is sitting on a nest requiring camo)
saying that many birds are indistinguishable (from distance) but it is rare the female is brighter

im pretty good with birds and IDing them

Off topic, but our now departed beautiful jackdaw, without shadow of a doubt the best 'pet' i ever had

 

[413x]

At wider apertures the light rays exhibit a greater refractive angle, at narrower apertures the light enters the camera more parallel. The phase detect sensors don't work when the light is closer to parallel.


yeah, if the lens is not out resolving the sensor before the TC then adding a TC will not add any extra detail to the final image. And so yeah, that is why TCs are only officially supported on high end lenses, mostly primes.

thanks.

think my physics a level is actually useful for something now!

id also like to try getting some light trails over the motorway, i keep eyeing up bridges!