HOME | DD

Published: 2012-03-08 01:17:04 +0000 UTC; Views: 3508; Favourites: 143; Downloads: 40
Redirect to original
Description
Our first stop during one of the birdwatching tours started at a local feeder. Not the best way to bird, but it made for some nice photo ops!Flame-colored Tanager (male)
San Gerardo de Dota, Costa Rica
Canon 7D / EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM
© Melissa Mancuso Penta // All Rights Reserved
Do not duplicate or distribute this photo without permission
Related content
Comments: 33
WillemSvdMerwe [2014-07-25 08:48:39 +0000 UTC]
Great photo! It looks very interested in *something*...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Andres-Cadena [2013-05-27 16:28:20 +0000 UTC]
Que tal Melissa! Me tome la libertad de compartir tu foto en mi mas reciente jouranl. Gracias por tan bella imagen!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
mydigitalmind In reply to Dash-Photo [2013-05-13 22:26:39 +0000 UTC]
Thank you so much! Have to hand it to the bird for being beautiful though
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
JosephTimbury [2012-08-24 03:44:36 +0000 UTC]
Melissa, I love your wildlife photography. I have a quick question regarding the lens you used. I know the 70-200mm is an amazing lens. It's self explanatory that the f/2.8 is better than the f/4, but my question lies in the cost to quality ratio. Is it worth spending an extra 1,200 dollars for a f/2.8 in comparison to saving 1,200 dollars and getting a f/4? To provide you with some context, I'm a student in college and my funds are limited. I'm a serious hobbyist photographer, but can't see going professional. I would love your input. Thank you.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
mydigitalmind In reply to JosephTimbury [2012-08-24 12:25:31 +0000 UTC]
Also note that the F4 is smaller, lighter and easier to carry around!!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
mydigitalmind In reply to JosephTimbury [2012-08-24 12:25:00 +0000 UTC]
Ok.. so silly me copied the wrong lens on this photo, but it certainly can get shots like this. Some more recent photos that I took with this lens are of hummingbirds [link] [link] [link]
To answer your question, I have no experience with any 2.8 lens but I can see where they can be extremely useful shooting in low light. The F4 is a great compromise. I purchased mine used knowing that I would eventually want to purchase another lens that had more zoom, but that is because my main subjects aren't very cooperative. It is a great lens and with a more limited budget is well worth it. One thing I would not give up, though, is the IS. Do not settle for the non IS versions of these lenses.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
JosephTimbury In reply to mydigitalmind [2012-08-24 16:40:29 +0000 UTC]
Thanks for sharing. I agree that IS is a must, especially with the larger focal lengths.
My current collection of lens and equipment are Canon T3i Rebel, Canon 50mm f/1.8, Canon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6, Canon 55-250mm f/4-5.6, and Canon 580EX II Speedlite.
I'm looking to upgrade my 55-250mm to something better. I understand when upgrading lens that you need to consider what you're photographing and your purposes for the new lens. I'm on the yearbook committee in college and a photographer at a camp during the summers to provide you with more context. I'm mostly photographing what's happening at a particular event, generally sports events with spontaneous portraits in a variety of different lightings. My own personal photography is usually wildlife, nature, and landscape photography, but lately I've been wanting to start photographing people and fashion. I'm a bit all over the place with my photography, completely self-taught, and a serious hobbyist.
After knowing that information, any recommendations for a lens?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
mydigitalmind In reply to JosephTimbury [2012-08-26 22:45:19 +0000 UTC]
I'll be honest - I don't know what the best set up is for sports photography. I'm no pro myself, just someone who loves to take photos of birds. I need lenses with much more reach I actually upgraded from the 55-250 to my 70-200 and did not regret it at all. We always want better. I do think that you would be happy even with the F4 - I certainly am even though my subjects tend to perch in dark areas and are FAST!!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
JosephTimbury In reply to mydigitalmind [2012-08-26 23:47:06 +0000 UTC]
What's your opinion of the Canon Macro EF 100mm f/2.8 for $1,100. What's your input on the matter? What is the difference between a macro lens and a normal lens?
Thanks for answering my questions.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
mydigitalmind In reply to JosephTimbury [2012-08-27 16:33:04 +0000 UTC]
I honestly don't know - I never used a macro lens! I do think that the 70-200 would be more versatile though.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
JosephTimbury In reply to mydigitalmind [2012-08-27 16:40:48 +0000 UTC]
Do you use the Canon 100-400mm f/4-5.6?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
mydigitalmind In reply to JosephTimbury [2012-08-27 20:20:02 +0000 UTC]
Yes. It's my main lens. It's perfect for being able to have good reach and still hand hold/walk around without it breaking your back.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
JosephTimbury In reply to mydigitalmind [2012-08-29 03:51:47 +0000 UTC]
That makes sense. Thanks for sharing.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0