3rd party or branded

[spykep88]

ok so i own an canon 600D, I am looking for a new lens, but would love to know what other on here own. so my question.

what would you recommend? 3rd party or camera brand lenses? and any lens you would recommend? ( looking for up to 300/400mm myeslf, but this is just curiosity )

Thanks

 

[TordFuglstad]

Well, if you're not planning on upgrading your camera to a full-frame anytime soon I actually would recommend getting a third party lens. The branded (canon) lens for up to 400mm would be way to expensive.

 

[gw2424]

A budget would help but for around $600 you could find a Sigma 100-300mm f/4. In fact, here is one for $550!

FS: Sigma 100-300mm f/4 HSM Canon Mount 9+ Mint!!! Reduced - FM Forums


There are a few TPF'ers that would recommend this lens.

Good Luck,

GW

 

[Dao]

I do not think there is a definite answer for this question. Recommendation of a lens based on a lot of factors, and different person weight different factors differently. I may weight more on cost, but you may weight more on optics while he may weight more on build quality but she prefer a lighter lens.

And also OEM lenses do not automatically means better than 3rd parties optically. There are people choose a particular 3rd party lens over the OEM lens even if the OEM lens cost less.

As for 300mm to 400mm lens, do you have a budget in mind? Is weight a important factor? Is "zoomable" a important factor?

 

[spykep88]

Well I was thinking just to find out what people had in there kit and with there experience which lens gave them there results. canon/nikon lens or 3rd party.


A/PArsons

 

[MPhotoUK]

The Canon 400 5.6L is reasonably cheap (as L telephotos go) and a brilliant lens, as long as you have something to support it with. If you want a little more on the wider end than a prime then you'll want to look at the Sigma 150-500 or 50-500, though the 150-500 isn't particularly sharp nor are any zooms in this sort of price point. The 50-500 is a very good lens but a chunk more expensive, as expensive as the L is.

If you're just looking for up to 300mm then I'd go with the Tamron 70-300 VC or Canon 70-300 IS. The Canon is a marginally better lens but is a good 30% more expensive, and you won't really see any difference in actual shooting conditions. These will both be a tiny bit soft at the long end (as all sub £500 70-300mm's are), but they're very strong lenses otherwise.

In terms of the best lens you could really get sub £1000, I'd probably say the Canon 300mm f/4L IS. Again, as it's a prime you'll have to really know what you want to shoot and where from, but the Canon telephotos are pretty much ubiquitously brilliant and you'll no doubt see better images from the 300 f/4L than from a Sigma 50-500, but then you'll get more images from the Sigma due to its versatility. Teleconverters will help and the Canon lenses take them better than the Sigma ones generally do, but then that's another expense that you might not want.

 

[KmH]

Why is it 3rd party gear makers can sell for less? (Most top-of-the-line 3rd party gear doesn't cost much less than equivalent camera make gear)

Here is how they can do that:
• lower quality materials
• fewer features
• broader manufacturing tolerances
• less stringent quality control

All that adds up to more variability in the performance of 3rd party gear.

A lens having a high percentage of parts from the bad end of the materials, manufacturing, QC range will perform in the field worse than a same model lens having a high percentage of parts from the good end of the materials, manufacturing, QC range.

In short, you usually get what you pay for.

 

[2WheelPhoto]

Don't settle for 2nd best