Which telephoto lens???

pauleos60d · Nov 19, 2013

Hi everyone I've recently just got the canon eos 60d. It's a brilliant camera so far but I fancy a new lens, preferably telephoto. Looking to spend around £400. I've looked at the 70-300 IS USM (4.3x zoom) lens and an 18-200 IS lens (11x zoom). Am I correct in thinking that the shorter lens would have a greater zoom on it? Can some explain or make a suggestion about another lens that I could look at.

All help is appreciated, thanks

vimwiz · Nov 19, 2013

They might be overkill, what do you want to zoom for? - Using something with that much zoom unsupported will probably be difficult. (Im just speaking my my experience - I shoot film with a 70-150mm, giving something like 2 or 3 times zoom, and find it more than enough)

pauleos60d · Nov 19, 2013

I want to start shooting wildlife and I travel a lot to with my job so I need something with a good zoom on it. They have image stabilisation on them but not sure how steady it will be with them.

480sparky · Nov 19, 2013

The x number is just marketing hype and is meaningless. Is a 5.4x lens better than a 4.9x lens? There's no way to tell using those numbers.

The focal length is what you go by. It will allude to the FOV (that should be in the specs anyway), and it's the FOV that determines subjuct-to-camera distance and framing in the VF.

grafxman · Nov 19, 2013

I've been very happy with the Sigma 18-250mm macro. I've taken thousands of photos with it on my 7D. It's never let me down.

pauleos60d · Nov 20, 2013

I think I might go with the 18-200. Has a better aperture and apparently better zoom

Braineack · Nov 20, 2013

I'm assuming they are both 5.6 at 300mm and ~4.5 at 70mm, so that's a wash really.

"better" zoom is subjective; I'd assume any lens with a "better" zoom is a lower quality lens.

pauleos60d · Nov 20, 2013

The 70-300 is f4 to 5.6
The 18-200 is f3.5 to 5.6

Also they both have image stabilisation but the 300mm lens has USM where as the 200mm doesn't, I don't think I'm too bothered by this.

Braineack · Nov 20, 2013

pauleos60d said:
The 70-300 is f4 to 5.6
The 18-200 is f3.5 to 5.6

You mentioned the 18-200 has a better aperture, but it's more complicated than that:

At 18mm the 18-200 can open to f/3.5, by 200mm its f/5.6.

At 70mm, the widest it can go is f/4, same as the 70-300.

But at 200mm the 70-300 can open to f/4.8.

It's really a personal choice, you're sacrificing image quality for convenience here.

flyin-lowe · Nov 20, 2013

Save up and get a 70-200L lens. There are a few variations of this lens and any of them will be far better then the two you are looking at.

Braineack · Nov 20, 2013

That's a big lens to travel with, but I agree it's a great lens and a huge leap into quality glass and $$$.

pauleos60d · Nov 20, 2013

I think the 70 - 200 is a bit too expensive for me as I'm just getting into the hobby. Maybe in a year or 2 I won't mind spending £1000 plus on a lens but not just yet. Out of the lenses I mentioned which is best for quality etc, or any telephoto lens under £500. I know they won't be the best quality but surely I'll be able to get a decent enough lens for that price.

pixmedic · Nov 20, 2013

pauleos60d said:
I think the 70 - 200 is a bit too expensive for me as I'm just getting into the hobby. Maybe in a year or 2 I won't mind spending £1000 plus on a lens but not just yet. Out of the lenses I mentioned which is best for quality etc, or any telephoto lens under £500. I know they won't be the best quality but surely I'll be able to get a decent enough lens for that price.

Actually, for just a little more money, you could get a used tamron or sigma 70-200 f/2.8 in the older non VR versions.

Other than that, i would recommend a nikon 70-300 VRII. Its a full frame lens, and can be found used in EX condition for $300-$350. I personally think it is nikons best "bang for your buck" lens.

Braineack · Nov 20, 2013

But can it be used on the Canon?

D-B-J · Nov 20, 2013

pixmedic said:
pauleos60d said:

I think the 70 - 200 is a bit too expensive for me as I'm just getting into the hobby. Maybe in a year or 2 I won't mind spending £1000 plus on a lens but not just yet. Out of the lenses I mentioned which is best for quality etc, or any telephoto lens under £500. I know they won't be the best quality but surely I'll be able to get a decent enough lens for that price.

Click to expand...

Actually, for just a little more money, you could get a used tamron or sigma 70-200 f/2.8 in the older non VR versions.

Other than that, i would recommend a nikon 70-300 VRII. Its a full frame lens, and can be found used in EX condition for $300-$350. I personally think it is nikons best "bang for your buck" lens.

THIS! Don't be afraid to buy used, or even non OEM. I have a sigma lens and love it. I bought nikon's older 80-200 lens, and love it. Really, if you can afford it, pick up a used canon 70-200 f4, or a sigma version, or even an older used 70-200 2.8. As long as you buy from a reputable dealer (adorama, b&h, keh.com, etc), you should be fine. About half of my lenses have been used, and I can't complain one bit about them. And remember to that good glass lasts a while. Sure, it may be 1000 now, but that lens may very well last you ten years. That's only a 100 a year, for GREAT glass. I know it often seems like a lot up front, but it's more sensible to buy a good lens now then a mediocre lens now and a better one in a year.

Jake

Jake