300mm Question

[crowl31]

I don't see many comments on lenses over 300mm. Is it not that common for people to buy 400mm?

 

[YouAreBrahman]

i imagine they would be a pretty penny-- especially if you wanted to use it at high speeds. thats a serious scope

 

[Alex_B]

I don't see many comments on lenses over 300mm. Is it not that common for people to buy 400mm?

good lenses over 300 are very very expensive ... actually, already at 300 good ones are very expensive

also a 400 or 500 mm lens is a rather specialised lens (wildlife and sports mainly), and less multi-purpose than something in the 30 - 300mm range.

also, anything beyond 300 mm is not that easy to handle in terms of camera shake and all.

 

[Big Mike]

EF 600mm f/4.0L IS $7,200
EF 400mm f/2.8L IS $6,500
EF 500mm f/4.0L IS $5,500
EF 300mm f/2.8L IS $3,899
EF 400mm f/4.0 DO IS $5,199

I know a few people who have this lens: EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS $1,379


It isn't that common because they are really expensive. They are mostly used by professional sports shooters and hard core wildlife shooters.

 

[Chris of Arabia]

Still expensive by comparison to most common lenses, but a perhaps more practical proposition would be the EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM at $1,119.95. It would also be a damned sight less of a strain in carrying it round too when compared with some of Mike's list. This one's on my list of potential future buys.

 

[Alex_B]

Still expensive by comparison to most common lenses, but a perhaps more practical proposition would be the EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM at $1,119.95. It would also be a damned sight less of a strain in carrying it round too when compared with some of Mike's list. This one's on my list of potential future buys.

This is actually the one I am using, and the weight was also one of the reasons

over here it costs the price you quote, but in EUR

 

[Chris of Arabia]

This is actually the one I am using, and the weight was also one of the reasons

over here it costs the price you quote, but in EUR

Go to the UK and do the same in £'s in some places. Best price I can find is £769.99, but that's shipped from Hong Kong.

 

[(Ghastly) Krueger]

Go to the UK and do the same in £'s in some places.

Too bad they don't do that here in pesos...

 

[Alex_B]

Too bad they don't do that here in pesos...

If they did, I would be a frequent visitor

 

[crowl31]

i didn't realize they were that pricey. I can see why not that many people have them.

So if there is one 300mm lens to buy that was of good quality but also has a good price which one would it be?

 

[JIP]

I think all of what has been said is prety much right (long lens=expensive) but nother thing is I think most of the discussions on the forum are about either portraits or general people shooting. Long lenses like the ones you mentioned are more for sports or wildlife shooting and are fairly specialised I am sure if you look in the landscape/nature section you might se a little of that. Really though alot of the people on the forums are either gneral shooters or portrait shooters and the max you are going to get there is pretty much 200mm.

 

[Big Mike]

What's your definition of 'a good price'?

The 70-300mm F4-5.6 consumer level zoom lenses are less than $200. There is a 70-300mm IS (or VR from Nikon) that is several hundred more. There is the 100-400mm L IS, that I mentioned before. There is the 300mm F4 that someone mentioned.

 

[doenoe]

I have the sigma 70-300 4-5.6 APO and it was pretty cheap. Makes good enough pics too. You can see some samples on my website (see signature) Most of the fauna and roofvogels (birds of prey) are shot with either the sigma or the Tamron, which is even cheaper as the Sigma. I like the Simga better though.

 

[crowl31]

Those are great photos. After seeing that I feel comfortable purchasing one of the basic 300mm lenses for my XTI

 

[doenoe]

i should mention that there is some post-processing on them offcourse (not alot, just some basic stuff )