| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/02/2005 10:09:11 PM · #1 |
I bought my Canon EOS20d earlier this year and ran out of money, now I have a budget of around $300.00 USD for a zoom lense, is the Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM Autofocus Lens a good value for 279.00? Just looking for input. Thanks for your help.
|
|
|
|
05/02/2005 10:12:10 PM · #2 |
Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 for about $330. WAY the best walk around lens for that price.
|
|
|
|
05/02/2005 10:12:52 PM · #3 |
| i have that lens , it's not that bad , your like it . Go to the camera store and try it out bring your 20d take some shots and then check them out on your computer and the make up your mind |
|
|
|
05/02/2005 10:15:50 PM · #4 |
My Canon Camera Kit came with the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6, does the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 really offer much mre zoom capabilities than the one I have now? I am satisfatied with close up and portrait shots, but I want more out of long range pictures and such.
|
|
|
|
05/02/2005 10:17:55 PM · #5 |
If you haven't already, you should check out the reviews on //www.fredmiranda.com/ . I've never used the lens you mentioned, but I have used the Sigma 70-300 macro and it was not a bad zoom lens for the money. It takes decent 1:2 macros and has a nice zoom reach, but it's noticeably soft above 250mm. If you're okay having a 70-250 lens, then it's a decent option in your budget.
That said, if you can wait just a little longer and buy the Canon 70-200 f/4, I think you'll be WAY happier.
|
|
|
|
05/02/2005 10:19:09 PM · #6 |
| I'm about to put my Tamron 28-300mm 1:3.5-6.3 XR Di LD (IF) Macro out on eBay...It will probably go just under $300... |
|
|
|
05/02/2005 10:20:42 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by bobdaveant:
My Canon Camera Kit came with the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6, does the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 really offer much mre zoom capabilities than the one I have now? I am satisfatied with close up and portrait shots, but I want more out of long range pictures and such. |
The zoom isn't much different, but with the 2.8 on the 75mm end, the low light capabilities are 100x better. There's a world between 55 and 75, but if you need a long lens, why not just a Tamron 75-300mm f4-5.6? That's a FANTASTIC lens for about $120.
|
|
|
|
05/02/2005 10:37:20 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by bobdaveant:
My Canon Camera Kit came with the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6, does the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 really offer much mre zoom capabilities than the one I have now? I am satisfatied with close up and portrait shots, but I want more out of long range pictures and such. |
If you've got the 18-55, and are on a limited budget, I don't think the T 28-75 is the right choice. I have one, it is a very good lens, much better than the 18-55. But there is too much of an overlap, and the 18-55 is not that bad of a lens. I'd say go for something longer just for the sake of versatility.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2005 12:09:48 PM · #9 |
You should seriously consider the Sigma 70-300 APO II.
It's about $200, very sharp, solid build, no CA, out performs consumer grade Canon 75/100-300mm zoom lenses, and comes with a bag and a hood.
Do a search about it at dpreview forums, you'll see.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2005 12:16:47 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by bobdaveant:
I bought my Canon EOS20d earlier this year and ran out of money, now I have a budget of around $300.00 USD for a zoom lense, is the Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM Autofocus Lens a good value for 279.00? Just looking for input. Thanks for your help. |
Wait and save another $255 to get the Canon 70-200mm f/4L |
|
|
|
05/03/2005 12:28:51 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by doctornick:
Originally posted by bobdaveant:
I bought my Canon EOS20d earlier this year and ran out of money, now I have a budget of around $300.00 USD for a zoom lense, is the Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM Autofocus Lens a good value for 279.00? Just looking for input. Thanks for your help. |
Wait and save another $255 to get the Canon 70-200mm f/4L |
This, I think, is good advice - not as instantly gratifying, but good.
If you are discerning, you will, likely, move on to better glass once you can easily distinguish the differences between an image taken with one lens and the same image taken with another. The cheaper lens (which is often the lesser glass and speed) will then be obsolete, and, in the end, your overall expense will be greater than necessary.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2005 12:52:08 PM · #12 |
The 70-200/4L is a nice lens, but two thinks need to be considered 1) it's not as telephoto, and 2) it's a fair amount heavier. As always, it's a trade-off between convenience and quality.
(Incidentally I have both the 70-200/2.8L and a 75-300.)
|
|
|
|
05/03/2005 12:58:29 PM · #13 |
Sigma 70-300 APO. Gotta be the APO.
For reviews of lense, try
//www.dcviews.com/lenses/Canon-lenses.htm
and this one
this one. [/quote]
edited to shorten...
Message edited by author 2005-05-03 14:55:01.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2005 01:13:12 PM · #14 |
Just shortened the second link for easy reading.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/16/2025 12:53:06 PM EDT.
