help with zoom lens please.

[tandart]

well after much thought and deliberation i am the proud owner of a new 30D. i got it 3 weeks ago and love it to bits. i got it with the 18-55 kit lens and while it takes very good pictures, i will, in the near future, be looking at a bigger zoom.

are there any sites that do lens reviews?

it will be used for show jumping - max distance 50-60 metres. i am sure i'll get into things later that require longer zoom lengths (and money).

not sure about budget yet, but realise i could spend up to 10x the price of the body on 1 lens (if i was loaded/professional/insane ).

all thoughts will be appreciated.

thanks
david

p.s i am in awe of some of the pictures on here - like ones posted of the air show and especially the ones taken with the 400mm prime (i'm not worthy )

[monkeyhanger]

Sigma 70-200 f2.8.

Sigma 100-300F4.

Or anything similar to the above.

[poah]

they would be my choices

[tandart]

thank you both for your advice. i will have a look at these 2 too .

david

[Hanslow]

Here's some lens review places....

www.photographyreview.com/defaultcrx.aspx
www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/index.php
www.photodo.com

Edited by Hanslow on Tuesday 22 August 08:54

[monkeyhanger]

tandart said:

thank you both for your advice. i will have a look at these 2 too .

You're welcome

Both of those lenses will work quite nicely with a 1.4x Teleconvertor if you find yourself needing extra range in future. They will also retain Autofocus on the 30D.

Of the 2, the 70-200 is easily hand-holdable but the 100-300 "may" be a bit heavy, depending on your preference. It works very well on a monopod though.

[tandart]

awesome sites - thanks for that. it does look like the 70-200 is the one to go for.

in future, if i want more zoom than the 200mm, is a converter ok to use. i appreciate it'll never be as good as, say, a prime 400mm lens, but it is also no-where near as expensive. but from what you are saying and what i've read, you can still get some pretty good results with a lens like this and a converter.

would it be true to say that the bigger the converter, the worse (slightly) the picture quality?

now to get saving for THAT lens - and a new bag and and and.

[monkeyhanger]

The 1.4x convertor will serve you well on either of those lenses but the 2x will degrade image quality and AF speed significantly.

I use a Sigma 2x on my 120-300 f2.8 but that lens is in a different league to most. I also have the 70-200 f2.8 and it's a cracking lens.

[tandart]

ok MH - thanks for that. your collection of lenses sounds amazing BTW.

[monkeyhanger]

tandart said:

ok MH - thanks for that. your collection of lenses sounds amazing BTW.

You wouldn't want the credit card bill though

[tandart]

i'll say - especially when you consider that just the 70-200 f2.8 runs to £1200.

still, i'll bet it takes stunning pictures.

[monkeyhanger]

tandart said:

i'll say - especially when you consider that just the 70-200 f2.8 runs to £1200.

still, i'll bet it takes stunning pictures.

It does, but it's the Sigma

Non of that over-priced IS malarky on a 70-200 for me, TYVM

[tandart]

i see - still very nice.

i have also just been informed of a new lens canon is bringing out - the 70-200 f/4 L USM IS. it will retail for around $1200. they'll keep their non-IS lens in the range and i'll still probably get it as the IS one looks to be about double the price of the non-IS one.

[flameop]

just ordered an 70-200 non IS .. can't wait to get me grubby hands on it