Making those

hard choices...

...long lenses

Whatever the newcomer to nature photography may have hoped, sooner or later, they are going to discover that they want more reach. 400mm seems an awful lot of lens until you are out in the field trying to photograph small or shy creatures. To be successful with subjects like this magpie you are going to find it easier the further away you are.

Very long lenses are not at all essential for taking great wildlife photographs, but they are a big help and strangely it wasn’t until I owned a 500 that I realised just how useful my 300 and 400 mm ones could be. A long prime lens can be a nuisance when you are photographing blue tits and a woodpecker comes along for example. One moment you are getting nice frame-filling shots the next it is head and shoulders only and nothing to be done about it. Nevertheless, all creatures have a circle of confidence, within which they feel safe, it is their own space. If you intrude into that circle, they will move away or at least begin to act unnaturally. This is where the longer lens comes into its own , allowing you to shoot from a distance that your subject is more comfortable with. The camera manufacturers 500 mm lenses are hideously expensive new but much more affordable secondhand, although personally I would only buy one from a reputable dealer or somebody that you know and trust.

There is another alternative well worth considering. Sigma make some really good lenses to fit most other manufacturer’s cameras. When I was struggling to get the cash together to buy a 500mm lens, I took the plunge and bought a secondhand sigma 500 f4.5; I sent it straight off to Sigma for a full overhaul (it was quite an old model) and I haven’t regretted it for a minute. It is very sharp and compared to the canon 500/f4 quite compact. True it doesn’t have image stabilisation and it is not great with a convertor, but it is comparatively light and a lot more affordable.

Where Sigma let themselves down is in quality control and not all their lenses are as faultless as they should be out of the box; but they are very good at sorting them out at the factory and if you can try before you buy then that won’t be necessary. Their macro lenses are the lens of choice for many photographers over and above OE so they are well worth a look.

If you can afford to buy the maker’s lens, then do so; but if you can’t, buy a Sigma and get out there. The only thing stopping you getting the shots then is yourself.

There is a tendency with a long lens to expect it to bring everything up close. It is very easy to immediately start straining to reach subjects that are further away. This can lead to disappointment very quickly and that is when the convertors come out!

I have satisfied myself now that my 500 is best used to make a better job of the shots I was already getting rather than trying to get even more average shots of subjects that are a lot further away.

Probably the biggest benefit of a long lens is that it makes a better job of backgrounds which are more diffuse than with a shorter one. This woodpecker was taken at 750 mm with a Sigma 300-800 mm lens and it leaves nothing to distract the eye from the subject.

Click on kingfisher symbol

to read article

A remote release,either cable or better still infra red, is a worthwhile addition when using these lenses as it helps to reduce vibration, especially when used in conjunction with the live view setting. This function if your camera has it will avoid mirror slap entirely.

Last but not least, you will need to consider how you are going to transport the thing. Personally, I carry mine assembled on the tripod and balanced over my shoulder. It is a calculated risk, because I could fall and trash the lot or a screw could come undone and drop it all to the floor. I take that risk so that I can have the thing set up and shooting within a few seconds, but it is a worry. If you are a more painstaking photographer than I am, you may well want to carry it in a well-padded backpack to be assembled on arrival. The choice is yours, but it is one that you need to consider. If you do decide to risk carrying it over your shoulder, I would recommend some decent padded tripod leg covers; these will save your shoulder from some serious wear and tear.

It is worth bearing in mind that buying a long lens involves more expense than its own cost. Having lashed out so much money, it is foolish to trust its welfare to a simple ballhead. Even a Sigma 500 is a very heavy piece of kit and should the mount slacken, it will flop over alarmingly, clattering against the tripod or worse still it may overbalance the whole set-up and go crashing to the ground. It should always be supported or rather suspended from a gimbal of some description.

Correctly fitted to one of these devices, its default position is not to collapse, but to swing back level. In addition, they are a positive asset when attempting to pan smoothly. I bought a cheap Indian copy of the Wimberley head which at the time cost less than half the price. I would never claim that it is as good as the original, but its basic operating principle is the same and it is entirely functional. Again it is not the best that money can buy, but it enables me to get out in the field and pursue the pictures that I want to get, knowing that my gear won’t let me down.

With right kind of lens support and a little practice, it is entirely feasible to take shots at very slow speeds. This robin was shot with the un-stabilised 500 Sigma at only 1/25 second.

Hard choices

Where ??

Sharp shooting

Fill-in flash

It’s not so easy

Chair hide review

Macro techniques

Creative seabirds

Going full-frame

Feeding stations

Art for art’s sake