NEED NEW ZOOM LENS!

Discussion in 'Photography Beginners' Forum' started by feRRari4756, Dec 29, 2008.

  1. feRRari4756

    feRRari4756 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2008
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey guys, 2 days ago I unfortunatley dropped my Canon EF 70-210 mm and the AF is broken.

    I am going to do a lot of wildlife shots and need a very sharp lens UNDER $600. Preferbably about 300-400.

    So, I need a new Canon lens with a zoom up to at least 200 mm.

    Here is the one Im looking at now, but it more on the expensive side for my range. Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Lens Review.

    Is there any other lens that you guys that are comprable to this lens but a little cheaper?

    Thnaks
     
  2. Jaszek

    Jaszek No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,177
    Likes Received:
    25
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    you can try the sigma 70-200mm f/ 2.8 . Heard the quality is almost as good as the canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L. Last time I chcecked it was about 600 i think

    Edit: Never mind the lens is $715 at B&H
     
  3. gryphonslair99

    gryphonslair99 Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    11,438
    Likes Received:
    2,096
    Location:
    Wichita, Kansas, USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit

    Look for used. Usually in the 550 range.
     
  4. feRRari4756

    feRRari4756 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2008
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well for that price, Ill just get the Canon one which I know is really good. Thanks though.

    Anyone else?
    Remember the main thing im looking for is sharpness and quality, but in my price range.

    Also, it would be nice to have a 300 or 400 mm lens, but i know that would be well over 1000.

    But i would be willing to pay 500 for a 300 or 400mm with saxrificing a little sharpness.
     
  5. gryphonslair99

    gryphonslair99 Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    11,438
    Likes Received:
    2,096
    Location:
    Wichita, Kansas, USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit

    True, but f2.8 is a dawn/dusk lens where f4 is not. Depending on the wildlife you are shooting, time of day can be very important. The sigma is a sharp lens, the AF is just a bit slower than the Canon f2.8.

    If you want to double your price range you could look at the 100-400 f4.5-5.6. Canon | 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM Autofocus Lens | 2577A002AA Slower but reportedly a nice piece of glass.

    As for a 400 in the $500 range, you are out of luck. My 400 f2.8 ran me 7K and the 300 f2.8 is in the 4.5K range I believe these days. The slower versions are still in the 2K plus range at least.

    A used Sigma 300 f2.8 usually goes in the 1000-1200 range if you can find one.
     
  6. feRRari4756

    feRRari4756 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2008
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    0
    That is true too. So yes, that is a possible lens for consideration. So now its the canon one and the sigma one. But, i was looking at amazon and it shows some of the pics took with that lens and THEYRE REALLY NOT THAT SHARP AT ALL (please someone tell me it can take better photos). heer is the link [ame=http://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-media/product-gallery/B0009V13XS/ref=cm_ciu_pdp_images_1?ie=UTF8&index=1]Customer Image Gallery for Sigma APO 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras[/ame]
     
  7. feRRari4756

    feRRari4756 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2008
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    0
    ?
     
  8. feRRari4756

    feRRari4756 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2008
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    0
    ?
     
  9. Overread

    Overread has a hat around here somewhere Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Messages:
    23,095
    Likes Received:
    3,763
    Location:
    UK - England
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    firstly don't bother looking for how good a lens is based on webphotos - when a photo is resized to the web its often only 1/3rd the size it was from the camera and sharpening in stages can make a softer fullsized pic look rather good at webscale. The best thing is to look for 100% crops from the lenses - that is a crop of a section of the full photo so that you can see that quality without having to upload the whole image.

    Look about in google as I am sure the sigma has been compared to the canon offerings many times by different reviewers. That would give a much better understanding than some random photos posted on amazon.

    Personally I would think long and hard and make a choice - do you want to go cheaper and need that lens right now - or would it be possible to save and get a bigger budget and a better lens. Invest in a Canon L lens and its something that will last you (provided you don't abuse it) many decades of good use. Quality is also key and for wildlife one often finds that they are working right at the limit of the lens and putting a lot of pressure on the kit to perform well in difficult conditions
     
  10. feRRari4756

    feRRari4756 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2008
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    0
    Okay thanks. So guys, are they the only two lens that are very sharp at 200 mm and the only ones that are in my price range?
     
  11. TheOtherBob

    TheOtherBob TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    UWS, NY, NY
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    It's hard to say that there's a comparable lens to the 70-200 that's cheaper -- sadly, you do get what you pay for, and a less expensive lens is usually (not always, but usually) going to be outperformed by the more expensive lens.

    But there are options within the Canon line:

    55-250mm (about $250?)
    70-300mm (about $450?)
    200mm 2.8 prime (about $650 -- so you might prefer the 70-200 4L you looked at already)

    Whether these are good enough for what you need, I can't really say -- they're fine lenses, certainly, but it really depends on what you need to do, and just how sharp "very sharp" is to you.

    Good luck.
     
  12. feRRari4756

    feRRari4756 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2008
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG]

    Like this is how sharp I want it.

    Do you think the 55-250mm (about $250?) or the 70-300mm (about $450?) that you mentiioned are good enough?
     

Share This Page