DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Best Telephoto for Canon Rebel
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 27, (reverse)
AuthorThread
02/01/2006 09:17:19 PM · #1
I know this has probably been hashed to death (don't all posts start like this?), but I would like some opinions on the best telephoto lens for the Cannon Rebel (300D), for under $500?

I want to take wildlife close-up shots.

Thanks in advance!
02/01/2006 09:22:19 PM · #2
Under $500, probably the 70-200 F4 L.
//www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_70200_4/index.htm

02/01/2006 09:31:59 PM · #3
Im planning to get the Sigma 70-200 F2.8, its about the same price as the Canon F4 but its 2.8!!!
02/01/2006 09:40:58 PM · #4
Love my 4L best bang for the buck. Colors and Sharpness are outstanding.

We had a bunch of Cedar Waxwings hanging out at work today and of course I always have the cam w/70-200mm mounted.

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/21367/thumb/289828.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/21367/thumb/289828.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
02/01/2006 09:49:37 PM · #5
Awesome pic of the Waxwing.

That's what I love about this site; I can always count on great advice.

Thanks for all the (quick!) suggestions.
02/01/2006 09:51:19 PM · #6
Originally posted by LoudDog:

Under $500, probably the 70-200 F4 L.
//www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_70200_4/index.htm


That's quite the review! I wish I understood all of it. One day.

Thanks LoudDog!

Message edited by author 2006-02-01 21:51:33.
02/01/2006 09:58:25 PM · #7
Sigma 100-300 F4 EX
02/01/2006 09:58:53 PM · #8
Tne Canon 70-200mm f/4L is an exceptionally nice lens, no question about it. I'm delighted with mine.

R.
02/01/2006 11:35:19 PM · #9
Originally posted by pitsaman:

Sigma 100-300 F4 EX


$899. OP wanted to spend $500 or less.

Anyway - sigma 70-300 4-5.6 APO is nice. The canon 70-200 4L might be in the price range (barely) but 200mm is not enough lenght. 400 to 500 works better.

There a thread by cresus - get one of those lenses (70-200 2.8) and a 2x TC for a 400mm 5.6 'equivalent'. Not super fast at that effetive 5.6 but, but affordable. You can often pick up a used 2.0 TC for $100 or so.

here are some shots with the Sigma 70-300
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/16648/thumb/268312.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/16648/thumb/268312.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/16648/thumb/268315.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/16648/thumb/268315.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/16648/thumb/197148.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/16648/thumb/197148.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

In december i got a tamron 70-210 2.8 (same model lens cresus is selling) and have yet to take many shots with it - it takes a while to 'learn' a new lens i'm finding out..some shots
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/432/thumb/278584.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/432/thumb/278584.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/16648/thumb/278755.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/16648/thumb/278755.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
and all these bird shots too.

With a PAIR of TC's i got out to 940mm on my rebel with that lens for this test shot:
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/16648/thumb/271782.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/16648/thumb/271782.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
Yes, you need a tripod for that and the shutter speeds get slow but it is possible and the image quality is fine.
02/02/2006 12:01:52 AM · #10
I've only ever used my f/4L, but I LOVE it. Nothing really to compare it to, but it's a superb lens. L glass is addicting, though... lol
02/02/2006 12:43:43 AM · #11
I love my new Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS. Its new IS tech (updated from older) and I'm very happy with the AF speed. Its just a bit over your price range, but might be worth it. Also, the Canon rebate might still be going, but I'm not sure about that. Anyway, I'm pretty happy with lens. Its not an "L" lens, but great price for IS which I found more utilitarian.

Here's are two shots without tripod at max focal length:

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/42715/thumb/289899.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/42715/thumb/289899.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/42715/thumb/286107.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/42715/thumb/286107.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

Message edited by author 2006-02-02 01:10:50.
02/02/2006 01:59:20 AM · #12
Originally posted by picnut:

I love my new Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS. Its new IS tech (updated from older) and I'm very happy with the AF speed. Its just a bit over your price range, but might be worth it. Also, the Canon rebate might still be going, but I'm not sure about that. Anyway, I'm pretty happy with lens. Its not an "L" lens, but great price for IS which I found more utilitarian.

Here's are two shots without tripod at max focal length:

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/42715/thumb/289899.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/42715/thumb/289899.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/42715/thumb/286107.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/42715/thumb/286107.jpg', '/') + 1) . '


Both seem a little soft to me - could be your PP or the lens. IS might be handy - I had to keep shutter speed at 1/500 or faster most of the time to avoid shake at 300mm. I know the non-IS 70-300 canon is know for being soft over 200mm. The first two I posted are at 300mm from the sigma with some USM. Try taking the as-captured shot and try USM of 300%, .3 and 0. This is canon's recomendation to offset the softening effect of the anti-aliasing filter on the sensor.
02/02/2006 02:19:38 AM · #13
Maybe I should not respond - being with Nikon and all, but I just think that 300mm for close up wildlife shots (not Zoo LOL) may not be enough, especially if you want to shoot birds. I'd get a 300 F4 at least so I can use teleconverters.
02/02/2006 04:53:21 AM · #14
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:

Originally posted by picnut:

I love my new Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS. Its new IS tech (updated from older) and I'm very happy with the AF speed. Its just a bit over your price range, but might be worth it. Also, the Canon rebate might still be going, but I'm not sure about that. Anyway, I'm pretty happy with lens. Its not an "L" lens, but great price for IS which I found more utilitarian.

Here's are two shots without tripod at max focal length:

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/42715/thumb/289899.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/42715/thumb/289899.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/42715/thumb/286107.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/42715/thumb/286107.jpg', '/') + 1) . '


Both seem a little soft to me - could be your PP or the lens. IS might be handy - I had to keep shutter speed at 1/500 or faster most of the time to avoid shake at 300mm. I know the non-IS 70-300 canon is know for being soft over 200mm. The first two I posted are at 300mm from the sigma with some USM. Try taking the as-captured shot and try USM of 300%, .3 and 0. This is canon's recomendation to offset the softening effect of the anti-aliasing filter on the sensor.


Prof,
You're right. They are soft. I took your advice about the USM at 300%/3/0 - I had never done it at such high levels - but that seemed to add so much noise to the background...maybe USM with NeatImage? I'll try to do some test shots with the lens tomorrow and post some crops from the originals. Thank you so much for your suggestion (sorry, I realize its not an individual photography discussion, but the help is always appreciated).
02/02/2006 05:30:42 AM · #15
You shouldn't need NeatImage. Here's a couple quick resharpenings. They'd be smoother if I'd had the large original to work from, but I don't see a serious increase in noise here:

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/30861/thumb/289941.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/30861/thumb/289941.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/30861/thumb/289940.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/30861/thumb/289940.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

Robt.
02/02/2006 09:16:50 AM · #16
Given your budget, I'd sat the new Canon 70-300 IS is your best bet hands down. It's $520 shipped at Dell.
02/02/2006 09:25:38 AM · #17
Pardon my ignorance. Quick question RE lenses. I thought that you got an idea of the "zoom factor" or "magnification" by dividing the big number by the smaller number. Like:

70-300 is 300/70= 4.3

Obviously I'm wrong. When I bought my one & only lense a few weeks ago, I got an 18-200, which is good for wide-angle and zoom. I figured I'd be getting about 11x magnification, and it seems to be close enough to that for me.

What's the proper way to get an idea of lense magnification for a recent P&S user like myself?

P.S. Feel free to laugh at my newbieness.

Message edited by author 2006-02-02 09:26:31.
02/02/2006 09:31:34 AM · #18
my understanding is that dividing the two numbers gets the zoom factor, which is not the same as the magnification.

I am still looking for a definitive answer on fidning magnification values which are comparable to 5x,6x etc in the P&S world
02/02/2006 09:33:50 AM · #19
Uh, no. 3x zoom, 11x zoom, etc. is just a term to describe the RANGE in a zoom lens, not the magnification. A 28-85mm lens and a 50-150mm lens would both be 3X zooms, but 150mm has MUCH greater reach.

The crop factor describes the effect of enlarging an image projected onto a smaller recording surface than "normal." Most camera sensors are smaller than 35mm film, so if you enlarge the images captured by a small camera sensor and a 35mm frame of film to 4x6" print size, the camera image would have to be enlarged more, thus it's magnified more. On a Rebel, the crop factor is 1.6, so a 28mm lens becomes a 45mm, and a 100mm lens becomes a 160mm.
02/02/2006 09:44:12 AM · #20
In 35mm format 50mm lenses are considered "normal" - basically what you see through the camera is more or less what you see with your naked eye. In that regard a 300mm lens would give you a magnification of 6x over the "normal" lens.
With digital cameras having smaller sensors a "normal" lens would probably be around 35mm.
02/02/2006 09:47:03 AM · #21
Originally posted by scalvert:

Uh, no. 3x zoom, 11x zoom, etc. is just a term to describe the RANGE in a zoom lens, not the magnification. A 28-85mm lens and a 50-150mm lens would both be 3X zooms, but 150mm has MUCH greater reach.

The crop factor describes the effect of enlarging an image projected onto a smaller recording surface than "normal." Most camera sensors are smaller than 35mm film, so if you enlarge the images captured by a small camera sensor and a 35mm frame of film to 4x6" print size, the camera image would have to be enlarged more, thus it's magnified more. On a Rebel, the crop factor is 1.6, so a 28mm lens becomes a 45mm, and a 100mm lens becomes a 160mm.

Thanks Shannon. Does that mean my 18-200 lense is actually a 29-320? I'm still having trouble grasping the idea of 'zoom' in real lenses as described by the two numbers. It's probably been discussed before. I should Google on it rather than bung up this thread.
02/02/2006 09:48:50 AM · #22
Originally posted by Strikeslip:

Does that mean my 18-200 lense is actually a 29-320?


Yes, exactly.
02/02/2006 09:51:03 AM · #23
Originally posted by wsteyn:

In 35mm format 50mm lenses are considered "normal" - basically what you see through the camera is more or less what you see with your naked eye. In that regard a 300mm lens would give you a magnification of 6x over the "normal" lens.
With digital cameras having smaller sensors a "normal" lens would probably be around 35mm.

Thanks, that puts it in simple terms for me. 50/1.6 = 31.25, so a 70-300 would have 'mag' 300/31.25 = 9.6 and my 18-200 would have 'mag' = 6.4?
02/02/2006 09:53:58 AM · #24
That seems about right.
02/02/2006 10:02:29 AM · #25
Originally posted by scalvert:

That seems about right.

Oh, well that was easier than I thought it would be. It's nice to finally get that straight in my head, thanks!
:-)
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 05/27/2020 10:11:37 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 05/27/2020 10:11:37 PM EDT.