| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/24/2006 08:52:20 PM · #1 |
I have a Canon Rebel xt. I'm going on vacation. I would like a lens that can zoom so I can shoot far-away things. Like animals and nature.
First what would be the BEST lens out there for this? Second, What would be the most economic lens? It would also help if you have a canon to tell me what you have.
|
|
|
|
06/24/2006 08:53:32 PM · #2 |
P.S. I'm leaning towards Stigma because of price, BUT i'm not sure about quality.
|
|
|
|
06/24/2006 08:55:30 PM · #3 |
P.S. I'm a little confused about the zoom/macro thing. Does a 70-300 telephoto shoot macro too. Is it a focusing thing? How would I know?
|
|
|
|
06/24/2006 08:58:56 PM · #4 |
| the 70-300 is a decent lens for shooting distance, but does not shoot macro. Look under the lens specs for "minimum focusing distance". There is a nice 100mm 2.8 that does macro - mid distance, great close-ups.... alternatively, the 70-200 is excellent from mid - long range, but does not do macro (extremely close). For economy - the 70-300 is probably fine. For quality the 70-200 2.8L. For macro and mid-distance - the 100 2.8 macro. |
|
|
|
06/24/2006 09:02:27 PM · #5 |
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO Macro Super II for Canon
Then what does this mean? This is the most owned lens for Stigma in dpc.
|
|
|
|
06/24/2006 09:03:24 PM · #6 |
| Hmmmmm well if it says macro then it does macro. i don't know Sigma lenses, only canon ones. |
|
|
|
06/24/2006 09:16:20 PM · #7 |
The Sigma 70-300 apo is not a true macro, but does a decent job: |
|
|
|
06/24/2006 09:33:43 PM · #8 |
A true macro lens can reproduce what you see at 100% full size (1:1). The canon 100 2.8 is a try macro lens.
Most of the other lenses that zoom and do macro are more accurately called 'close focusing'. Some can reproduce 1:2 (1/2 life size) but 1:3 to 1:5 is more common.
the longer the focal length of the macro lens the farther away you can(or need to) be. You can get a 60mm macro lens and almost be touching the subject. a 180mm macro may require you to be 2 to 3 feet back - great for a flying insect on flower as you won't scare them, but it can be a problem for other subjects.
Every lens is a compromise - in size, cost, weight, optical quality, etc. What you value vs what i value in a lens may differ.
The sigma 70-300 APO is a very good value. There are better lenses out there for optical quality and focus speed, but they cost more and weigh more. You can get a 28-300 lens too - but to get that much range in one lens you're giving up optical quality.
the sigma does macro, you have to zoom to 200-300mm and flip a switch. it is pretty good, but nothing outstanding for a macro lens IMO. It is a lens i recomend - the next step up would be the canon 70-200 F4 and a 1.4x TC, or perhaps the sigma 70-200 2.8 and a 1.4 TC. But you'll see the cost of those lenses (without the TC) to be about 3 and 5 times the sigma 70-300 price.
|
|
|
|
06/26/2006 09:52:28 AM · #9 |
The 100mm is a highly recommended lens for serious macro enthusiasts...
There are some other very interesting lenses, but there's a fantastic balance in the 100mm..
I will support most of what Prof said in his post above this, but I will add that if you go with the Canon 70-200 f/4L (or any of the other similarly ranged L lenses), you will not get the macro capability of the Sigma... Sometimes I wish I had it because I really like the middle ranges that I'm currently lacking... There are some fantastic flowers that are simply gorgeous here that I just can't get the right perspective with the setup I'm currently using... Larger subjects such as flowers and insects of the dragonfly family are well suited to the Sigma 70-300.
The next thing I will be checking into though is getting some extension tubes to see if I can do some close focusing with the 80-200 I own... That's a seriously flipping sharp lens... I've found that it's noticeably sharper than the 50mm f/1.8's in some situations... but more on that elsewhere...
With macro, there's certainly more than one way to 'skin a cat'. |
|
|
|
06/26/2006 10:02:38 AM · #10 |
| it will do macro in a sence you can get way in on a subject by zooming, but it isnt true macro as you will need to be about 4-6ft away for it to focus on your subject any closer than that is not to good. but is nice for shooting small things like bees or butterflies so you dont scare them away. Any way for what you want it is a good lense to do it. |
|
|
|
06/26/2006 10:06:45 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by Sparky9001:
I'm going on vacation. I would like a lens that can zoom so I can shoot far-away things. Like animals and nature.
|
You might consider the Sigma 50-500. That is a huge focal range from "normal" 50mm to "extreme telephoto" at the 500mm end. I haven't used one but the reviews are good. Supposed to be a big, heavy thing but hey you're young! Depending on where you are vacationing it may be possible to rent one. |
|
|
|
06/26/2006 10:06:46 AM · #12 |
| how about canon 70-300mm f3.5-5.6 IS USM ? |
|
|
|
06/26/2006 10:12:28 AM · #13 |
I have a tamron 28-300 which gives a nice range of view, it also allows me to pack light when I do not have the space or means to lug around an extra bag full of lenses.
|
|
|
|
06/26/2006 10:20:52 AM · #14 |
| I have an XT and a Lens Sigma 18-200 mm , it´s a great lens , I compare it against my Canon EF 24-85mm and it is far better lens than the Canon. Excellent lens for vacation! It is equivanlent to a 28-320mm in full frame , excellent range for outdoor photo. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/18/2024 08:35:38 PM EDT.
