70-400 to replace???

[bonneville]

Bird photography is calling but my reach is just not far enough.

My two best lenses are the Minolta 300 f4 G HS and the Sony 70-200 f2.8 G SSM but even with the
Sigma TCx1.4 EX DG or the Sony TCx2 they aren't enough. I am looking seriously at the 70-400.

But one of them has to go, which one?

[David Kilpatrick]

If 600mm f/8 is not good enough, selling your lenses won't solve the problem. The 70-400mm may just work with the 1.4X converter and provide some focus functionality, it will be a manual 800mm f/11 otherwise. In your position, I would do something very unusual instead. I'd buy an Alpha 350 or 380 and a radio remote release, and a pair on binoculars. Here's why.

First, the Alpha 350 will give you 14.2 megapixels and for bird photography, every pixel counts. Your current maximum of 600mm f/8, or a very workable 450mm f/5.6, using the 300mm and converters would be extended relative to the A700 by a small factor - 450 becomes 485mm if you crop to the same number of pixels. But the live screen is even more useful with the radio remote. You can place the camera in a hide or closer to the target, and observe the live screen (either from close, within a hide, or through binoculars) and fire - the radio remotes perform autofocus - when you see the subject on screen.

David

[Dr. Harout]

Brian, I think you have "lens fever".

[01af]

Bird photography is calling but my reach is just not far enough. My two best lenses are the Minolta AF Apo HS 300 mm f/4 G and the Sony SAL 70-200 mm f/2.8 G SSM but even with the
Sigma TC 1.4× EX DG or the Sony TC 2× they aren't enough. I am looking seriously at the 70-400.

If your existing arsenal doesn't give you enough reach then the 70-400 won't make big a difference. The advantage over an AF Apo 300 G with converters isn't that much after all. While for a zoom it goes pretty well with tele converters, it still does not go as well as the prime 300 mm lens does. It sure is a great lens but it still is not the right choice when significantly more reach than 300 mm + 2× TC is what you really want. By the way, did you ever try stacking the two tele converters?

But one of them has to go, which one?

When you sell one of those lenses, sooner or later you will regret. Do not buy the SAL 70-400 G solely for the 400 mm end. If you buy it then get it for the 70 mm to 400 mm range ... and then you may sell the 70-300. But keep the 300 mm prime and the 70-200/2.8.

What you need is a fast 500 mm or 600 mm prime telephoto lens. Take a look at the Sigma 500 mm 1:4.5 EX DG or wait for the upcoming Sony super-telephoto lens. Or better yet, learn to approach the birds closer. See Gustav's kingfisher photos he took with only 200 mm on an A700 from a hide ...

-- Olaf

[bonneville]

Thank you for all replies.

Interesting suggestion David, binos onto live view. The only problem with that idea is that the 350 will have to bob up and down on a raft on Rutland Water since this is the closest I can get to the Osprey nest:


A700, Minolta 300f4, Sigma TC1.4, ISO1600, 1/400, F8, monopod

Perhaps I could fit the camera to a radio controlled boat But seriously, an idea I hadn't considered.


Harout, you could be right have you got any medication for my fever? (Preferrably not one that involves using a brush)

Olaf, as you say a l o n g e r lens is the real answer and I have been looking at the Sigma 150-500 and the older Tamron 200-500. The birding forums have a lot to say about these but the reviews seemed mixed.

I am thoroughly enjoying the captive raptors, such as this:



But it is the reach to the real birds in the wild that I am struggling with for clarity and sharpness. It is shots like Gustav's that help to inspire me, but doesn't he hire the long primes (as well as spending hours in hides)?

Brian

[David Kilpatrick]

Gustav photographs kingfishers from 2-3m with a 70-200mm... you are trying to photograph ospreys from a distance. The close distance is one reason why Gustav's shots work so well, he does not have a lot of contrast loss due to air quality - even a perfect day will show some loss of contrast, colour saturation and sharpness as you increase distance (regardless of the lens used).

Osprey nests - apart from their protected status - are usually only photographed close-up from specially constructed platforms or hides and it takes 1-3 years to secure good detailed nest photos - in our area, limited very strictly to one or two photographers/film makers working with the conservation team. Public viewing is from less intrusive locations. Video cameras are now permanently set up on the close viewpoint platforms, linked to monitors in the viewing hides. That's the best way the public can see the action.

The quick answer is don't set your sights on one of the most protected and difficult species to photograph. In your location, you have fairly quick access to fenland areas to the east with a lot of birdlife.

David