A very versatile lens

[eccles]

I posted a robin picture (http://www.ukbutterflies.co.uk/phpBB2/v ... f=7&t=1766) in these forums a while back using my favourite lens, a Sigma 400mm f5.6 Telemacro. It cost me £260 from London Camera Exchange. Quite expensive for a second hand Sigma but it's been a cracking birding lens and is pretty sharp even wide open. But now I'm finding it very useful for skittish butterflies. It'll close focus to about .3 times full size. OK, it's not as good as a proper macro, and the close focus isn't enough to get close to a small blue, but it'll fill the frame with larger butterflies from around 5 feet away. The peacock below was cropped a little, by about 10 or 15%. Worth looking out for if you can get one to fit your DSLR.

[Will]

Presumably its fitted to a DSLR giving around 600mm actual? Unless you use a full framer, of course. Nice lens, whatever!

[eccles]

I'm currently using with my Sony A100 which is APS-C, so yes, it gives a crop equivalent of 600mm. It's not a cropped lens though so will work with full frame. It's a bit of a beast though. I got to meet fellow UKB member Denise today. She was toting her new Canon 100-400 zoom which has image stabilisation and zoom but was about the same weight as my non-IS fixed focus Sigma.

[Dave Mac]

Talking about lens versatility, I was out birding last weekend in Norfolk (it still does not feel warm enough to be in full butterfly mode yet). Anyway the sun came out (which was a rare occurrence in itself) and in a short stretch of overgrown pathway I saw about a dozen small torts and a couple of peacocks. I was carrying my Canon 100/400 zoom with a 1.4 extender and shot them from about 10ft. away. Did not even have to stray from the path

[PeterD]

I use the Olympus E3 an recently purchased the Sigma 50-500 lens for bird photography. During my birding expeditions, I have used this camera/lens combination for a few butterfly shots. See my post at http://www.ukbutterflies.co.uk/phpBB2/v ... 720#p10720.

These shots were taken from about 5 ft away and demonstrate the quality of the optics for colour and detail. I have always used telephoto rather than MACRO lenses for this type of shooting. Success is almost always assured and the dof is better.

Peter

[Gruditch]

Each to their own Peter D, but I would say a Macro lens, is the best lens to use for Macro photography.

Gruditch

[Martin]

Each to their own Peter D, but I would say a Macro lens, is the best lens to use for Macro photography.

Gruditch

Unless it's a Canon 100-400L IS with extension tubes of course





Martin.

[PeterD]

You are correct of course . My preference for this approach though is that I can still take images without too much stalking and if I want more detail then I just crop to get it. I have tried Macro lenses but found that I lost too many opportunities due to my lack of stalking skills.

Peter

[PeterD]

Each to their own Peter D, but I would say a Macro lens, is the best lens to use for Macro photography.

Gruditch

Unless it's a Canon 100-400L IS with extension tubes of course





Martin.

Lovely shots Martin. Focus and dof is perfect.

PeterD

[Pete Eeles]

Each to their own Peter D, but I would say a Macro lens, is the best lens to use for Macro photography.

Gruditch

Unless it's a Canon 100-400L IS with extension tubes of course

Martin.

And biceps the size of tree trunks

Cheers,

- Pete

[Pete Eeles]

Each to their own Peter D, but I would say a Macro lens, is the best lens to use for Macro photography.

Gruditch

Unless it's a Canon 100-400L IS with extension tubes of course

Martin.

And biceps the size of tree trunks Superb photos though!

Cheers,

- Pete

[Martin]

[
And biceps the size of tree trunks

Yep, that's me

[Gruditch]

Yep nice shots Martin, makes a pleasant change from seeing your bl@@dy car.
Funny thing is PeterD, I have a Sigma 120-300 reputedly a great lens, have I got a single good shot with so far, No. I have finally taken to using my Macro for longish range stuff, and cropping in.

Gruditch

[PeterD]

Yep nice shots Martin, makes a pleasant change from seeing your bl@@dy car.
Funny thing is PeterD, I have a Sigma 120-300 reputedly a great lens, have I got a single good shot with so far, No. I have finally taken to using my Macro for longish range stuff, and cropping in.

Gruditch

I have recently had a similar experience. Purchased a Zuiko 70-300mm lens but always got soft results. Saw lots of others getting superb pics with the same lens so I put it down to me. Tried everything form setting changes, tripod/monopod mounts but still did not get acceptable results. This went on for about 2 months then, in desperation, I took out two Olympus bodies, one fitted with the so callled kit lens + 1.4 converter to give me a focal length off just over 200mm. The other body was fitted with the 70-300. The max aperture size was the same for both lens combinations and focal length set to 200mm. Took several shots of the same subjects with both cameras then swapped body/lens combination and repeated the exercise. The problem went with the lens and the manufacturer has agreed a free replacement - I shall pick it up next Friday. The reason I mention this is that its worth considering a possible faulty lens and if the manufacturer is reasonable, you should still get a replacement from them if this is the case. My 70-300 was purchased in December 2007.

Peter

[eccles]

There are many ways of photographing butterflies. I have two telephoto zooms, the fixed telephoto mentioned above, a 2 dioptre achromatic close up lens, a 105mm macro and a 1.4x teleconverter. Except for the teleconverter, all have been used at various times to shoot insects. I intend to use the teleconverter in future to extend the reach of the 105 macro. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages. I don't currently have extension tubes because, for the most part, the lenses I have will all focus quite close. I expect I shall add a set some time in future for >1:1 macro.