Jump to content


Lenses For Wildlife Canon D40

5 replies to this topic

#1 Rodrigo



  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 17 March 2008 - 09:24 AM

I'm on the lookout for a telephoto zoom for my D40, mainly to be used for wildlife shots.

I've read much about Canon L series lenses as well as some other Sigma lenses, more affordable.

I've had a look on the Canon 70-200 F4 and F2.8...the price is different in about $700...is the edge of 2.8 compared to 4.0 that significant for telephoto?

Also, the edge os having an extra 100mm to the 300mm...could i regreat not having it if buying an 200mm?

What about sigma lenses? Is the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 comparable to teh canon one? I'm an mateur on this...eventhough have been taking picts for some years now...hobby.

Any ideia...guidance is very much appreciated,


#2 markgoldstein


    Super Member

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,109 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, United Kingdom

Posted 17 March 2008 - 05:53 PM

It depends on what wildlife you're photographing (birds, elephants?!) but I think you'd appreciate the extra 100mm of a 30mm lens.
Mark Goldstein
Editor, PhotographyBLOG

#3 chappo1


    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 12,726 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Melbourne Australia
  • Interests:Australian wildlife, photography, red wine. White wine if there is no red and.... (Is wife beating a hobby or a passtime? ).<br />language- As you may gather from some of my smart arse comments....

Posted 26 March 2008 - 08:16 PM

For wildlife and long lens's in my view you will need IS unless you can get the critters to pose in front of a tripod mount. As you have a Canon this means IS lens as opposed to IS in the body of some brands.
Go for the longest IS lens you can afford..john
We're off to see the Lizard~~the wonderful (sic) Lizard of Oz~~

#4 Tim Martin

Tim Martin

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 428 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hong Kong

Posted 27 March 2008 - 02:58 AM

If you have the funding, the 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS by Canon is great for wildlife. It is a stabilized lens, although a little slower than the prime lenses, but has an incredible reach. Especially if you stick a 2x teleconverter on it to effectively make it 200-800 (320-1280 with the crop factor) which gives you quite a range to work with. Also, if you use a monopod you can stop down a little bit to get a little extra sharpness.

#5 alan fear

alan fear

    Super Member

  • Advanced Members 100
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9,468 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Australia

Posted 26 May 2008 - 03:38 AM

Hi Rodrigo,

I agree with Tim about the 100/400, it is a fabulous wildlife lens with AF ans IS and not too heavy, and it is an L series which speaks volumes.

As for putting a x2 EXt. on it, useless for wildlife. At the 400mm end you start at f/5.6 and with the ext. on you go to f/11. So no AF now, and a dark image in the eyepiece which makes it very hard to get sharp focus manually. As well, at 800mm even with IS a tripod is needed and good light on a very still subject, or all you images will be soft. It may be good for shots other than wildlife though. Still a fabulous lens, and would recommend it to anyone. If you can afford it, go 400mm, not 300 and definitely not 200.

Cheers, Alan

#6 Andy B

Andy B


  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 14 July 2008 - 01:14 AM

I use a 40D and in addition use a 70-200f4L and 300f4L with 1.4TC and this is good enough for most wild life. The IQ is exceptional and the IS brilliant. The f4 versions offer huge weight savings over 2.8 variants and they can be carried all day without any problems. Of course if you can afford the 500mm f4 then go for that as it is the ultimate wild life lens.

Reply to this topic


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users