which zoom lens?

[ofcorsa]

Im Currently using my 400D with the 50mm f1.8(mainly, i do have the 18-55 but prefer the nifty 50)

Im in the need of more reach, I read great things about the canon 55-250mm IS. Il be using it for wildlife stuff/zoo i imagine and also candid portraits, Just wondered if 250mm will be enough or should i look at the 70-300 from Tamron or canons 75-300 (no IS?) all available for very good prices.

or anything else i should consider

[miniman]

Budget? Sounds like it won't stretch to a 70-200 f/2.8 L IS plus a 1.4x converter?

[ofcorsa]

I was just looking at those on ebay,

That was option 3 actually, wait a few months and get the L lens. but that stage arnt i better just just getting another camera? Or as ive been told numerous times, the glass is more important?

Edited by ofcorsa on Thursday 8th May 17:15

[miniman]

The difference between a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 (which is still a good lens) and the Canon L equivalent on my 350D body is obvious. The handling of the lens is in another league too. I would recommend saving up for the L lens every time, it's the lenses that you will keep for years while bodies come and go IMHO.

[Jonleeper]

Was looking through pervious threads to reasurect one when this crops up! I have a similar dilema. I am currently using a 10d with a Tamron 28-75 f2.8 SP AF Aspherical XR Di lens Now since buying this lens I have not looked back and love the quality and flexability that it gives, over my previous cheaper lens. Now my wife is asking for more detailed and better picture, to use for her art, and I need to improve my reach. I have a Canon 70-300 f4-5.6 IS USM but don't think that it delveres s much as the Tamron. I have a budget of about £600 for new kit. I use the camera for just about everything and find the 28-75 great for a walk about lens. It is when I am photographing animals and birds that I feel I am lacking, although this could be my ability not the equipments.

A few options have sprung to mind including upgrading the camera itself, 40d complete with battery grip is, just, about within my price range so an option. I have no real issues with the 10d it works very well, although it is throwing up a multitude of error 99's at the moment, but a service would probably not go amiss.

A quick scout around the bazzars for lenses has thrown up a multitude of options. All of these are approximate prices and options;

Canon 70-200 f4 L USM at £350
Canon 70-200 f4 L IS USM at £600
Canon 70-200 f2.8 L USM at £650
Sigma 70-200 f2.8 ES DG Macro HSM at £450
Sigma 100-300 f4 DG APO IF HSM at £570
Sigma 50-500 EX DG HSM at £575

So I now don't know what options I should be investigating further. Should I stick with the 10d and get better glass or try to utilise the glass I have witha better camera? I would love a 5d or even 1dmk2 but they are about £800 - £1000 so out of the price bracket. I am at a loss as to where to go and would appreciate any asisstance given!

[ofcorsa]

Just relooked,

The IS version is certainly out of my price range for now, But non IS is within budget

[Jonleeper]

If the 70-200 f2.8 L non IS is within budget with a 1.4 converter then try looking at the 100-400 f4-5.6 L IS USM it appears to be avaliable for abotu £800 so might be an option. Lots of people rave about them.

[miniman]

ofcorsa said:

Just relooked,

The IS version is certainly out of my price range for now, But non IS is within budget

To be honest I have rarely used the IS on mine. But if you are going to go down the 1.4x converter route, you will lose a stop so the IS might be more useful in that situation.

[Jenx]

miniman said:

[To be honest I have rarely used the IS on mine.

miniman...why would you ever have it switched off? Mine is on all the time

Martin.

Edited by Jenx on Thursday 8th May 18:43

[miniman]

err... pass. Thinking about it, I don't care about battery life as I have several, it has a motorsport mode, I might switch it on and see what happens!

[Mick429]

Recently upgraded from a Canon 70-200 f4L non IS lens to the Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS version. The new lens had its first proper outing at the weekend, and I am seriously impressed with the new bit of kit.

Much more vivid colours, many more keepers (down to the IS) and great bokeh with the aperture opened beyond f4

[Jonleeper]

Any advice on my new body vs glass dilema?

[Ordinary Bloke]

I have a Canon 50mm f1.8, Tamron 28-75 f2.8 XR Di and Sigma 70-200 EX HSM f2.8 with the Sigma 1.4x converter, hours and hours of research before I bought them and they're all brilliant.

I don't need IS or wide angle, so they're perfect. Of course I'd prefer L-series but each of these gives maximum performance for the money spent.

[miniman]

Jonleeper said:

Any advice on my new body vs glass dilema?

Personally I think glass makes a bigger difference, although the 10D is getting on a bit now I guess. By the way, the Sigma 50-500 is BIG! Definitely try before you buy - I couldn't be doing with dragging it round all day having used a mate's for a short time.

[Simpo Two]

ofcorsa said:

That was option 3 actually, wait a few months and get the L lens. but that stage arnt i better just just getting another camera? Or as ive been told numerous times, the glass is more important?

Well, even the best camera in the world isn't going to get you 300mm or even 200mm. It still needs a lens, so you'll be at exactly the same point, ie without a lens, only much poorer.

[ofcorsa]

I think ive decided i can realisticly afford the f/4 70-200 and maybe get a telephoto converter later,

My main interest is portraits so 200mm should be plenty,

[Ordinary Bloke]

ofcorsa said:

I think ive decided i can realisticly afford the f/4 70-200 and maybe get a telephoto converter later,

My main interest is portraits so 200mm should be plenty,

The Canon 70-200 f4 is a lovely lens, but for portrait's I think you need a wider maximum aperture than f4, that's why I have the Tamron and Sigma.

But any 70-200 f2.8 is very heavy, good for candid photo's (I did a wedding reception using my Sigma) but for most portraits you don't want/need to be that far away.

IMHO.

I have heard of fashion shots outdoors done with 300mm f2.8 lens and walkie talkies between the photographer and the model!

Edited by Ordinary Bloke on Saturday 10th May 22:46

[ofcorsa]

Thanks bloke

The sigma 70-200mm f2.8 are looking like an affordable alternative to the canon,

[Simpo Two]

ofcorsa said:

The sigma 70-200mm f2.8 are looking like an affordable alternative to the canon,

Yes, I have one and if you don't have a grand to spend, it does a sound job. The AF misses sometimes in low light at f2.8 and then if you have time it's wiser to switch to manual focus, but if you need speed for sensible money I'd recommend it.

ETA the AF missing may be related to camera not lens, I don't know. I use a Nikon D200.

Edited by Simpo Two on Monday 12th May 23:25