[Ginnypenny]

So I have this friend.... no really I do.  Anyway, she is just a hobbyist and has a Canon Rebel.  She likes to shoot wildlife and is getting frustrated by blurry shots, since most wildlife shooting opportunities are in the evening and far away.  She was talking to another photographer casually at the store and he mentioned she needs a lens with wider aperature... and she is all confused.  I told her I would ask here to see if you guys have any recommendations for a faster lens for wildlife since I really don't know... I shoot people at a fairly close range, and not usually in the dark
Keep in mind a moderate price range, she is willing to spend, but this is just a hobby.

[Ryan]

I've got a 70-200 f/2.8 EX Sigma that I love.  It's their version of the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L.  Pretty heavy, but really sharp when the focus is on.  I rarely use it without a monopod though because of the weight. 

If she's shooting wildlife already she probably has one of the 70-300 zooms.  Not Canon's best work.  I have one of those as well and rarely get sharp images out of it. 

[BobEdens]

I would recommend the same f2.8

she might try using a monopod first just to see how much is her and how much is lens.

[BobEdens]

just as an FYI I shoot most of my wildlife with a sigma 50-500 that weighs about nine pounds, always on a monopod.

[Ginnypenny]

Thanks guys.  I am passing the info along.

[jkleb]

I've used a Canon 500 f/4L IS that worked great for sports and wildlife. It's nearly impossible to hand hold though, and I would suggest a gimble mount tripod head. This isn't the cheap option.

[Travis Minnig]

Who takes sharper wildlife photos than Mike?  He recommends almost always shooting at f/8, which would nullify the need for fast glass.  However, he also uses the best lenses he can afford because of the sharpness of the glass.  This would in turn be back to paying for a top end f/2.8 fixed aperture lens, like the 70-200 f/2.8.  This is not a cheap lens, but then sometimes 'cheap' is relative to your personal circumstances.  Also, 200MM has almost never been enough for my personal wildlife photography.  I say, always buy the best glass you can afford, regardless of your need/usage.  For wildlife, you can't have too much zoom.

Aside from all of that though, I usually do everything I can to help my friends get the most out of the lenses they already have first.  If your friend goes out and pays 1200-1500 for a new fast lens, but still has a bad technique, she is only going to be upset that her images are still soft, even after spending all that money.  Proper exposure will affect sharpness because of not enough detail to begin with, graininess is introduced from underexposure as well, too low of an ISO for proper hand-holding shutter speeds when no tripod is used, dropping the camera after pressing the shutter instead of following through, proper focus, using the right AF function with your camera for the circumstances, camera holding technique, etc, etc.  These are all things we already know, and often take for granted, but are all too often the cause of soft images.  I would recommend, if you haven't already, spending some time with her helping her hone her skills to get the best that's possible out of her current equipment, then help her choose a lens.

One other thing to consider... is she using a teleconverter?  The cheap versions of these are horrible for image sharpness and make hand-holding shots nearly impossible as well because they reduce the amount of light by such an extreme factor.  I personally would not recommend using them for wildlife at all, unless she is willing to spend 200-300 bucks for some of the upper end models.  That's not to say they aren't used and don't have a place, but in my own experience they were only a source of frustration and discouragement.

My three cents,
Travis

[Ginnypenny]

Thanks Travis.  Those were great thoughts.
She is actually quite an experienced photographer.  Her husband is actually the one that is my friend and he races motorcycles and she takes pictures of that, and foxes and birds by their home, but they recently went on a trip and she was dissapointed by how dark it was when they saw wildlife she wanted to shoot.   
I think I have talked them into renting the lens they are thinking of buying from Pictureline for like $40 first to see if she likes it before she spends a ton of cash.
I asked about the teleconverter, although I didn't think she used one, and it turns out she has in the past and discovered what you said about them.

[Mike Hodgson]

When shooting wildlife, even if the subject is not moving, the faster the shutter the better.
Take into consideration the focal length of the lens, IE 200mm 1/500 would be ideal hand held or Monopod/Tripod, multiply by 2 to the focal length. Make sure IS or VR is off when using tripod or monopod.
Sharpness is from what I mentioned above. The other secret to less vibration, when mirror slaps, is to place your hand on top of the lens and gently roll your finger on the shutter to capture the moment. Have a look at my avatar, always on top and always using the monopod. 


Also, the saying out there is ISO 200 1/800 @ f/8.0
I like ISO 100 on a bright day.

Sigma 50-500 is an awesome lens if your friend can afford it. I have many friends overseas who use it, images are tack sharp.

Thanks Travis 

[Robert.Broadhead]

In regards to the "shake reduction" does it really help?  I got my first shake reduction lens and when I have it on the pictures seem to be softer than when it is off.

[Ginnypenny]

I used one of Travis' VR lenses and I liked it, it was for a fashion show that was pretty dark.  I didn't try any shots without it so I can't compare.

[Ryan]

I've got one IS lens, Canon's version of VR, and am not really that impressed.  Of course it was also a cheap 70-300 zoom and I'm comparing shots on it to a Sigma EX so that's probably not a fair comparison.  I would think it's nice to have when you need it though.  You can always turn it off.  Or at least I assume you can on the Nikons. 

[Marian Murdoch]

My Minolta has shake reduction built into the body of the camera, so every lens I use gets the benefit. It's extremely helpful when shooting wildlife, as I'm usually chasing after a wayward bird and end up hand holding a large lens.

Living in an area of the country that is NOTORIOUS for low light, a fast lens is critical for me. I just wish I could afford them. When I got my f/1.4 50mm lens, I thought I died and went to a brighter heaven!

Some cameras have trouble focusing automatically in low light. A lot of times, my camera just spazzes and I have to go manual. Plus, even if it "thinks" it found a good focus in low light, it really didn't.

[Mike Hodgson]

I never use the VR on my lens, I have a monopod, the stability is great. If I turn on VR and am using a monopod or tripod, the VR will work against it, thus blurred images.

Hand held, even with VR on, I still like the Double factor IE 200mm 500 speed.

[Ginnypenny]

Yes, I have heard what Mike is talking about with using a tripod with VR, I heard it explained all scientificallly... something about how the lens is anticipating movement...

I did notice the VR had a different "feel" to it.

A local wedding photographer here uses Sony cameras and it has a VR equivilent built in, he loves it.