royden Loc: Decatur, GA

I have developed a liking for birding. Was at a wildlife refuge in Delray Beach, Fl recently and shot a few with a Canon 40D and 55-250 EFSll. I need more range.
I've been researching and need some help. I have a budget of $700. I looked at used/refurbushed EF 70-200/4L IS and none IS, (would need to add a 1.4) EF 300/4L, EF 70-300 IS USM l and ll.
Sigma has a lot of 50-500, 120-400, 135-400, 150-500, 170-500 and of course the 150-600. Some of these go back to 2008. There is also Sigma 100-400. Tamron 18-400 and 100-400(I think) Some of these maybe outside my budget. Although I list some 300s I believe at least 400mm would be better. Would a 40D be adequate with any of these? Will I find that I need a 80D or one of the 7Ds?

I have a Pentax K5lls, 16MP and newer than 40D and would prefer to use that but not many options in long lens. Some of the Sigmas come in Pentax mount. So I have a lot to think about.

Would appreciate your input.

Have a Happy and Prosperous New Year.

wetreed

The Tamron 18-400 is your best bet for your budget. Also it’s a great all around lens you will probably want use all the time.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Someone just posted the perfect lens for you on UHH classifieds this morning. Its a 150-600mm Tamron for only $550.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

You're going to want a lens that gets you into the 400+mm range. But, your budget is a little light for new models. If you go with a zoom, try to limit the range covered, where 100-400 is a better choice than 18-400. Given your 40D can autofocus only to f/5.6, pay attention to zooms or extension ideas that zoom or combine to apertures smaller than f/5.6. Try the used market, both ebay and KEH. You might find a vI copy of the 100-400L in the $800 range.

zudac1ae Loc: Amesbury, MA

Wetreed is right. I have had mine for a while now, and it has become my walkaround lens. Whether i an shooting BIF or dogs in the park it has done everything i have ask of it on my D7200. Couldn't ask for a better lens, well i could, but i couldn't afford that one.

Jay Pat Loc: Round Rock, Texas, USA

Here is the link MT referred to.

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-570972-1.html

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

Selene03

It probably depends on how close you can get to the birds, but I have been using a 70-300 USM II with an SL2 for photographing birds from my kayak with excellent results. I agree that using a long Tamron or Sigma will get you more reach, but they don't focus as fast and are heavier, both of which made them less useful for me, but those might not be problems for you. I also think the Canon lens is sharper, but that may depend upon technique. When I am on dry land, I use a 5d mk iv with the 100-400 lens and a 1.4 teleconverter. Even with the limitations of that setup, I think the images are sharper than what I got with a borrowed tamron, but again it may be due to my limitations as a small person trying to shoot rapidly with a heavy lens. Good luck, birds are fun to watch and photograph.

royden Loc: Decatur, GA

Thanks MT, but I need to consider what CHG_CANON said about the f5.6 limitation.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

All Canons since the 20d will AF to F6.3. Not an issue. I have customers using this lens even on the Rebel XT

royden Loc: Decatur, GA

Thanks CHG. Never thought about that. I saw a Canon 35-350/ 3.5-5.6. I think these hit the market in 1987. What do you think?

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

Ted, Thanks for the New Year wishes. The same to you and yours. I had for my Nikon the Sigma 150-600 Sport and liked it for Birding.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

If the issue is birding, what you're probably seeing already is that all your shooting occurs at / near the maximum focal length of your current lenses. If this generalization is accurate for your situation, you should be looking at lenses that maximize your focal length and don't zoom to cover a large focal length such as jack-of-all zooms. So zooms add flexibility, but are unneeded if you're at the max always / most of the time. Given these assumptions, you should analyze reviews looking specifically at the observations / recommendations about the maximum focal length image quality. As you look at 3rd-party lenses, particularly the older models, you'll likely start to see comments about losing sharpness / image quality at the max zoom. So now you might think, "hmmm, am I better off with a third-party lens that loses something beyond 500mm even if it zooms to 600mm?"

You mentioned the EF 300 f/4L IS. You can extend this to 420mm while retaining AF and IS on your EOS body. Consider that option against used / older models of 3rd party lenses where you have access to extensive online reviews and image examples, if you can't handle a candidate lens directly.

royden Loc: Decatur, GA

[quote=CHG_CANON]If the issue is birding..

I'm with you here. Gonna focus on the 100-400 and on the 300. The former give more reach, zoom convenience but less light gathering. The other is faster, probably sharper but more of a one prick pony. I have a friend with a 100-400 on a 6D and another with a 300/2.8 Minolta. He shots a Sony A99. Thanks for taking the time.

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

Sigma lenses (and maybe Tamron) will report to the camera that their maximum aperture is F5.6 even if it is actually F6.3. I have never had an issue with older Nikon cameras that were not supposed to autofocus with F6.3 lenses (D200, D70S, D300), and I am pretty sure at least one of my [past students was using a Sigma C 150-600 on an older Canon body - probably a 40D - and had no issues with AF.