Discussion in 'Photography Beginners' Forum' started by Campbell, Oct 11, 2007.
If that lens is anything like the typical 70-300 lenses made by Canon, Nikon, Sigma, Tamron etc. Then it should be good for you, provided that you use it in good light. The problem with these lenses is that the maximum aperture is rather small, which means that you need a lot of light in order to get a decent shutter speed...and with a long lens like this, a fast shutter speed is more important than with a shorter lens.
What's your budget? There are better lenses but they will be more expensive.
I wouldn't count on the lens being available yet. (Oly claims this month, but somehow I don't believe them.) You might look for a similar Sigma for 4/3rds mount.
I'd say the build quality is probably very similar to the 40-150, which is a decent lens. If it's available, go for it.
I wasn't planning on spending more than $500. I know that it isn't much and rules out a wide range of the more higher grade lenses, but this one is only around $430 so I'd like to keep it around there.
The release is set for later this month, so I realize I will have to wait a little bit before I can actually order it. Luckily I won't need it until late January.
I can tell you that I sprung for this type of lens, 70-300 f4-5.6 because I wasn't patient. I regret that decision very much. As soon as I developed a more discriminating eye, I quickly discovered my purchase was unwise. And then I had trouble selling the lens for anything close to what I paid for it. I say wait, save your money and get professional quality glass--it's totally worth it....
I really don't have the funds for "professional quality glass"
Atleast, not the funds to spend well over $1,000 on a single lens.
Are there any lenses that aren't rediculously expensive you would recommend in place of this one?
Maybe you guys can tell me what you think about this. It's quite a big jump in price, but I'm thinking it may be a wise investment in the long run:
Focal Length- 50mm - 200mm( 35mm equivalent focal length 100mm - 400mm )
Maximum Aperture- f2.8 Wide - f3.5 Telephoto
Minimum Aperture- f22
I see it doesn't have as large a focal length. Will that be a noticeable factor?
And do you think that will that give me what I'm looking for? Worth the $829?
The max aperture is rather small, and that might end up being a problem. Also, try these two things to help you save money:
-Buy used lenses, especially if youre a beginning photographer. You dont need a brand new $450 lens to get good at shooting wildlife. Pick up something from a local shop use for $100-$200. They usually have everything in like new condition. Ive saved a ton of money buying used stuff, and its great for learning.
-Trying going for something like a 150-300. 70-300 is a wide range, and range like that will take your money away. It might be smarter (depending on how many lenses you have) to get a 70-150, and a 150-300. Thats what I do. I have 4 lenses and they cover almost all the ranges I need (although I still need one that hits 300).
What kind of camera body are you shooting from?
Olympus Evolt E-500
That's a fantastic lens, and worth it. You might want to look at sample shots on pixel-peeper.com
I updated my first post with the 3 lenses I'm looking at. Please let me know which you would recommend!
Separate names with a comma.