Inexpensive Telephoto Lens

smudger · Jan 2, 2007

I have a Canon Digital Rebel XT and am a REAL AMATUER to photography. I am looking for a telephoto lens I can buy, that I can use to photograph my kids while playing sports. Is there an inexpensive (below $150 perhaps) lens out there that is worth purchasing. Keep in mind I am an amatuer, so I am not looking for anything ground-breaking.

Alex_B · Jan 2, 2007

generally speaking fast telephoto lenses are always expensive.

but you can try to get a used Canon 70-300 at ebay or some off-brand lens from ebay. however you will encounter at least a certain
amount of frustration as the lens will sometimes/often be too slow for sports.

even for pros sports photography is one of the most expensive segments in terms of lenses.

my advice, get the best lens you can for your budget, and get a used one. I would not go beyond 300mm as then camera shake will be a severe issue if you don't use a sturdy tripod.

Mybe even 100mm is enough, depending on the sports your kids do ...

CMan · Jan 2, 2007

I've got experience with one of those cheap, under $150 70-300 lenses, and let me tell you, you really get what you pay for. If it has to be cheap, you might consider the Canon 75-300 USM.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...&Q=&sku=169269&is=GREY&addedTroughType=search

Big Mike · Jan 2, 2007

Welcome to the forum.

The typical telephoto zoom lenses in the lower price range are the 75-300 lenses. Canon makes (or has made) several different models. Sigma and Tamron also make similar lenses that will fit your camera. $150 may be a little low to get one new...but maybe a used one could be found to fit your budget.

As mentioned, the problem with these lenses is that they are slow...by slow, I mean that they have a small maximum aperture. This means that unless the lighting is quite bright, you would have a hard time getting fast shutter speeds...which are essential to freeze action shots.

You could still use a lens like this to shoot your kids during sports...but you will need to work on getting the shots when they aren't moving too much. Like a stop in the play or even at the top of a jump. It's not a perfect way to work...but to get shots like you see in sports illustrated, or even in the sports section of the newspaper...you might need a lens that costs 5 times as much as your camera.

John_05 · Jan 2, 2007

the 75-300 F4-5.6 Sigma i have only cost $120 + shipping on Amazon. after using it, and then borrowing the Canon 100-300 and using that for a couple shots, i can honestly say i did notice a slight difference between the 2, but for me it wasnt worth spending $300+ more for the Canon. im positive others will disagree, but this is just my opinion. i cant afford to spend even $300 on a lens unless i save for a few months so for me, for now, the Sigma is fine. when i can afford to put some money away, i will be looking to replace it with a Canon lens though. the Canon was a little bit better, and i think it felt like it was better made.

t_rust · Jan 2, 2007

You will need to spend at least 500$ for a decent telephoto lens.
Look at[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM.
If you need more reach than it gets really pricey. Check the [/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]EF 400mm f/5.6L USM (no zoom).

Regards,
Thorsten
http://tr-photo-blog.blogspot.com
[/FONT]

Alex_B · Jan 3, 2007

t_rust said:
You will need to spend at least 500$ for a decent telephoto lens.
Look at[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM.
If you need more reach than it gets really pricey. Check the [/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]EF 400mm f/5.6L USM (no zoom).

Regards,
Thorsten
http://tr-photo-blog.blogspot.com
[/FONT]

I do not reccommend anything beyond 300mm for a beginner.

And L glass is no option here at all I am sure.

Johnboy2978 · Jan 3, 2007

I have a Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 that I bought early on. I was just wanting something to play with and for under $150 I think I got my money's worth. You can find them on ebay for probably 129. Look for a seller by the name of cameta auctions. This lens got surprisingly good reviews even though it is cheap. Takes a good enough picture though. It's rather light as well since the construction is largely plastic.

Tyson · Jan 3, 2007

I got my E-500 for one heck of a deal from cameta camera. If it wernt for them I would not have a DSLR. You can get to them on eday and at www.cameta.com . I highly recomend them, I am getting ready to but a lens from them it is a 40x180 I think, it has a buy it now for like 99 or 120 bucks. Its an olympus brand kit lens I think.

gundy74 · Jan 3, 2007

ill admit i know squat about canon but i got a 70-300mm lens for my Nikon for $120 at BHP so canon probably has something to compete with that price. its not a pro lens but it gets the job done

is it just me or does canon have more lenses than nikon?

smudger · Jan 3, 2007

Thanks for everyones suggestion. Another NEWBIE question, with these 75-300mm lenses, what do I need to be looking for in terms of filters (e.g. size, drop-in, etc.)? I really just want a UV protection filter at this time. Cheers.

Big Mike · Jan 3, 2007

is it just me or does canon have more lenses than nikon?

I doubt it. Actually, Nikon probably has more lenses for their current cameras because their compatibility goes back to the 60s or 70s. Canon switched lens formats with the EOS system in 1988.

what do I need to be looking for in terms of filters

If you want a UV filter for protection, then get one...but personally, I wouldn't worry about it. You would be better off getting a plastic lens hood...which will protect the lens somewhat and also give much needed shading to the lens. The most used/needed filter, especially for digital is a circular polarizer...however, with these consumer telephoto lenses...it's a struggle to get usable shutter speeds...and a polarizer will make the problem worse. My suggestion would be to forget about a filter and get a hood.