Canon 40D...what zoom lens?

[N'Kolor]

Okay so I bought a Canon 40D with the 28-135mm lense. I would like to get something (affordable) in about the 70-300mm size. Any recommendations?

Thanks!

 

[DSLR noob]

what do you call affordable? I say the Canon EF 70-200 f/4 L. Just under $600 and you get an L series lens, helping you get more out of your 40D.

 

[N'Kolor]

$500 or less?

 

[N'Kolor]

One more thing...I will be visiting Puerto Rico and two US Virgin Islands in the coming weeks. I would like to get a lens long enough to get good close-up shots of natives without bothering them to get close.

I am looking at a 200mm fixed f/2.8 lens. What do you think about this choice?

 

[Big Mike]

The Canon 200mm F2.8 L, is a fantastic lens...I can't imagine that you would be disappointed with the quality of it. Although, the 70-200mm zoom lenses are so good, that it I'd recommend one of them over the 200mm....which may be limiting. It's not a cheap lens though....or did you find a cheaper model?

 

[Deadeye008]

I'd recommend the 70-200 4L also. Great lens and priced very reasonably as well.

 

[N'Kolor]

I do like that lens and the price is good. Um, how well will it work for wildlife photography? Is 200 really long enough?

 

[Alex_B]

I do like that lens and the price is good. Um, how well will it work for wildlife photography? Is 200 really long enough?

for wildlife, lenses are never long enough

I shoot with a 300mm on full frame (similar to 200 on a 40D), while it is not always as long as I want it to be, many times it is sufficient.

Of course it depends on the kind of wildlife, there will always be situations when the lens is too short.

 

[N'Kolor]

Well since wildlife is something I am only slightly interested in, maybe a 200 is more what I should shoot for. I am really looking to be able to shoot people from across a street and the 135 just isn't long enough.

 

[N'Kolor]

What about the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 lens?

 

[Big Mike]

What about the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 lens?

It's a pretty decent lens, but it's big and heavy (as is the Canon 70-200 F2.8).

If you are shooting sports or weddings, I would say that F2.8 is a big advantage over F4...but if you are shooting wildlife and people on the street...I'd suggest the 70-200 F4. It's a fantastic lens and it's much smaller and lighter than the F2.8 versions.

 

[Deadeye008]

You can always get the 1.4x TC for the 70-200 4L for a little added length and you'll still me able to use AF. It does make it a 5.6 lens though but for outdoor shooting in good light that shouldn't be a problem.

 

[N'Kolor]

Should I consider the IS?

 

[Big Mike]

Should I consider the IS?

Certainly you should consider it. If you can afford it, I'd highly recommend it.

 

[N'Kolor]

Thanks for the advise everyone!

Yesterday I purchased a Canon 70-300 lens and I took it out today to see what it could do. Reach = great! and I thought, this is exactly what I was looking for. I then took my card of wildlife photos to my computer and DL'd them. The shots at 300 were terrible at best. I went by my camera store that I bought it at and returned it.

I looked at the L series lenses yesterday but decided on the 70-300 IS. Well I went back and they still didn't have a f4L non-IS so I bought the f4L IS!

We'll see what it does!