gwbarr Loc: Pocahontas, AR

I shot a lot of wildlife and do ok with my 2nd hand Tokina 80-400mm lens, but if I hve a fast moving subject such as a Falcon or Teel Duck I can not manual focus fast enough and my lens will not autofocus on fast moving objest unless i am close enough for the subject to fill the frame. Is there a lens that would do what I need and not bankrupt me.
I'm sure you have address this before but I'm new to this site. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Northern Shoveler Spoonbill Duck

(Download)

Swamp Gator Loc: Coastal South Carolina

What camera are you using?

gwbarr Loc: Pocahontas, AR

I Use A Canon T2i

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

Yes, the camera is just as, or even more important for this! A T2i is not able to take advantage of the latest (and vastly improved) AF implementations put forth in the newest crop of "fast" AF lenses. If you focus manually, maybe you should try pre focusing for a while and see, it that gives you any better results.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

GW, welcome to the Hog.
Also, how fast is that lens? Are you always at 400?
Probably gonna have more to do with the camera than the lens!
SS

Rongnongno Loc: FL

A lens will not help. The camera itself makes the difference. Fast lenses are all well and good but in the end? You don't really need the marginal yet very expensive upgrade.

Bill MN Loc: Western MN

The newer Sigma 150-500 focuses fast

gwbarr Loc: Pocahontas, AR

the lens is 1:4.5-5.6D

gwbarr Loc: Pocahontas, AR

Which would be the best camera for my needs

Thanks everyone for your help

watchcow Loc: Moore, Oklahoma

If the critters are some distance off, it seems like it would make sense to turn off the AF and prefocus the lens on a point and then pick an aperture, maybe f11 and work out the hyperfocal distances. This a pretty common and successful technique for many years before autofocus came along. It worked well for sports and reportage for me for years, I suspect it will work for ducks. With modern sensors able to gain up to 800ISO and still get as clean an image as we could have ever gotten with 400ISO film there seems little reason to invest in expensive new hardware when an old technique would suffice.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

This really depends on what you consider 'needs' and what is important to you.

gwbarr Loc: Pocahontas, AR

I want something that gives good well focused photos with good color on fast moving subjects as well as good scenic photos

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Your camera is pretty good for genera purposes. However, fast moving subjects, especially if you are in close and at high magnifications, there is no substitute for a fast lens - F2.8 or F4 maximum aperture, and a camera body with fast and accurate autofocus. The faster lens will improve autofocus performance by letting the sensor see more light and contrast, and it will be better at freezing action. Most lenses of 300mm or greater will provide their sharpest image wide open or stopped down up to one stop.

I shoot Nikon, and I saw a definite difference in autofocus performance between my D300, D700 and D800, with an improvement with each upgrade. I also can recommend that most zooms with variable apertures are not in the same class as primes when it comes to autofocus speed and hunting, especially in lower light or with subjects that have busy backgrounds (like the image you posted). There are some zooms - the Sigma 120-300 F2.8 and the Nikon 200-400 that have great AF speed and will acquire and lock onto a moving subject quickly. The Canon 200-400 F4 is also an amazing lens, but it also costs $11,800 - in the realm of dreams for most mortals.

So bankruptcy may be in your future, I'm afraid. :(

picsman Loc: Scotland

I use a nikon 80-400 zoom for ski races and mountain biking and find it quickly focuses and produces some very fine and sharp images. I recently used it for some track and field events and again it performed well.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

I agree, I often use my 80-400 for large targets and it is ok. The difference is a bird in flight is small in the frame, and very erratic, not like a skier or mountain biker or an athlete on a field. In comparison, the 300 F2.8 is considerably faster with less hunting in less than ideal light, which is not uncommon when shooting birds.