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

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Need some advice on my lens purchases (canon)
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 53, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 03/03/2004 01:57:29 AM · #1
Alright, I'm seriously considering selling my current olympus e20 and tcon-300 lens for around $1200. I think this should be reasonable what I can pick up for them on ebay.

I'm thinking about purchasing a 300d, possibly a 10d.

The lenses I am considering are the following: (followed by approximate price)
Tamron 70-300mm - $150 - for telephoto - some bird/zoo photography - possibly with a 1.4xTC
Tamron 28-75mm - $300 - general carry lens
Sigma 105mm 2.8x macro $350 - obviously for macro purposes - I'm not sure if I would need this if I have the 70-300mm?

I'm also considering the Canon ES 50mm 1.8 lens because of the great reviews, but if I have the 28-75mm is there really a need for this?

I'm not sure if I'm missing any category of lens.

All these lenses seemed to have decent reviews from what I have researched on them. If anyone else would like to comment on them or suggest alternatives, please feel free.

I'm looking to keep the lenses under $1000. Please note, that I am looking for quality in the lenses (good quality at AT LEAST 8x10), but I am not expecting them to perform as L lenses.

Any help is appreciated.

Thanks!

Message edited by author 2004-03-03 02:05:32.
 03/03/2004 02:00:41 AM · #2
Tamron 70-300mm - $150 - for telephoto - some bird/zoo photography - possibly with a 1.4xTC

Which one is that? No such thing!

Rebel and 10 D do not focus with lenses darker than F 5.6,in order to use 1.4X teleconverter you need a lens which is f4 or lighter!

Message edited by author 2004-03-03 02:03:25.
 03/03/2004 02:03:05 AM · #3
here
 03/03/2004 02:04:45 AM · #4
OK,but you can't put teleconverter on that!
And watch out about cheap 300 mm lenses,very shake sebsitive and bad picture quality,save some money and buy f2.8 telephoto...

Message edited by author 2004-03-03 02:13:34.
 03/03/2004 02:11:57 AM · #5
I don't recommend the 70-300. Yes, it is cheap, but you'll just be wasting your money. You'll soon realize how soft the lens is at 300 and will surely replace it, thus that's really not 150 well spent. I had a similar sigma large range lens, but found that the zoom at 300mm was completely unusable, even on a tripod at f11. So, I saved up a bit of money and got a Canon 70-200 L f4. It really is the best lens for the money. Sure you lose the extra 100mm, but you can always use a 1.4x extender, but the quality is amazing. Can't compete. Your other lenses look reasonable. The Tamron 28-75 is a very good lens, or you can consider the Canon 24-85mm, which is also very good. I've heard good things about both lens.

I just ordered the 24-85mm after much debate, but thought that the cost savings is good when i can share the 67mm filters between my 70-200mm f4 and this lens, the tamron 28-75mm is also 67mm btw, so both are good choices to go with the 70-200mm. I think this is the ideal combo.
 03/03/2004 02:19:26 AM · #6
Almost everything I have read about the tamron 70-300mm has stated that it is an incredible value for the money. It is supposed to be fairly sharp over the entire range.

reviews

The most complaints were a somewhat slow autofocus from what I can tell. Image quality is supposedly very good.

EDIT: I agree that the 70-200 L would be ideal, but I don't think I want to put up the $600+ for it

(I'm just going from what I've read though)

Message edited by author 2004-03-03 02:20:48.
 03/03/2004 02:25:43 AM · #7
I have the Tamron 70-300 LD (Macro). I have gotten excellent results with it at all focal lengths, particularly up at 300. It's an excellent lens for the money. Yes, the autofocus does seem slow when you compare it with USM lenses, but sufficiently fast for everyday usage. A couple of sample shots:

Heron

Egret


Message edited by author 2004-03-03 02:30:37.
 03/03/2004 02:26:56 AM · #8
Originally posted by SoCal69:
I have the Tamron 70-300 LD (Macro). I have gotten excellent results with it at all focal lengths, particularly up at 300. It's an excellent lens for the money. Yes, the autofocus does seem slow when you compare it with USM lenses, but sufficiently fast for everyday usage.

But not for birds,maybe for some large ones like ducks...
 03/03/2004 02:31:20 AM · #9
Originally posted by pitsaman:
Originally posted by SoCal69:
I have the Tamron 70-300 LD (Macro). I have gotten excellent results with it at all focal lengths, particularly up at 300. It's an excellent lens for the money. Yes, the autofocus does seem slow when you compare it with USM lenses, but sufficiently fast for everyday usage.

But not for birds,maybe for some large ones like ducks...


Take a look above...I edited my post to add some samples. But you are correct, 300mm is not enough focal length for smaller birds. But the same is true of any lens with similar aperatures and focal length.

Message edited by author 2004-03-03 02:32:31.
 03/03/2004 02:35:42 AM · #10
Originally posted by SoCal69:
I have the Tamron 70-300 LD (Macro). I have gotten excellent results with it at all focal lengths, particularly up at 300. It's an excellent lens for the money. Yes, the autofocus does seem slow when you compare it with USM lenses, but sufficiently fast for everyday usage. A couple of sample shots:

Heron

Egret


Both photos are awesome,but they are taken on the open with lot of light and those birds are very large!
In the forest where light is limited you need much faster and more precise lens for Cardinals and Woodpeckers..
 03/03/2004 02:36:30 AM · #11
thanks for the images. The heron is a great shot!

I don't think there are many affordable lenses (I was looking into the sigma 50-500 bigma). Other than that, it seems I'd need to put up at least a grand for just that lens.
 03/03/2004 02:40:31 AM · #12
Originally posted by pitsaman:
Both photos are awesome,but they are taken on the open with lot of light and those birds are very large!
In the forest where light is limited you need much faster and more precise lens for Cardinals and Woodpeckers..


Yes, as I said, you are correct. However, jrs915 is working on a limited budget, so I doubt faster (and more expensive) lenses are an option for him. In fact, he specifically mentioned the 70-200 f/4 L lens. Of course any lens purchase must be based on a combination of factors, not the least of which is the use to which it will be put. My only point was to basically state that this is a good lens for the money. I don't dispute that it has limitations.
 03/03/2004 02:55:40 AM · #13
Thanks for your help. So the Teleconverter won't work with the 70-300 because the extra stop won't allow enough light for it to focus?
 03/03/2004 05:48:36 AM · #14
The newer Canon Extenders (converters?) only work (as far as my experience goes) with select L Series lenses.

Does anyone know of off brand converters that work with normal EF lenses?

The Canon glass is really nice though, too bad the cost is so high. Makes it hard to fill your Lowepro with L's.
 03/03/2004 06:16:58 AM · #15
Originally posted by Count:
The newer Canon Extenders (converters?) only work (as far as my experience goes) with select L Series lenses.

Does anyone know of off brand converters that work with normal EF lenses?

The Canon glass is really nice though, too bad the cost is so high. Makes it hard to fill your Lowepro with L's.


You can also try Tamron's (recommended by many) and Sigma's (not that many recommendations). Also I've heard that Kenko's TCs are nearly as good as Canon's.

:)atwl
 03/03/2004 11:32:51 AM · #16
Kenko converters are good...
Tamron 90 Macro -- better than Sigma 105 :-) same price too.
Good zoom Sigma 70--200 F2.8 EX APO
 03/03/2004 11:37:04 AM · #17
get the canon 70-200L and the canon 50mm 1.8...both very sharp lenses and the L lens works great with the 1.4x teleconverter
 03/03/2004 11:38:25 AM · #18
When you buy Sigma teleconverter {from BHPhoto} \you will see a chart with which lense is compatible...

THE FOLLOWING LENSES "ONLY" ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THIS EXTENDER
(Using this extender with any other lens may damage the extender as well as the lens.)

Sigma Lenses For Canon AF Mode Original Canon EF Lenses Mode
180mm f/3.5 APO MACRO EX HSM MF 200mm f2.8L USM AF
300mm f/2.8 APO EX HSM AF 300mm f2.8L USM AF
300mm f/2.8 MF 300mm f4.0L IS/ USM MF
300mm f/4.0 APO MACRO/HSM MF 400mm f2.8L USM AF
300mm f/4.0 APO MACRO MF 400mm f5.6L USM MF
400mm f/5.6 APO MACRO /HSM MF 500mm f4.5L USM MF
500mm f/4.5 APO EX /HSM MF 600mm f/4L MF
800mm f/ 5.6 APO /EX HSM MF 1200mm f5.6L USM MF
1000mm f/8.0 APO MF 70-200mm f2.8L USM AF
70-200mm f/2.8 EX HSM AF
70-210mm f/2.8 MF
50-500mm f/4-6.3 APO MF
100-300mm f/4 EX HSM MF
120-300mm f/2.8 EX APO AF
300-800mm f/5.6 EX APO MF

Sigma 2x APO Extender for Canon EOS
 03/03/2004 12:03:23 PM · #19
I have the tamron 70-300 and I have printed 8x10s from it, I have say I am not the least bit disappointed with the end product!
I find that the biggest problem that I have is camera shake.(my tripod stinks!) keep in mind that on either of these cameras the actual
focal length would be 112-480. I didn't read what everyone wrote so someone may have already said that!
 03/03/2004 12:07:33 PM · #20
Originally posted by jrs915:
Almost everything I have read about the tamron 70-300mm has stated that it is an incredible value for the money. It is supposed to be fairly sharp over the entire range.

reviews

The most complaints were a somewhat slow autofocus from what I can tell. Image quality is supposedly very good.

EDIT: I agree that the 70-200 L would be ideal, but I don't think I want to put up the $600+ for it

(I'm just going from what I've read though)


Why not? The len's is just as important (if not more) then the chip in the camera body. Especially if you want large prints.
 03/03/2004 12:12:56 PM · #21
Why not? The len's is just as important (if not more) then the chip in the camera body. Especially if you want large prints. [/quote]

I agree, but I know I can't afford to. And it sounds like jrs915
may be in the same boat.
03/03/2004 12:13:20 PM · #22
I think there is the ideal world and the realistic world of lenses. Not everyone can afford the best lenses and sometimes you just have to go with what you can afford NOW esp if it's your first set of lenses. You could always upgrade at a later time if the money then becomes available. That said I think you have to evaluate what type of lens you will get the most use out of and try to get the best you can afford at that range. If you pay 150 dollars for a 70-300 with macro do you really need/want to spend 300+ on a macro lens? Could you put the money into a 'better' zoom lens and wait on the macro lens or get a cheaper macro lens?

Personally I love my Tamron 70-300 and find it takes very sharp images, sharper than my USD300+ lenses. Of course I would love to have the 70-200 VR 2.8 with TC AND a 400mm prime but only after winning the lottery.

03/03/2004 12:17:13 PM · #23
From everything I've heard the 50mm 1.8 is an awesome lens and excellent value for the money. I'd recommend keeping that on the list. I'm waiting for B&H to get some in right now.

As far as the 70-300 - I have the Canon 75-300 USM and really like it. A little more money then that Tamron you mentioned, but less than the 70-200L

Of course, if you really want the teleconverter (or think you will down the road) the 70-200L is the lens you should go with.

Edit:

This shot was taken with the Canon 75-300 at 300mm....

Message edited by author 2004-03-03 12:18:39.
 03/03/2004 12:27:10 PM · #24
i have had the canon and sigma 70-300mm, i prefer the sigma hands down and it has the macro feature which is great, I also have the 105mm and the 500mm and the kit lens, 75-300 is the one I use the most, and the sigma is not that expensive, I about 200 US.
 03/03/2004 12:30:16 PM · #25
Originally posted by moodville:
AND a 400mm prime but only after winning the lottery.


That is definitely the next lens on my list, the 400mm F/5.6L from Canon. This is an extraordinarily sharp lens, with the downside of being slower than it's big dollar counterparts which are F/4.0, and lacking IS - but even with those drawbacks it is a killer wildlife lens for barely over a grand - you don't have to win the lottery to get this one in your bag!

Rich.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/18/2024 02:56:12 AM

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 © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/18/2024 02:56:12 AM EDT.