Hummingbirds

[MarkBarbieri]

I'm in Colorado on vacation. I'm missing out on a friend's hummingbird shoot. He's doing it properly with 6 flashes. You use a bunch of flashes because you want them to each use minimal power. The less power a flash uses, the faster it flashes. By lighting the hummingbirds with the flashes, you can use narrow apertures and still stop the birds fast wings.

Fortunately for me, there are lots of hummingbirds where I'm at. With my oh so sweet personality, they are always flying around me. I didn't have a bunch of flashes and stands, so I just shot with a high shutter speed. I used a Canon 5D Mark II and a rented Canon 100-400 IS. The shots are all at 400mm, f/5.6, ISO 1600, and 1/1000s. All of the shots were cropped.

 

[Sewfun]

These are awesome!!!

 

[mabas9395]

Any reviews on the 100-400mm? I remember you not being a big fan of it in the past.

 

[Quicklabs]

Outstanding, Mark!

 

[oregondaddyof2]

Mark - Those shots are incredible..

 

[MarkBarbieri]

Any reviews on the 100-400mm? I remember you not being a big fan of it in the past.

I'm afraid that, so far, it meets my mixed expectations. Optically, it's very good. I'd like it to be wider at 400mm, but that would add size, weight, and cost, so I'm OK with that trade-off. The problem is the ergonomics of the lens. It's a push/pull zoom rather than a twist zoom. That's really annoying.

There are several problems with this approach. First, when zoomed all the way out to 400mm, the zooming part pretty far out. That means that I need to take my hands off of the zooming part to comfortably support the lens. I also have to deal with a fiddly little ring to adjust the tension. Too loose and it will creep when aimed up or down. Too tight and you can't zoom easily. Finally, zooming in and out is like working a bellows - it moves a lot of air. That's why it is nicknamed the dust pump.

On the other hand, I think it is optically superior to the competing lenses in roughly the same range. It doesn't hold a candle to Nikon's 200-400 f/4, but it is half the size and 1/3 the price. As much as I'd rather have the Nikon lens, it isn't an option unless I want to rely on manual focus.

Canon has a lot of mixed options in the 400mm range. In addition to this lens, there is the old 400mm f/5.6 prime. It's cheaper, lighter, and sharper than the zoom, but it has no IS. They have an incredible 400mm f/4 lens that is extremely small and light (relative to other 400mm f/4 lenses), but it is $5,000. They also make a wonderful 400mm f/2.8 (which I would love), but it is heavy and costs $7,000. These are all primes as well, so I'd lose focal range flexibility.

I'm still torn as to whether I should buy the 100-400mm. I'm praying that Canon replaces it with a more conventional design soon. I love the range so much, though, that I might break down and get one for our Spring Break trip to Monterey. That'll depend a lot on my personal economic situation. Just keep your fingers crossed that oil prices stay above $70/bbl and that natural gas prices keep recovering. If you find yourself getting cold this winter, turn up the heat and think of how happy you are making me.

 

[AndrewWG]

Mark,

These are excellent shots! Well done!

I echo all of your thoughts of the 100-400 lens. I also rented it this summer for a week of the baseball season. The optical quality was excellent and the range was great, but that push pull zoom and as you mentioned, the tension ring thing is a pain in the rear to deal with all the time. One thing that I would add is that when used with a teleconverter, it is still awesome, but it is all manual focus.

 

[Frantasmic]

Bravo! Colorado seems to be a great locale for hummingbirds. My in-laws front porch on the Western Slope is filled with them.