Dear Tweeters,

Thanks for all of your helpful comments regarding camera lenses for
birding! For the curious, here is a distillation of the responses:

Canon 300mm f4 lens: highly regarded by almost everybody, for its sharpness
and flexibility, but many consider it too short for birding. Works quite
well with the 1.4x teleconverter.

Sigma 50-500: while a very considerable lens for the price and the reach, is
on the slow side. Some have reservations about the brand and quality
control. Not surprisingly, a little heavy.

Canon 400mm f5.6: again highly regarded for sharpness, and the focal length
is more desirable for birds. Works well with 1.4x teleconverter, though
autofocus suffers (f8 effective).

A very frequent suggestion was the Canon 100-400mm zoom lens. Has the
benefit of 400mm reach, flexibility of 100mm zoom and also has image
stabilization. Heavier than the 400mm prime, but less so than the Sigma.
Focuses a bit slower than the 400mm prime.


After considering all of the comments I received and doing some additional
research on the internet, I've decided to go with the 400mm prime. Though
I'm very tempted by the 100-400mm zoom, the 400mm prime seems to edge out
the zoom for sharpness, just by a bit, is lighter and focuses a bit faster.
It lacks image stabilization, but I don't mind bringing along a monopod if
necessary. With my Canon body (1.6 crop factor) the 100-400mm zoom loses
some of its appeal to me as a non-birding walk-around lens--I find even my
50mm lens a bit long lots of the time. And for birding, I think I could
count the times on one hand when I've been too close to a bird, even
digiscoping with 1000mm effective focal length. The 400mm prime is also a
few hundred dollars less expensive than the zoom, stays within my budget,
and also seems to have good resale value (just in case : ) ).


Thanks---
Megan Lyden
Bellevue, Washington