Cheap, quality 400mm - DPChallenge Forums

07/14/2005 06:19:49 AM · #1

I've decided I want more reach than my 70-200/2.8L, so I'm considering lenses up to 400mm. The problem is, I don't want to spend a huge amount, but I DO want decent quality. (Hence no 2x TC.) Can anyone offer advice on something sharp at 400mm, but still reasonably cheap?

07/14/2005 06:55:47 AM · #2

From my limited experience, "cheap, quality" very rarely go hand in hand for lenses.

I did a quick search on the B&H site using "400mm" as my search criteria and came up with lenses in that focal range from the Phoenix 100-400 f/4.5-6.7 ($209.95) all the way up to the Canon 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS ($1409.95). I think your best bet would be a Tamron, Tokina or Sigma lens that range between $449.00 to $999.00 if you want to keep quality up as high as possible while keeping cost down a bit. I have never taken the time to search for reviews for these lenses, so you have a bit of legwork ahead of you. According to the Fred Miranda review site, the lenses listed highest that would fit your criteria would be the Sigma 80-400mm F4.5-5.6 EX OS APO (9.5 score / $999.00), Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 EX APO RF HSM (8.6 score / $999.00).

Seeing that you own a Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L and are used to the high quality images it produces, you may be disapointed by the results these lenses produce. It's hard to go back to cheaper lenses once you've had your first L fix. Keeping this in mind, you may want to look at the Canon 400mm f/5.6 L. Sure, it's a prime, but what you sacrifice in focal length flexibility you gain in image quality. Plus it's only $100 more than the two other lenses I just listed.

07/14/2005 07:10:20 AM · #3

Thanks Denis, I must admit I'm tempted to save for the 400/5.6L, but quality is conflicting with wanting it now! ;-)

07/14/2005 07:31:00 AM · #4

I have used the 400/2.8L, and with such a size/range, you want to make sure you have IS. Personally I would never buy a 400mm 5.6, seeing that 2.8 was barely enough to make my shots sharp, of course you can only use the lens with a monopod, but still. :-)

I would recommend you to contact all sorts of press officies around your area, ask them if they have some old equipment that is not in use, and if you could buy them secondhand. My experience say that most big press centers have a bundle of old lenses collecting dust, since they're always purchasing the newest/best lenses that comes around.

Good luck on your lens hunt, and if you're lucky enough to find a 200mm/1.8, let me know! :)

Terje

07/14/2005 07:35:51 AM · #5

Originally posted by terje:

You da man, Terje! You da man!

07/14/2005 07:37:42 AM · #6

Interesting point about the IS, especially considering the 300/4L comes with IS, which is a very similar price to the 400/5.6L. I do have the 1.4x TC II, so I could possibly sacrific an extra stop to take it up to 420mm.

I'll consider contacting some papers in the area. Should I get a 200/1.8L I'll be sure to let you borrow it when you're in the UK. :-D

07/14/2005 07:43:49 AM · #7

Originally posted by PaulMdx:

That's what I use. I just got the 1.4x extender. Here is an example

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

07/14/2005 07:55:32 AM · #8

Originally posted by Beagleboy:

That's what I use. I just got the 1.4x extender. Here is an example

Are you pleased with it? I can't really appreciate how sharp/unsharp the image is at that size unfortunately.

deapee

Kodak V803

07/14/2005 08:01:56 AM · #9

Tamron 200-500 f/5-6.3

//www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00021EED6/photonet/002-6242836-4073605?creative=327641&camp=14573&link_code=as1

doctornick

Apple iPhone 13 Pro

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

07/14/2005 08:08:01 AM · #10

Originally posted by Beagleboy:

Originally posted by PaulMdx:
Interesting point about the IS, especially considering the 300/4L comes with IS, which is a very similar price to the 400/5.6L. I do have the 1.4x TC II, so I could possibly sacrific an extra stop to take it up to 420mm.

That's what I use. I just got the 1.4x extender. Here is an example

Ditto

07/14/2005 08:15:54 AM · #11

Originally posted by PaulMdx:

Originally posted by Beagleboy:
That's what I use. I just got the 1.4x extender. Here is an example

Are you pleased with it? I can't really appreciate how sharp/unsharp the image is at that size unfortunately.

Oops! Hadn't thought about that. Here is a 100% crop of the same image, but completely unedited for sharpness, etc. The only thing done to it was convert from RAW to Jpeg. A bit grainy cuz I was shooting at ISO 400. Oh yeah, and this was shot handheld at 1/125 sec! Try that with a non-IS lens at 420mm.

hopper

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM

07/14/2005 08:21:44 AM · #12

man ... that's impressive actually

Originally posted by Beagleboy:

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED

07/14/2005 08:22:07 AM · #13

Thanks Denis, Nick, those look pretty good. As you say, Denis, sticking with L lenses certainly is tempting.

gbautista87

Nikon D70

07/14/2005 08:26:47 AM · #14

If I were you I'd get a teleconverter for now, since you seem to want more reach as soon as possible. Then I'd start saving up for a longer L lens.

You can just think of the poorer quality from using a converter as something that will really make the day you get the good stuff better. Imagine how much sharper the lens will seem after seeing soft pictures for a while.

coolhar

Canon PowerShot Pro 90 IS

07/14/2005 09:29:37 AM · #15

I don't know why Beagleboy overlooked the Tamron 200-500. It rates slightly higher on Fred M than the Bigma (8.7 vs 8.6). I've been using mine for about six months and am very pleased with it's performance. If you just want to stick with L it won't interest you. But if you want reach, light weight and the ability to produce fine images hand held at a reasonable cost, it's worth considering.

Here's an example of how sharp it's images are, this at max zoom of 500: flying close

07/14/2005 09:31:25 AM · #16

the 2x converter is getting a lot of pepper :-) I own both the 1.4x and the 2x TC, and I must say the 2x TC is useable :-) however, not as sharp as the 1.4x TC. On the other hand, I only use it with my 70-200/2.8IS

PS: I did try the 200mm/1.8 at roskilde, what a piece of glass that is! Now why would Canon stop producing it.. :-\

Terje

07/14/2005 09:37:22 AM · #17

Real photographers use L quality lenses. They can take a hit.

07/14/2005 09:39:33 AM · #18

Harvey, I did know about the Tamron 200-500, and the fact it's 500mm is temptation alone. That said, I wonder how much I'd use 500mm vs. 400mm.

Terje, What sort of aperture do you shoot at with the 2x TC?

07/14/2005 09:40:44 AM · #19

Paul, as much as light will give me. But I try to have twice as much shutter, then zoom length, so if I can do F11 1/800th seconds, I'll do that.