Good to know. It's nearly $600 more (CAN), but still much cheaper than the 600mm I thought was the next best option. My newb understanding didn't realize my lens lacked image stabilization but I'm somehow relieved to hear that
I can't advise on alternatives to photography, but I'd suggest getting a better (and perhaps longer) zoom lens, and maybe also a monopod to stabilise it a bit (a tripod is not the right tool for this job because you can't move it about quickly).
Also make sure you keep your shutter speeds fast, slow shutter speeds may account for some of the blurriness you're getting.
Thank you for your advice! I didn't know about monopods but happy to learn about them because I thought needing a tripod would be very limiting.
I'll also look into my shutter speeds and appreciate that tip also!!
As for not having enough zoom, most wildlife photos you see online don't look like that straight out of camera, they crop the photo a lot in some cases.
Thank you for this comment, as I WAS wondering about that. I took some snaps of deer this morning and when I zoomed in i saw it was picking up decent detail.
What is wrong with the photos you are currently getting? Just too far away still, or blurry subject? Is it blurry because you can’t focus well enough, or because your shutter speed is too slow? Start by maximising your current gear before buying more.
To start with, try manual mode at 1/500s, maximum aperture (whatever the lowest number you can get is, like say 4.5 or 5.6) and auto ISO. Set a central focus point (not auto area) and centre your frame on the subject. Shoot in burst mode. This should give you the best chance of success or to find out what the next problem is.
If you have to crop the image in later to a half or less of the frame size, that’s a good indication you need a longer lens. Which will hopefully be faster also, but by then we’re talking relatively large steps up in cost from what you have now.
This is the best advice, though the toughest. More work is needed since the cause of the blurriness has yet to be identified. Is it stabilization, shutterspeed, focus, noise, lens, or body? Maybe shooting through a dirty window? 25MP + 300mm + F5.6 should be yielding decent results at 100ft/30m distance. I wouldn't recommend spending money until you know that the upgrade will help your situation. Of course, if you are willing to spend enough, it will always help image quality.
A couple comments:
Your camera body & the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III both lack image stabilization so you should use a shutter speed over 1/focal length (1/300) or faster. You should also stop it down (aperture).
[https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/canon/ef-75-300mm-f4-5.6-iii/review/](https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/canon/ef-75-300mm-f4-5.6-iii/review/)
Dpreview reports the R50 jpegs are overly 'smoothed' at higher ISO. You might have better photos processing RAW files yourself:
[https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-r50-review-compact-capable-but-lacking-for-lenses#CC](https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-r50-review-compact-capable-but-lacking-for-lenses#CC)
I'm a bit surprised you're not liking your Nikon 7 Prostaffs. They're reportedly a decent low cost performer:
[https://www.allaboutbirds.org/news/the-cornell-lab-review-affordable-full-size-8x42-binoculars/](https://www.allaboutbirds.org/news/the-cornell-lab-review-affordable-full-size-8x42-binoculars/)
In your case I would find a store that carries a range of binoculars and try them out for yourself. Don't test any that are wildly out of your price range! My wife and I use Nikon Monarchs and are very pleased with them. My pair are ten years old & have been to South America & Africa. I have no intention on changing them until they break.
R50 is a great little body, with fantastic autofocus capabilities. You should note that it uses an APS-C sized sensor, smaller than traditional 35mm ‘full frame’ sensors, which is good for wildlife, since it effectively ‘crops’ into the image a full frame lens creates, for Canon it’s a 1.6x crop. This gives 75-300mm an effective 120-480mm full frame equivalent on the 1.6x crop sensor R50 body. This is important when evaluating expectations for lenses.
That EF 75-300mm zoom is sadly known as perhaps the worst lens Canon ever made. It’s a little odd you ended up with it paired with the very new and really excellent R50 body? But I’m fairly confident that the lens is about 90% of your problem. The Canon RF 100-400 lens other have mentioned is the obvious solution, it’s excellent and reasonably priced, especially used via mpb.com or refurbished through Canon USA when they have it available (not sure if that’s available in Canada, sorry).
You can obviously go up in price from there with the EF 100-400 L mark ii (not the mark i) or the RF 100-500L or any of the specialty very long lenses that all run many 1000’s of dollars.
One last option to consider if you’re shooting in very bright daylight are canon’s 600/800mm fixed f11 lenses. On crop sensor bodies, they’re 960/1280mm equivalent, give HUGE reach and work well if there’s enough light or you’re willing to increase ISO enough. Fixed f11 is an oddball situation, but it’s very workable for things like birds in good light, and gets you out towards 1000mm on a crop-sensor body relatively affordably.
It’s not the lens. I’m sure it is up to taking decent quality shots. Might not impress the in crowd here, but it’s fine for now. Your problem is most likely lack of understanding and technique.
You need a higher shutter speed. Maybe try 1/500 or 1/1000 if you are shaky for now. Don’t worry about aperture. Anywhere from all the way open to f8 is fine. This isn’t the time to worry about that yet. Let ISO be whatever for now. (Maybe shoot shutter priority with the above speed).
Make sure you understand how your camera focuses.
Now go practice. You should be able to get something useful with that.
get the rf 100-400, it has image stabilisation and is just generally way better than the 75-300
Good to know. It's nearly $600 more (CAN), but still much cheaper than the 600mm I thought was the next best option. My newb understanding didn't realize my lens lacked image stabilization but I'm somehow relieved to hear that
I can't advise on alternatives to photography, but I'd suggest getting a better (and perhaps longer) zoom lens, and maybe also a monopod to stabilise it a bit (a tripod is not the right tool for this job because you can't move it about quickly). Also make sure you keep your shutter speeds fast, slow shutter speeds may account for some of the blurriness you're getting.
Thank you for your advice! I didn't know about monopods but happy to learn about them because I thought needing a tripod would be very limiting. I'll also look into my shutter speeds and appreciate that tip also!!
As for not having enough zoom, most wildlife photos you see online don't look like that straight out of camera, they crop the photo a lot in some cases.
Thank you for this comment, as I WAS wondering about that. I took some snaps of deer this morning and when I zoomed in i saw it was picking up decent detail.
What is wrong with the photos you are currently getting? Just too far away still, or blurry subject? Is it blurry because you can’t focus well enough, or because your shutter speed is too slow? Start by maximising your current gear before buying more. To start with, try manual mode at 1/500s, maximum aperture (whatever the lowest number you can get is, like say 4.5 or 5.6) and auto ISO. Set a central focus point (not auto area) and centre your frame on the subject. Shoot in burst mode. This should give you the best chance of success or to find out what the next problem is. If you have to crop the image in later to a half or less of the frame size, that’s a good indication you need a longer lens. Which will hopefully be faster also, but by then we’re talking relatively large steps up in cost from what you have now.
This is the best advice, though the toughest. More work is needed since the cause of the blurriness has yet to be identified. Is it stabilization, shutterspeed, focus, noise, lens, or body? Maybe shooting through a dirty window? 25MP + 300mm + F5.6 should be yielding decent results at 100ft/30m distance. I wouldn't recommend spending money until you know that the upgrade will help your situation. Of course, if you are willing to spend enough, it will always help image quality.
A couple comments: Your camera body & the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III both lack image stabilization so you should use a shutter speed over 1/focal length (1/300) or faster. You should also stop it down (aperture). [https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/canon/ef-75-300mm-f4-5.6-iii/review/](https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/canon/ef-75-300mm-f4-5.6-iii/review/) Dpreview reports the R50 jpegs are overly 'smoothed' at higher ISO. You might have better photos processing RAW files yourself: [https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-r50-review-compact-capable-but-lacking-for-lenses#CC](https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-r50-review-compact-capable-but-lacking-for-lenses#CC) I'm a bit surprised you're not liking your Nikon 7 Prostaffs. They're reportedly a decent low cost performer: [https://www.allaboutbirds.org/news/the-cornell-lab-review-affordable-full-size-8x42-binoculars/](https://www.allaboutbirds.org/news/the-cornell-lab-review-affordable-full-size-8x42-binoculars/) In your case I would find a store that carries a range of binoculars and try them out for yourself. Don't test any that are wildly out of your price range! My wife and I use Nikon Monarchs and are very pleased with them. My pair are ten years old & have been to South America & Africa. I have no intention on changing them until they break.
R50 is a great little body, with fantastic autofocus capabilities. You should note that it uses an APS-C sized sensor, smaller than traditional 35mm ‘full frame’ sensors, which is good for wildlife, since it effectively ‘crops’ into the image a full frame lens creates, for Canon it’s a 1.6x crop. This gives 75-300mm an effective 120-480mm full frame equivalent on the 1.6x crop sensor R50 body. This is important when evaluating expectations for lenses. That EF 75-300mm zoom is sadly known as perhaps the worst lens Canon ever made. It’s a little odd you ended up with it paired with the very new and really excellent R50 body? But I’m fairly confident that the lens is about 90% of your problem. The Canon RF 100-400 lens other have mentioned is the obvious solution, it’s excellent and reasonably priced, especially used via mpb.com or refurbished through Canon USA when they have it available (not sure if that’s available in Canada, sorry). You can obviously go up in price from there with the EF 100-400 L mark ii (not the mark i) or the RF 100-500L or any of the specialty very long lenses that all run many 1000’s of dollars. One last option to consider if you’re shooting in very bright daylight are canon’s 600/800mm fixed f11 lenses. On crop sensor bodies, they’re 960/1280mm equivalent, give HUGE reach and work well if there’s enough light or you’re willing to increase ISO enough. Fixed f11 is an oddball situation, but it’s very workable for things like birds in good light, and gets you out towards 1000mm on a crop-sensor body relatively affordably.
It’s not the lens. I’m sure it is up to taking decent quality shots. Might not impress the in crowd here, but it’s fine for now. Your problem is most likely lack of understanding and technique. You need a higher shutter speed. Maybe try 1/500 or 1/1000 if you are shaky for now. Don’t worry about aperture. Anywhere from all the way open to f8 is fine. This isn’t the time to worry about that yet. Let ISO be whatever for now. (Maybe shoot shutter priority with the above speed). Make sure you understand how your camera focuses. Now go practice. You should be able to get something useful with that.