| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/18/2004 12:48:54 AM · #1 |
| I don't see a lens that fits this bill... I don't think I wanna drop 700-900 bucks on a lens, but I could do 350. The price seems to go from 250 then jumps to 450ish... Some of the iffy reviews on the cheaper ones scare me... Is there something else you guys can steer me at. Or should I just buck up and tell the wifey why I need to drop an absorbinant amount of money on a piece of glass and plastic... |
|
|
|
09/18/2004 01:33:36 AM · #2 |
| Are you talking primes or zooms? Canon only, or Sigma/Tamron? |
|
|
|
09/18/2004 10:53:35 AM · #3 |
Well after more looking I'm thinking about jumping up in price range a little bit, which makes the choice much easier.
I'm looking for a zoom lens and I don't need it to go over 200, mostly because I'm not sure if I've seen a ???-300mm zoom lens that I've been happy with in the 500ish range...
EDIT: Oh ya, I'm prefering to stick with Sigma or Canon I guess.
Maybe This?
Message edited by author 2004-09-18 10:57:53. |
|
|
|
09/18/2004 11:07:20 AM · #4 |
You cannot go wrong with the 70-200 f/4L, unless you know that you definitely need more aperture. The 70-200 range is a very useful one, and the f/4 speed is a nice compromise between size/weight and performance. And it's build like a brick sh!thouse, LOL.
It's also compatible with the Canon EF 1.4x II (and the 2.0x II) teleconverters, for even more range. I don't recommend the 2.0x teleconverter with zooms though. |
|
|
|
09/18/2004 11:09:16 AM · #5 |
I would definitely agree with Kirbic on this; if you can swing the extra few hundred the 70-200 F/4L sounds like the way to go for you. I know a bunch of people who have that lens and have never heard anything bad about it. Some wonderful images have been produced with it on this site.
|
|
|
|
09/18/2004 01:16:06 PM · #6 |
As Kirbic has said already... This, is one gorgeous lens, and considered by most the best glass in this focal range (I use the f/2.8 v.).
|
|
|
|
09/18/2004 08:20:18 PM · #7 |
| Thanks guys, huge help... Nice to feel confident about a lens purchase :) |
|
|
|
09/19/2004 12:39:06 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
You cannot go wrong with the 70-200 f/4L, ... |
You're probably right--and the price is great--but the polarizer for it set me back $114! |
|
|
|
09/19/2004 01:11:21 AM · #9 |
Well, I don't know if this fits the bill given the brands you've expressed a preference for, but one of my early cheap lens purchases was the Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6, which can be had for under $200. For the money it really is a pretty nice lens, and I've gotten some excellent shots using it. Just something for you to consider since money seems to be a primary concern.
|
|
|
|
09/19/2004 01:46:44 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
Originally posted by kirbic:
You cannot go wrong with the 70-200 f/4L, ... |
You're probably right--and the price is great--but the polarizer for it set me back $114! |
True dat, a good polarizer in 77mm is not cheap. But 77mm is pretty much the standard size for higher-end Canon glass, so having one in that size eventually is inevitable. 72mm is also a common size for some of the Canon "consumer" zooms, e.g. 28-135 IS, 28-200, etc. I just bought a 77mm filter and used a step-up ring. |
|
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: 09/12/2025 07:09:37 PM EDT.
