Real life help

[slat]

I'm looking to get a 70-300 lens. I've been comparing the Canon 70-300 IS with the Tamron 70-300 VC. I thought Canon until I realized that it doesn't have full time manual focus and that the filter threads rotate. That's when I started looking at the Tammy. Reviews are confusing for both of these lenses as to af speed, sharpness and what have you. Looking for some real world input from people that have used these. I'll take opinions on the Sig version too. I have a Canon SL-1. I currently do have the 55-250 lens. Find that I'd like more reach than what I get with it when shooting birds and woodland creatures.

 

[Braineack]

300 from 250 isn't going to help much for birds. Look for a used Tamron 150-600 vc

 

[davidharmier60]

I have a Quantary 70-300 for my XTi.
I don't think it's going to get me any great bird pics.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

 

[slat]

150-600 isn't in the budget right now. So early thoughts would be keep what I have crop if needed and save for the 150-600?

 

[beagle100]

150-600 isn't in the budget right now. So early thoughts would be keep what I have crop if needed and save for the 150-600?

yes, sigma 150-600 is often on sale
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[ac12]

150-600 isn't in the budget right now. So early thoughts would be keep what I have crop if needed and save for the 150-600?

This is the problem when you get in this neighborhood for lenses. These lenses get expensive to EXPENSIVE.

The 70-300 is only 20% more focal length than the 55-250. And that is not enough increase to be worth upgrading for.
I would want at least 50% more focal length to upgrade, so in your case a lens that can do 400 or 500.

Another option to the Sigma 150-600 is the smaller Sigma 100-400

• It is $700, which is not inexpensive. But it is cheaper than the $1,000 for the 150-600.
  
• The 100-400 is a bit shorter on the long end than the 150-600. For small birds, the 50% increase from 400 to 600 makes a difference.
  
• The 100-400 does NOT have a tripod mount. To some (like me), the lack of a tripod mount makes a difference.

 

[Braineack]

150-600 isn't in the budget right now. So early thoughts would be keep what I have crop if needed and save for the 150-600?

I'd say today the 150-600 is the default lens for birding. anything shorter is too short -- especially for small birds.

so you can save roughly $700 and buy a used Tamron VC or Sigma "C" 150-600. And use the same focal length and lens some "pro" birders still use.
or you can save roughly $400 and buy a used Canon or Sigma 100-400 and still have too short a lens that's not the greatest IQ as well.

 

[weepete]

the image quality on the consumer grade 70-300mm isn't the best either. They are ok if you are close but quickly show their flaws if you are shooting wildlife and cropping. I shot for a long time with one of these lenses and for me they just were not up to par. If I were you I'd be saving my money up and getting one of the 150-600mms or the Canon 100-400 L IS USM ii