Geek warning!! Geek warning!! The following post contains technical details that only camera geeks care about. If you are not a camera geek you might want to skip down to the image. Ok, you’ve been warned.
With all the wildlife opportunities that abound in Florida I decided to rent a lens to increase my chance of making good images. The largest lens I own is a 70-300mm. I chose a Canon 400mm f/5.6L. I had the option of selecting the 400mm f/2.8L until I discovered that it weighs a whopping 13 pounds! With my back problems the total amount of equipment I can carry around at one time is about 20 pounds so that lens was out of the question. What a monster! It’s hard to believe that the f/5.6L is 10 pounds lighter. All for one f stop!
The lens cost me $70 to rent for 10 days whereas the f/2.8L would have cost $475 for the same time period. To buy the lenses, the f/5.6L goes for $1,200 and the f/2.8L goes for $11,500. That’s a rather hefty difference in both weight and dollars.
The lens is a beauty! I cannot believe how sharp the images are. Not only is it L glass but it is also a prime lens. I think I am finally convinced that a prime lens is the way to go for sharpness. I have never bought one in my life. When it comes time to lay my money on the table I always went for the zoom lens because it seemed so much more versatile.
Here is an image I made with my new favourite lens. It is a Brown Anole displaying his dewlap. They do this to assert their territorial dominance. Either that or he really really liked me a lot 😉 He was probably about 6 inches from tip to tail.
Please click the image to view a larger version.
I made the images of the Spoonbill and the Wood Stork from earlier this week with this lens as well.
Renting the lens was easy, fast and economical and I am sure I will be doing it more often now that I’ve tried it. I mean, why invest thousands of dollars and be stuck with a certain variety of lens when you can rent and always have the perfect lens for the job.
Lovely critter and great photo!
I had a prime (and only) lens way, way back in time with my very first SLR (this was in the late 70s). When I upgraded to my first “modern” SLR, it came with a zoom and every lens I’ve had since has been a zoom. Lately I’ve been looking at that old 50-mm prime with nostalgia and wishing there was some way I could use it on my current camera – adapters aside, it seems like a stretch!
Hi Laurie, thank you so much for your comments. You know I was looking at a 50mm recently and they are really cheap. You can get a good one for around $100. The old lenses I had for my canon ae1 actually worked with my digital slr’s but no auto-focus. It might be worth a shot to try it out if they have the same mount. But if not, it might be worth investing in a new one. I have heard a lot of people really like them, especially if you get a 1.4 or 1.8, you can do some shallow depth of field stuff.
The Canon 50mm f/1.4 was the first quality lens I ever bought. I use it a bit less now than when it was my only lens – but I quite like it. I’ve heard good things about the 1.8 – though it is fairly cheaply bit in comparison (and much cheaper in price). Both are much lighter than a f2.8 44mm! 😉
Thanks for the info Michael, I might check into one of those 50mm 1.4’s. I don’t understand why some lenses weigh so much more than others, but it all adds up to a sore back!
Wow Anne, 13 pounds. I think I would need a harness to shoot with that. Very nice image. You are right, unbelievably sharp.
Hi Len, I think people do use a harness! You can get those chest harnesses or a special tripod head for them. But still you have to carry it to the location, that would be way too hard for me!! I think I need a donkey. A donkey would be rather handy. Thanks for your comments.
Good info on the 400mm lenses. I was recently looking at a used 400mm f2.8 online, but didn’t realize it was so heavy. I am starting be conscious of equipment weight as well!
Hi Randy, yes weight is very important. It is one of things I always look at in the specs before I buy something. When you look at the photos of the lenses online they don’t look like they are so different in size. I borrowed a friend’s 500mm during my trip and it was HUGE! I had him take a photo of me using it. It’s a good thing to look at with tripods too. I spent the extra money and got a super light one and now I carry it almost always.
I would not want to carry around a 13lb lens either! I enjoyed all of this post, so I guess that makes me a camera geek!
Hi Michael, oh there’s no doubt, you are a total geek! You’re one of the best geeks I know 😉 You’re the geek I go to when I need technical help on stuff after all. But you know I say “geek” with warmth in my heart – it’s a good thing!
I don’t mind the term geek at all. Geek is not a bad thing. Nerd, however, I don’t like as much – it seems to imply much lower social skills than geek. I am not a nerd. 😛
I think nerds dress funny too. Although I have no idea how you like to dress. As long as your mother doesn’t dress you funny then it’s probably safe to say you’re a geek not a nerd. 😉
400mm primes are monsters these days! 40 years ago I bought a Hanimex 400mm – slim long barrel of a lens, light, and almost shaped like a telescope. Took some reasonable motor racing shots with it – no idea what happened to it. For my action work while skiing (coming soon) I use a Sigma 28-300 Zoom. On a DX sized sensor that takes me over 400mm in film equivalence. It’s reasonably sharp too and weighs no more than my chunky 24-85 Nikkor. Wouldn’t get on a plane with one of those 400mm prime beasts!
Love the photo of this cheeky little fellow.
Thanks Andy. I usually use a canon 70-300mm usm lens and I have always liked it. But it is no where near as sharp as that 400mm was. But it’s half the price so you get what you pay for I suppose. Can you imagine getting on a plane with one of those? They would probably want you to take it apart or something! I guess people must do it. I think renting is the way to go.
Love, love, love this shot Anne! Good Lord, I had no idea that those lens’ cost that much. My personal favorite lens is my 50mm prime we got last year for the exact same reasons you mention here.. tack sharp images! I love our little lizard friend in this shot, Anne, what a great capture!
Hi Toad! I knew you would like this because he’s like a salamander which are amphibians like toads 😉 But actually he’s an Anole which is a reptile not an amphibian. And that’s today’s fascinating fact!
That is incredibly sharp. Thanks for this post because I’ve been thinking about purchasing a new lens and now I think I’ll go out and rent to test some out. Great shot.
Thanks Edith! I would do the same thing it is worth renting just to find out if you really like it.
i have lizard Iguana, and this one is cute, nice capture…you can see light in photos, good job
Hello Vinko, I have been keeping my eye out for a wild iguana here in Florida but I haven’t seen one yet. In this photo the sun was in just the right place to highlight the orange colour of his dewlap – it appears to glow! Thank you for visiting my blog and leaving comments.
Awesome capture Anne. What a great looking little lizard. Wonderful clarity and sharpness in the subject, while the soft background rounds the picture out. Nice work.
Thanks again Adam, I have to thank that beautiful lens for the sharpness and the bokeh.
That is a great shot, the lizard looks almost rubber at a glance (but many of them do!) but on a closer look you can really appreciate the image.
Hi Helena, thank you very much! He was not a rubber lizard but that’s not a bad idea for sometime when I cannot find any wildlife to shoot 😉