Is this lens worth getting?

[Polarbert]

What do people think to this lens then?

www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0001VQ12Y/kelkoocpc-electronics-photo-accessories-21/ref%3Dnosim/203-6329658-0748712


It looks alright to me but then I wouldn't know!

[HankScorpio]

I had one for Nikon for a few months but upgraded to it's bigger brother, worked well and certainly value for money but I was overcome with lens lust.

[Polarbert]

What did you get?

[HankScorpio]

70-200 f2.8 HSM

[longers]

HankScorpio said:

70-200 f2.8 HSM

What do you think to it? Am considering one of these myself with possibly the 1.4x or 2x converter.......

Longers

Sorry for thread hijack polabert!!

[HankScorpio]

Really liked it but wasn't long enough (and a bit poop with TCs) so sold that for a 80-400.

I'm not sure if it was here or elsewhere but I posted somewhere recently that I really miss the speed for indoor portraits at family events, it was a really nice lens and I'd get again if funds allowed.

[longers]

Thanks for the info.

Mrs L is having a baby soon so thought it'd be a good lens for the kids parties etc that I'll be attending / hosting over the next couple of years! Would prefer something that goes to 400 if just for motorsport though...

I'll give polarbert his thread back now.

Longers

[Polarbert]

LOL no its okay, I got my answer, I'm just deciding whether or not to get a used one on ebay now.

Will a 55-200 be good for le mans?

[HankScorpio]

My situation exactly.

Sigma is brilliant for family stuff, 400 is brilliant for the track.
I was doing more track stuff so that won but I do miss the sigma on occasion.

[Polarbert]

So a 200 wouldn't zoom in enough?

[Polarbert]

Don't think I will be able to stretch to a 80-400 at the moment, they are £565 on ebay!!!

[Polarbert]

Okay...what about this one: www.buyacamera.co.uk/xsearch.asp?RecId=CANCA860&pt=k ???

[miniman]

Polarbert said:

Okay...what about this one: www.buyacamera.co.uk/xsearch.asp?RecId=CANCA860&pt=k ???

I've got one of those, it was one of the kit lenses on my old Canon 35mm. Some pics using it here: www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=109&t=265471

Despite what the advert says, I don't think the focussing is that fast. But in general I find it pretty good, especially as the 1.6 factor on the 350D makes it into effectively 480mm.

[Gemm]

If you are going for a Canon lens, then I'd choose a USM lens due to faster AF. 75-300 USM is OK but 100-300 USM is a much better lens with better features. New 70-300 IS is also a good choice.

BTW, I used to use Sigma 70-200 f2.8 HSM, and I loved it and it worked great with 1.4x.

>> Edited by Gemm on Monday 15th May 20:34

[Polarbert]

How much did you pay for it?

[Gemm]

Polarbert said:

How much did you pay for it?

Me? Which one?

[Polarbert]

Gemm said:

Polarbert said: How much did you pay for it? Me? Which one?

I meant miniman, but sure, how much for your lenses? I'm on a bit of a budget at the moment you see.

[tertius]

I have the Canon 75-300 USM lens (came as part of a kit) - I think its a decent lens for the price. Pretty much all the Philadelphia baseball pics I posted a week or two ago were taken with it (on a 350D body), if you want some examples. (PS don't blame the white balance on the lens - that's the operator!)

I haven't used the 100-300 so can't comment on that.

[Gemm]

tertius said:

I haven't used the 100-300 so can't comment on that.

Advantage of 100-300 f4.5/5.6 USM is that it uses ring USM, which means faster and quieter AF, capability of full-time manual focusing (it means you can manually focus without using AF/MF switch on the lens, which is extremely handy and I couldn't live without it now) and non-rotating front element (useful when using filters), and it's also built better. Optical quality is slightly better too. This is obviously slightly more expensive than 75-300 though.....

These are mid-range lens (the one with little focus distance window on the lens) and it's worth going for if you can afford it.

>> Edited by Gemm on Tuesday 16th May 10:26

[miniman]

Polarbert said:

How much did you pay for it?

Well, the 35mm body, a 28-90 and the 90-300 were about £250 IIRC.