Re: Telephoto lenses
MHoff36100 (MHoff36100@aol.com)
Tue, 13 Jan 1998 18:51:54 EST
In a message dated 98-01-13 18:22:55 EST, Fran Saunders wrote:
> If I remember correctly, some scopes have optional adapters
> for cameras, and it makes for a better fit. Might be worth
> looking into if you plan to use a scope for photos.
>
> Speaking of cameras, I was thinking of adding a tele lens for
> bird photography. Anybody out there with some recommendations
> as to make and size? Some people on our AZ trip had 400 mm
> Sigmas, which they said worked well.
>
> Fran
>
Fran -
I do a fair amount of picture-taking, especially of rarities, pelagics, etc. I
use Nikon equipment and have both a Sigma 400/5.6 and 500/7.2 that I use
depending upon lighting conditions. The more light and faster the shutter
speed the better with these long lenses. With such "slow" lenses you almost
have to use a fast film, like Kodachrome 200, which I prefer. The next step
up in lenses (say a 400/2.8) is going to cost you $3K+. I use Sigma lenses and
I'm very happy with them. Comparable Nikon lenses would cost 3-5x as much. I'm
giving a talk to the Baltimore Club in February on "Rare birds of Maryland" if
you'd like to check-out some of the results or talk more.
I also have 800mm and 1000mm adapters for my Kowa scope that I can use the
Nikon on. These need much light, and are really only good for documenting
birds, not taking quality pictures. A tripod is mandatory.
Regards,
Mark Hoffman
Sykesville, MD
Mhoff36100@aol.com