best second lens for a Cannon Digital SLR?

[igg]

I've got one of the Cannon digital SLR's (300D - came out about a year ago), which was supplied with their made for the camera 18 to 55mm zoom.

I'm really after a good telephoto zoom, but had a look at the cannon prices and thought, perhaps I'll buy a Tamron, Sigma or other aftermarket lens instead. Has anyone got any suggestions as to the best buy/lens config??

I was thinking of something up to about 200mm (which I understand is more like 300mm on a digital camera - yup, I've no idea what I'm talking about! Please help)

Thanks
Igg

[poah]

depens how much you have to spend. I would get the sigma 70-200 f2.8 if you can run to it.

[igg]

I guess the one I liked the sound of was the cannon - which seems to be about £1200.

I was thinking of spending around £400 on the next lens, don't know if that is enough of a budget for what I have in mind, or whether I would be better going for a smaller telephoto - ?

[RossC]

Sigma f2.8 70-200 can be had for about 500. Don't have it myself but very highly rated, no IS though.

[cirks]

At that budget I'd go for the Canon (note, one 'n'. Cannon is a piece of artillery equipment ) 70-300mm IS (not DO as that's way more money). It's what I've got, it covers the range you want, is not too heavy and has good reviews.

[beano500]

igg said:

yup, I've no idea what I'm talking about! Please help

Don't worry - stick around these parts and you'll find your not alone. Now i know next to nothing about the current Canon offerings, you see. But I do know that you are best off working out in the following order:

What am I going to take pictures of?
How much gear do I want to carry around?
What sort of quality output do I need?
What sort of quality do I want?
What's my budget?

My inclination is towards saying that, if you have a "reduced size" i.e. digital sensor suitable that a latest design "digital" aftermarket would benefit from being smaller and (hopefully) therefore lighter and more user friendly and be a good match for the camera. Probably have some "macro" benefit too for close up work.

There are plenty of "allrounders" to choose from, but, if possible, do get down to your local Messups or similar to see that it is compatable and focuses correctly too!!!


Far from a full answer - because personally I'd have something completely different!!!

[igg]

Many thanks - and duly noted it's a CaNon not a field gun - thanks again
Igg

[V6GTO]

Best allrounder IMHO

www.warehouseexpress.com/photo/lenstech/canon/100400f4556lisusm.html

Martin.

[anonymous-user]

I've got that one, its around the £1000 mark though.







These were taken on a 300D

[RobDickinson]

I'm looking at these too..

The 70-300 USM II IS looks nice, image quality is pretty good, IS is 3rd revision and works great. Cheapish build, rotating(focus) end so pants for filters that dont like that(gradiated, polarising), also doesnt come with a lense hood. No manual focus adjustment in auto focus mode. light. 350

70-200 f4L - nice, no IS, well built. Soon to be replaced I tink tho?Not to heavy. 400 quid.

70-200 F2.8L - heavier, bit quicker than the f4, 700-800?

70-200 F2.8L IS - image stabalised, heavier again, 1100 or so?

Sigma 70-200 f2.8 is like the canon f2.8 qualty/speed for the f4 price, if I wasnt woried about weight I'd go for this one.

[monkeyhanger]

RobDickinson said:

Sigma 70-200 f2.8 is like the canon f2.8 qualty/speed for the f4 price, if I wasnt woried about weight I'd go for this one.

Unless you're 3 stone wet through it really isn't heavy.

I can happily walk around with mine on the 20D all day and have done on several occasions, although i have the 100-400L on there mostly.

>> Edited by monkeyhanger on Friday 6th January 00:46

[RobDickinson]

monkeyhanger said:

RobDickinson said: Sigma 70-200 f2.8 is like the canon f2.8 qualty/speed for the f4 price, if I wasnt woried about weight I'd go for this one. Unless you're 3 stone wet through it really isn't heavy. I can happily walk around with mine on the 20D all day and have done on several occasions, although i have the 100-400L on there mostly.

I'm talking about adding it to a 20kg pack (tent, cooking, food/ater / clothes etc), + camera + wide angle, mid range on 3-4 day hikes.

By getting the 350d over the 20d, and the 70-300 instead of the 70-200f2.8 etc can save me a lot of weight.

Minor differences in weight may not bother most people tho.

[Bee_Jay]

If you are really looking for size weight savings, the Canon 70-300 DO is perfect. I have both that and the 100-400L. The 100-400 comes with me whenever I can, however the 70-300 is the one that goes in a day-pack with the 10-22 and 17-85 so that pretty much all eventualities are covered.

>> Edited by Bee_Jay on Friday 6th January 11:29

[ErnestM]

Bee_Jay said:

If you are really looking for size weight savings, the Canon 70-300 DO is perfect. I have both that and the 100-400L. The 100-400 comes with me whenever I can, however the 70-300 is the one that goes in a day-pack with the 10-22 and 17-85 so that pretty much all eventualities are covered. >> Edited by Bee_Jay on Friday 6th January 11:29

Bee_Jay, are you sure you haven't picked up my bag by mistake? It sounds almost identical (minus the 100-400).


ErnestM

[cirks]

ErnestM said:

Bee_Jay, are you sure you haven't picked up my bag by mistake? It sounds almost identical (minus the 100-400). ErnestM

No it's not yours Ernest...It's mine (also without the 100-400 and I have the non-DO 70-300 but otherwise identical...

[Black5]

I have a Sigma 70-200 EX f/2.8.

Bought secondhand with a polariser and x2 converter - £350.

Fantastic for the money.

If i had bought new, it would have been a tough choice between this and the Canon 70-200L f/4.

I also have a Sigma 70-300 APO Macro II. This was the second lens I bought. As a budget lens it is very good and has the advantage of a close focus.

[havoc]

Guys, quick hijack (I'm looking into lenses for 350D).

What are IS, and DO, and all the other acronyms? And how important are they to an amateur who's got no intention of going near professional? I understand the advantages of a lower f-number, but that's about as far as my (limited) knowledge goes.

Cheers,

Martin

[tertius]

havoc said:

Guys, quick hijack (I'm looking into lenses for 350D). What are IS, and DO, and all the other acronyms? And how important are they to an amateur who's got no intention of going near professional? I understand the advantages of a lower f-number, but that's about as far as my (limited) knowledge goes. Cheers, Martin

Hmm, well I was hoping someone more knowledgable than me would step in, but I can help a bit.

IS = Image Stabilisation and is a Canon technology to help take pictures at slower shutter speeds compensating for movement of the lens/camera (how it works I have no clue)

USM = Ultra Sonic something (Motor, Mechanism?), again Canon technology this time for focusing - supposed to be faster and quieter I believe

L = in Canon speak this means expensive

DO and the rest not sure, I assume they are model/type/grade codes

Dan

[havoc]

cheers tertius - L and USM I'd found, IS I should have guessed...it's the rest that fox me - the Jessop's catalogue has loads, but doesn't have a key, and neither does the website...which is about as useful as the shop assistant in there that I spoke to yesterday, who actually seemed to know less than me!!!

[tertius]

OK a bit more info, if you go here:

www.warehouseexpress.com/index.cfm?/photo/lenses/sigmalens.html

And click on "About Sigma Lenses" you get some useful info about the Sigma nomenclature.

Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be something similar for Canon, but does DO stand for Digital Only perchance?