Discussion
Ive got a 40D, currently using the kit 17-85 lens with it. I bought a 50mm 1.8 at Christmas and is a great lens but not had a great deal of use with it so far. Hopefully should be seeing more use in the coming months.
I've got a keen eye for a Landscape shot, but also want to try my hand at events and also at Motorsport (So generally everything bar Macro really!) so been thinking about a lens line up for my 40d and I've come up with the following
Sigma 10-20mm
Canon 17-55mm F2.8
Canon 50mm F1.8
Sigma 70-200mm F2.8
What does that look like? I know the 200mm isnt a great stretch for Motorsport but it'll be mainly bikes at UK tracks in BSB. I like the idea of the F2.8 for any low light work that might come my way. I wont be chasing birds (Wildlife that is) with it!
I've got a keen eye for a Landscape shot, but also want to try my hand at events and also at Motorsport (So generally everything bar Macro really!) so been thinking about a lens line up for my 40d and I've come up with the following
Sigma 10-20mm
Canon 17-55mm F2.8
Canon 50mm F1.8
Sigma 70-200mm F2.8
What does that look like? I know the 200mm isnt a great stretch for Motorsport but it'll be mainly bikes at UK tracks in BSB. I like the idea of the F2.8 for any low light work that might come my way. I wont be chasing birds (Wildlife that is) with it!
Sigma 10-20mm - love mine but considering swapping for the new 8-16
Canon 17-55mm F2.8 - realy love mine, the best crop walkaround zoom in existence
Canon 50mm F1.8 - good, ish
Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 - Mine sold and AF is flakey will try get that fixed, not as sharp as the canon equivelants at 200. You can always use a 1.4 or 2.0 tc with this for more reach
Canon 17-55mm F2.8 - realy love mine, the best crop walkaround zoom in existence
Canon 50mm F1.8 - good, ish
Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 - Mine sold and AF is flakey will try get that fixed, not as sharp as the canon equivelants at 200. You can always use a 1.4 or 2.0 tc with this for more reach
The 70-200 is going to leave you short a lot of the time for motorsport and I know with Nikon the non pro lenses are pants with converters. The 100-400 seems to be a good option and is much better the the Nikon equiv 80-400. You need fast AF for motorsport and on a crop sensor at least 300mm.
Rob13 said:
So if it was full frame, what length would I need then? Upwards of 400mm?
100-400 is way above my price range. The Sigma would be stretching it at around the £600 mark
I think I'm right in saying the 40D has a crop sensor. I shoot Nikon. With the Nikon D300 you get an effective 450mm out of a 300mm lens. It is more angle of view than magnification but it sort of amounts to the same thing. 100-400 is way above my price range. The Sigma would be stretching it at around the £600 mark
I shoot mostly motorsport and my lens line up is all Nikkor and cost around a TVR Griffith (I sold mine to fund them)
300mm Prime VR f2.8
70-200mm VR f2.8
28-70mm f2.8
18-35mm f2.8
I also carry a 1.4 and a 1.7 teleconverter. With this I can cover everything except macro and super wide angle but I personally am not a fan of the distortion effect from wider angle lenses.
If you were shooting Nikon I would suggest that you go for the Nikon 70-300 VR11 for a cost saving, it is fast enough and is pretty sharp, at least until you compare it to one of the pro range anyway. I dont know if Canon have an equivalent or as was pointed out think about secondhand good glass from a reputable dealer.
At a lot of circuits without a media pass you can be quite a distance from track and have a fence in the way. There are a few exceptions. For bikes I go to the 300mm even at Russell at Snetterton. For Cars you could get by with the 70-200 but only in a limited number of places.
The cheaper lenses lose too much light with converters and the AF starts to hunt.
I had the Sigma 150-500 and it was terrible in low light without converters. I lost £300 in 3 months on that lens. Buy cheap buy twice.
Rob13 said:
Ive got a 40D, currently using the kit 17-85 lens with it. I bought a 50mm 1.8 at Christmas and is a great lens but not had a great deal of use with it so far. Hopefully should be seeing more use in the coming months.
I've got a keen eye for a Landscape shot, but also want to try my hand at events and also at Motorsport (So generally everything bar Macro really!) so been thinking about a lens line up for my 40d and I've come up with the following
Sigma 10-20mm
Canon 17-55mm F2.8
Canon 50mm F1.8
Sigma 70-200mm F2.8
What does that look like? I know the 200mm isnt a great stretch for Motorsport but it'll be mainly bikes at UK tracks in BSB. I like the idea of the F2.8 for any low light work that might come my way. I wont be chasing birds (Wildlife that is) with it!
I've just moved from 350D to 40DI've got a keen eye for a Landscape shot, but also want to try my hand at events and also at Motorsport (So generally everything bar Macro really!) so been thinking about a lens line up for my 40d and I've come up with the following
Sigma 10-20mm
Canon 17-55mm F2.8
Canon 50mm F1.8
Sigma 70-200mm F2.8
What does that look like? I know the 200mm isnt a great stretch for Motorsport but it'll be mainly bikes at UK tracks in BSB. I like the idea of the F2.8 for any low light work that might come my way. I wont be chasing birds (Wildlife that is) with it!
current lenses
Sigma 10-20mm
Canon 17-85mm
Canon 50mm MkII f1.8
Tamron 90mm (Macro)
Tamron 70-300mm
Heres a couple pics from Tamron from Snetterton BSB 2009 from the infield, JPEG straight from 350D
BTCC stuff here http://www.flickr.com/photos/16388901@N02/collecti...
and can do other things too (without flash):
I'd go for 300mm personally, I don't use the 70-300mm much tbh but the f2.8 might give you more flexibility for wider use than just motorsport. I have to bow down to the gurus for motorsport on lens choice but if you just want to see if it is something you want to do it's a good cheap lens (under £100 new) to start with imho.
I've got the Sigma but don't have the eye for landscape (and don't get much practise), will upload a couple pics later if you want if I can find some old holiday pics.
I found investing in 430EXII flash helps the 17-85 (plus needed for Macro/portrait lens).
But yes I think you lens choice gives you a nice balance.
Edited by Chicken Pox on Friday 26th February 16:13
Right so, aside from the telephoto, I seem to have the others nailed down!
I did look towards the 24-105mm instead of the 17-55mm but although it gives flexibility towards getting a FF in the long term, I'd rather have that extra width from the 17mm.
I think I'm getting a Sigma 10-20mm in the next week (tying a deal up at the moment), so following that, I might look to replace the 17-85 with the 17-55 before going for the telephoto. Only problem is that I cant do motorsport until I get a tele!
I did look towards the 24-105mm instead of the 17-55mm but although it gives flexibility towards getting a FF in the long term, I'd rather have that extra width from the 17mm.
I think I'm getting a Sigma 10-20mm in the next week (tying a deal up at the moment), so following that, I might look to replace the 17-85 with the 17-55 before going for the telephoto. Only problem is that I cant do motorsport until I get a tele!
Rob13 said:
I've seen the Sigma 100-300 F4. Now this is pricey, but can be had for about £450 used so its fast becoming my no1 choice. I thought about the 100-300IS USM but I think I might find it wanting pretty quickly after getting used to the range.
I've got the Sigma 100-300, personally I think the only thing that lets it down is the lack of IS, optically it seems pretty much spot on, even at 300mm and f4.Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff