The Bottom Line on my Bad Lens

For those who have been following along all these past months as I’ve struggled over the issue of soft pictures from my multi-thousand-dollar lens-and-camera combination, I’ve finally reached what I think is the true conclusion:

I’m using what is basically the wrong set of tools for the subject, and expecting miracles.

[I should note here that they are an excellent set of tools for the job they were originally purchased for -- weddings and events.]

I took a selection of prints down to Penn Camera with me last night to talk to some folks there — sales staff or other customers. I learned some very interesting things, not the least of which is that the lens that I’m trying to use is really not the greatest piece of glass on the planet, despite the high cost. While it’s rated “excellent” at shorter focal lengths, it’s quality suffers dramatically when zoomed to longer focal lengths, and at great distances. In other words, my real-world experiences match independent test data.

So, to move forward, I need to do a few of things.

1. I have to decide what kinds of photographs I really want to make — how important it is to me to be able to photograph birds like the Bald Eagles, the Great Blue Heron, the egrets, etc.
2. I have to determine what tools I need to correctly make the kinds of photographs I want to make.
3. I have to develop a plan to get the correct tools into my camera bag … easier said than done.

Here’s what I know for now: I enjoy shooting landscapes, nature and travel photography, as well as concert and performance photography. That points to needing an extremely broad range of focal lengths of excellent quality, but not necessarily super-fast lenses in all cases.

While it’s not very likely that I’ll be trying to shoot eagles at night, I will want to be able to take pictures of various birds during the “golden hour.”  There’s a great sense of satisfaction in getting a great shot of a Heron, both here in Columbia, and on the Eastern Shore. That’s going to mean that either a long fast lens will be required, or, a body with superior high ISO performance and a good quality long lens.

The high ISO performance of my Canon 40D and XTi bodies is decent, but even they struggle some above ISO 800. That means that fast lenses may still be a requirement. Of course, quality long, fast lenses are expensive.

The 70-200 that I have is a fantastic lens for concerts, for nature when I can get close-in, and for certain landscape images. But, it’s not a long enough telephoto for good bird photography. Further, it’s not a very sharp lens at 200mm, according to independent testers. Using a 2X converter with it — even the one designed to work with the 70-200 — only exacerbates the problem. And, since a 2X converter causes a 2-stop light loss, it forces me to either increase the ISO, adding noise, or decrease the shutter speed, increasing the chance of blur caused by camera movement or subject movement.

According to the test site I was looking at, the all out sharpest lens for Canon cameras (of those tested — and they’ve tested a lot!), is the Canon 70-200 f/4L IS — a lens that Donna almost bought!

At this point, I’ll be renting or borrowing various lenses to learn which ones work best for the types of photographs I want to take. At the same time, I’ll be divesting myself of things that don’t work for me. I’ll also be getting rid of things that simple don’t get used — things that are not related to my passions of photography/videography and model railroading.

Anyone want a used Ford Windstar full of audio production gear?