Geting my feet on the ground

[videoboyje]

Photography has been something i've wanted to get into for a while. I just started with a Canon Rebel XT, brand new just picked it up on friday. I've worked with my father in the video industry.

I'm looking to step up to a tele lens, what im not sure i was looking at a Sigma. Once you start geting out around the 200-300mm range will your picture start to become soft or hazy? If so how do u fix that?

Any tips or tricks for a beginner?

Any suggestions when it comes to a new lens?

This is a link to the lens im currently looking at but what the opinon of someone that knows a little more, and has more experience than 2 days.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/335762-USA/Sigma_684101_55_200mm_f_4_5_6_DC_Lens.html

Thanks

 

[Rhys]

By the time you get to 200mm lenses are beginning to get darker and heavier. Keeping the lens fast means they get heavy and expensive.

Generally I feel over 200mm is overkill for most 35mm and digital cameras.

I have the Canon 70-300 f4-5.6IS. I find the IS is useful but would prefer to have the extra quality of the 70-200 f4L. Maybe even the 70-200f4L IS. The IS on an L lens works a lot better than on a non L lens.

IS is not going to make your photos crisp; rather it will help to reduce camera shake. I recommend an IS lens over non-IS. It's not a gimmick - it really works.

Oh yes... And stick to Canon lenses. I tried other brands on an XT and they never worked all that well.

 

[Mav]

IS is not going to make your photos crisp; rather it will help to reduce camera shake.

...which will make your photos crisp.

 

[Mav]

For Canon, I'd get one of these:

http://www.adorama.com/CA55250AFS.html?searchinfo=Canon 50-250mm&item_no=1
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=150&modelid=15700

It should be better optically than the Sigma lens, it's longer, has Image Stabilization, and it's only $100 more. Looks like it's back-ordered though. But I say good things are worth waiting for. The next step up from this would be the 70-300IS lens, but that's closer to $500. Although that will work on any camera Canon makes including their full-frame bodies like the 5D or 1DS (it's an EF lens, not EF-S). This EF-S 50-250 will only work on the crop bodies like the Rebels and 20/30/40D. If you think you'd ever want to upgrade to the professional level bodies that don't work with EF-S lenses, you might want to save for a bit and go straight for the 70-300IS. The 70-200 f/4L is a good lens too for about the same money, but it's shorter, and doesn't have image stabilization at the $500 price point.

As for whether 200mm is enough, it entirely depends on what you're shooting. To zoom in on a sunrise or sunset or to get some birds or other small animals, even a 300mm can be on the short side. For portraits, trips to the zoo, or other general telephoto needs a 200mm is probably fine.