Canon IS lenses

I'm having a problems taking nature photographs. I'm using a Canon
Digital Rebel with a Tamron 28-300mm lens. The problem is blurred
pictures, that I know is caused by camera shake. Most of our photos
are taken under moderate to heavy tree cover and 20 to 40 feet away
with the subject being river otters.
Would a similar Canon lens with Image Stabilzation help?
Thanks
Mike



Go ask your mother!

 

it might do in terms of lighting etc, but if you are trying to shoot a
subject that's contstantly moving, I don't think IS will do much for
you...try using a tripod or a fast shutter speed and cranking up the ISO

 

Tamron is also making an IS 28-300 now.

Doug

 

A tripod is less expensive.

 

Camera shake will be minimised by IS but subject movement won't. You may try
using a high ISO so that the shutter speed can be kept high. That will
reduce blurring due to both camera shake & subject movement. The noise can
be later tackled in post-processing.

 

What is the apperture of this lens?

What shutter speed and apperture are you using? Check the EXIF data to find
out.
The rule of thumb is that for handheld photography at 300mm you should use
1/300s or faster, on a DX camera like the Rebel this translates to even
1/450s. Unless this is a very fast lens (unlikely for a Tamron 11x zoom) you
need a lot of bright sunlight to get that.

Probably somewhat. It will probably reduce camera shake by 2-3 f-stops, but
of course it will not freeze the otters, so you will still get motion blurr.

A much cheaper and IMO better option would be to use a tripod instead of
trying to handhold a slow shutter speed at 300mm.

And you may have even better luck wich a faster lens. Unfortunately those
are really expensive at that focus range.

jue

 

You might find that a monopod would be a better solution, leaving the
camera reasonably mobile yet restraining camera shake. Tripods,
monopods and IS lenses will do nothing, though, for subject movement.
Only a faster shutter speed will help this, meaning high ISO or a faster
lens.

Colin D.

 

There is no similar Canon lens but a similar Tamron lens is highly
affordable - the new VC version of the 28-300mm - and also pretty good
optically, much improved over the older non-stabilised version.

However, it won't stop otters moving, and they move very quickly. I have
had trouble shooting sharp pictures of otters playing in a zoo (I visit
them regularly) because even a slight head or paw movement demands
1/500th, they are so rapid.

David

--
Icon Publications Ltd, Maxwell Place, Maxwell Lane, Kelso TD5 7BB
Company Registered in England No 2122711. Registered Office 12 Exchange
St, Retford, Notts DN22 6BL
VAT Reg No GB458101463
Trading as Icon Publications Ltd, Photoworld Club and Troubadour.uk.com
www.iconpublications.com - www.troubadour.uk.com - www.f2photo.co.uk -
www.photoclubalpha.com - www.minoltaclub.co.uk
Tel +44 1573 226032

 

IMO, the tripod or IS will only help if your Otters are motionless.

Try this before spending money on either:

Try shooting in shutter priority (Tv mode) at 1/1000 of a second. If the
image is too dark, raise your ISO. I think you will also like what this
shutter speed does to water as it will freeze the droplets.

 

Wildlife shots with slow zooms ... this brings back painful memories!

In addition to the other suggestions, what time are you taking the
pictures at? Switching to the middle of the day will increase light and
allow faster shutter speeds. Decreasing the ISO (400, 800 but it affects
picture quality) and using a monopod or tripod will also help.

 

You're using a 28-300 lens and wondering why your photos suck? Amazing.

Yoshi

 

You need a good lens for shooting natures. Wide angel for landscape and
something like
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-500mm-f-4.0-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
for birds etc.

See also:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/Canon-Wildlife-Lens.aspx
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/Canon-Landscape-Lens.aspx

 

He's using an entry level camera and an entry level lens. He's not going
to go purchase a $5,000+ lens today after reading your post. He's
received some great suggestions about how to best work around the
limitations of his existing lens. As he gains more experience he'll be
in a position to know exactly what lenses will be more effective for his
type of photography.

 

Trust me that Canon lens has some of the most atrocious bokeh you ever want
to see. I'll give it one thing; its inexpensive price tag is all it got
going for itself. Canon cut too many corners. How much more would it have
cost Canon to put 9 aperture blades in that thing like Nikon? There isn't a
500mm lens out there that could even come close to the quality and
performance of the old Nikkor.





Rita

 

And what exactly does that have to do with this thread about helping a
Canon user and his entry level lens?

 

Nada. It's just the yada-yada guy going on. Always blowing hard, always
hyperbolic, and never accurate.

 

My wife and I have two lenses that would might work well for the kind
of shooting you are doing. She like to use the Canon 70-300 IS
lenses, not bad optics and very good IS. I like to use the Canon
300mm IS L, not bad IS and really good optics, I also have a 1.4X tele-
converter to use with it.

There are better lenses but the cost starts to go up.

IS will help some with getting the shoot, but if you are seeing a lot
of blur in your photos using a non-IS lens you will likely see at
least some using a IS lens. My rule of thumb is that if I take 10
shots without IS and 10 shots with the IS both on and off, my worst
shot with IS on will be about as good as my best shot with IS off.

I would suggest you rent a lens or two for a week and see how well it
works for you.

Scott

 

I'm guessing that its no faster than f/5.6

Which should also reveal what ISO he is set at.

Agreed. But since Mike mentions moderate/heavy tree cover, its
unlikely.

Even cheaper would be to bump up the ISO (if it hasn't already been
done).


My inclination would be to first try some shots with the existing gear
on a monopod and ISO pumped up. That should give an indication of if
you're close enough that the extra few stops from IS are worth the
investment cost. While one is considering this, one can also decide
if the solution also needs a faster ($$$) lens...ie, a 70-200 f/2.8 IS
if the full 300m reach isn't needed would pick up another 2 stops.


-hh

 

WTF is a "wide-angel" ? One who ate too much angel food cake?

 

Funny... it was just a misspelled word. It should be wide angle... ;-)