CANON

[chester 147]

WHICH SIZE IS BEST FOR ACTION SHOTS WITH THE DOGS WITHOUT HAVING TO BREAK THE BANK.?sorry about the caplock being on

Edited August 5, 2009 by chester

[byron 1,190]

WHICH SIZE IS BEST FOR ACTION SHOTS WITH THE DOGS WITHOUT HAVING TO BREAK THE BANK.?sorry about the caplock being on

canon 70/300mm is ..

on the bay..

great lens for price..

[Kay 3,709]

WHICH SIZE IS BEST FOR ACTION SHOTS WITH THE DOGS WITHOUT HAVING TO BREAK THE BANK.?sorry about the caplock being on

canon 70/300mm is ..

on the bay..

great lens for price..

 

Your very knowledgable on this sort of thing Byron , what an acset you are to this section

[Dawn B 212]

The lower the "f" number the faster the lens. "IS" will help with camera shake, but if you can afford it, an F/2.8 lens is excellent for movement. It "may" break the bank though depending on your budget.

[ghillies 209]

there was some canon 50mm f/1.8prime lens on ebay for 66 ish quids.... i'm still being suprised by the detail it pics up, it's murder for facial hair and those little marks on the face you never notised before. It doesnt have any zoom though,just a focus.

 

 

better of with a zoom lens if you plan on doing other stuff like wild life and the likes, a 55-200mm (Tamron,canon,sigma what ever) is a handy one, But the bigger the lens the more shake you will get so a tripod may help (as well as image stabalising). you may notice with IS on the pictures slightly less sharp, or looks slightly diferent so depends what you want, if your a bigger you probably wont even notise the difference untill you start prosesing your pictures.

 

do a google search under the images search, you'll find people use alsorts of lens's for the same shot's. small dog something like the 55-200mm or the 70-300mm but for close ups near too maybe an 18mm to something, depends how close up, the bigger zoom types will only focus to about 6 feet away so maybe a 18-105mm range and take pictures closer up... (or some numbers close to that).

 

 

dont forget that diferent people like different styles of photography so prefer different lensing.... for a toy dog in the garden a 55-200 or the 70-300 type.... if you want landscaping as well either get two lens or an 18-200 or something, usualy with two lens the 'mm' sizes either over lap or meet to give a full range, e.g.18-55mm and 55-200, for three lens add a 100-300mm etc, or overlap a bit.....

 

finally i'm starting to ramble on endlesly lol but, the bigger the end number (200mm end) the less is in veiw, so looking at a human at 30 yards away(ish) on 18mm youve got most of the garden wall and all the body (just an example) on 300mm youve got the head and torso...

 

 

if your on a tight budget theres the non IS models to consider, i can hold on 200mm at a shutter speed of 1/6 of a second and get a clear shot, but, thats on a good day...

 

go for it lol, do a google search, you'll see what suits you then.(and it can be intresting).

[MuttleMcTuttle 21]

Something in the 70-300 range will be best for running dogs. A 2.8 lens is desirable, but they are expensive. IS is handy, but for action shots it'll be an irrelevance. Even if you can handhold 200mm lenses at 1/6th of a second, that would be bugger all use for a moving target anyway. Even for a fat dog you'll need a speed of 1/500 sec, unless you are panning the shot, and want blurry effects.

The bigger the zoom range, the more you have to pay to get a good quality lens... but if you have a good camera, why spoil it by nailing cheap glass on the front?

[Bush Rummager 4,768]

Here you go Chester, http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/, have a good poke about on here mate, should answer most of your questions, if you see a lense that catches your eye, just bring it up on ebay for the latest prices.

 

Other than that , i'd go with what Byron said, the 70-300 is, very good for the money, 300mm focal length should be enough for what you want and fast enough to freeze the action. I was in the same boat as you mate a few months back, read all the reviews and ended up raiding the kids piggy banks and getting a 70-200 2.8 is, its a great lense.. but its a right lump of glass, cost a fookin bomb and i could really do with a bit more reach! I'd have a really good look at the 70-300! Hope thats some help mate...

[chester 147]

thanks for the advice just now i got a 90/300 1:4.5-5.6 lens but i think its a bit hit and miss. for 1 good pic i will have 10 bad ones

when out with the dogs i shoot on the sports mode. im just a novice so i dont mess about with the settings just left it on default.so any help with that side of things would be a help but it would need to be a blow by blow guide thanks again.atb chester

Edited August 6, 2009 by chester

[MuttleMcTuttle 21]

The 90-300 lens should frame the dogs up ok, and sport mode would be the best of the auto modes...

 

Not totally familiar with the 400D, but if you want to have a bit more control over the settings, switch to TV (shutter priority) mode, and set the shutter at 1/500 minimum. Set the shutter drive mode to continuous shooting, and the autofocus mode to AI servo, continuous focus.

Best to set the AF point to the centre one, and keep the dog in the middle of the frame to start with else the AF system will focus on everything else!

If you find you can't get a fast enough shutter speed, try altering the ISO settings - the higher the ISO no. the faster speed you can use. Your camera should produce good pics up to ISO 400.

A 'hit rate' of 1 in 10 isn't actually that bad for moving targets, so don't be too despondent! Sometimes I'll take 50 pics to get one I'm happy with

 

Good luck.

[J Darcy 5,871]

If you are using the lens for practically all running shots then do not worry about IS. It needs to be turned off anyway.

 

If i get one good pic out of twenty, of running, then i am happy with that ratio.

 

you may be better off with a second hand F2.8 than a brand new slower one. They are heavy though. Good luck.