new lens...

pilgrim · Sep 11, 2004

ok, last time I made a major purchase without reviewing and asking the fine people on tpf I was dissapointed with what I bought, not a first, but after a few months, when I was more aware of what was out there.. so, im going to ask you guys first this time.

Im looking for a lens around the 35-200mm range, but if there is a 24-200mm that would be better. the lens has to be light because I want to use it for my walks downtown, I want the big zoom for the street shots that I just can't get close to (a cop arresting someone etc..) and I still want somewhat of a wide angle so I can still shoot landscapes, building, etc.. but this time, I want to make sure I get some good glass. I know it will cost more, but I have been putting money asside for this lens, and im willing to spend more. so, what is out there? at first I was going for this lens.. http://cameracanada.com/eNet-cart/product.asp?pid=2578A002&type=1,3
but then I was thinking about it, and 70mm would just be too much zoom, I find my 50mm to be too much for some of the shots I want...
I keep looking and I can't seem to find anything, atleast nothing that will preform like I wish...
anyone?

photobug · Sep 11, 2004

Tokina makes a 24-200 that is highly regarded, but light it ain't (1.5 pounds). The Sigma &
Tamron 28-200 lenses weigh about half that, but may not be wide enough for you.

Sorry I can't be more helpful.

pilgrim · Sep 11, 2004

heh, its ok jim, thanks for trying though

I've looked around quite a bit now, and it doesn't seem like what I want is out there. maybe I will just go with the canon 70-200, and if I come acros a shot that needs a wide lens I can just switch.. its not that big of a hassle...
but I will keep this thread alive, just incase someone knows something.

Scurra · Sep 11, 2004

Sorry Pilgrim I can't think of anything that meets the description off the top of my head. But I can only say good things about the canon zoom lenses... I'm really pleased with my 75 - 300. It's cracking for close up stuff and gives a crisp result. Trouble is whenever I need a wide angle lens in a hurry I have the telephoto fitted

Digital Matt · Sep 11, 2004

I'm debating whether or not to get the 70-200 f/4 L myself Pilgrim. I've seen nothing but positive reviews on it. Are you looking at that one, or the 2.8 L IS? I shoot mostly nature shots at f/11 on a tripod, so I don't really need that 2.8 and IS.
www.fredmiranda.com is a good site for lens reviews.

pilgrim · Sep 11, 2004

I was looking at the f/4 matt, its cheaper, and lighter. I could benefit from the 2.8, but Im not about the spend the extra money and pack around a heavier lens..
and yah, that site has some great reviews! they really seemed to like the lens...

Digital Matt · Sep 12, 2004

Yeah, people seem pretty happy with that lens, and I'v seen some really great shots with it. I'm debating whether or not to get that, or a 200mm prime. The canon 200mm 2.8 L is a great lens as well, and relatively cheap.

Oh and btw, you might be better off buying your lens here[/url[. After the conversion it's $746.222 CAD I don't know what shipping would be to where you are at though. Check it out.

pilgrim · Sep 12, 2004

hey, thanks for the link again matt heh, that's like $150 cheaper then cameracanda, so aslong as shipping and duty and what ever taxes they charge to get accross the boarder dont cost more then that....
is adorama a good company to deal with?
what's this gray market stuff? it sounds awfully sketchy to only save $20.00...
hmm, and about the prime lens, I just don't know if I could handle a 200mm prime.. Like I love my 50mm prime, but when Im dealing with zoom, I have to have the option of zooming out..
prime lenses are the only lenses that can take extension tubes right? thats one thing I like about it..
hmm I gues I should see how close the closest focusing point with the 70-200 is..

Jeff Canes · Sep 12, 2004

I think your going to need an image stabilizer lens for what your taking about shooting, the Canon EF 75-300 f/4.0-5.5 EF IS is in your price range at about $420 US

I have the 70-200 f2.8 IS, it cost more that the camera, but it the best lens I own

pilgrim · Sep 12, 2004

hmm, you really think the IS is needed jeff? most of my shots will be in fairly good light.. probally 1/300 being the slowest.. like I would love to have the IS but im just not sure if I really need it, and I've heard such great things about the L lenses, I really wanted to go that route...

Jeff Canes · Sep 13, 2004

If you stay at or above 1/300 with good light you should be fine without the IS, but if you are temped to push the limits of the lens you maybe unhappy with the results, also with you be hand holding or using a monopod

I have a Canon FD 200mm f2.8 that is for my older Canons, I most always got good results with 400ASA film when shooting sports in bight day light, but shooting at night, poor light or with 800ASA results where mostly luck

Digital Matt · Sep 13, 2004

Are you going to be shooting handheld always? I use a tripod mostly, so for me IS is not a concern. As far as extension tubes, you can use those on zoom lenses. I use one extension tube on my Sigma 70-300 Macro lens to get even closer. Oh and Adorama is a good company. They've been around for years and have a huge store in Manhattan. I've bought almost all my stuff from them and never had a problem at all. Click through the link on the forum and give Chase a buck

Edit: There _was_ a link at one time, I thought

pilgrim · Sep 13, 2004

I'm going to be doing mostly handheld.. but like I said I will usualy be in good light, and if im not busting out the tripiod isnt a big deal.. I think im pretty certain on this lens now..
and yah, I remember seeing a link for adorma on the botom to...