£200 which telephoto lens

FuriousD

FuriousD

Messages
35
Edit My Images
No
Got a 450D, 18-55IS and a nifty fifty lens, but need something with some reach, some motorsport, wildlife, cars etc.

So which one for £200.

D
 
It's a shame you have a canon as I will be selling my sigma 70-300mm very soon.

It's a great lens for the money, can't go wrong with it.
 
If you want a nice sharp prime, keep on the lookout for a 300 f4L non IS. They generally sell from a bit more than your budget but by god they are stunning.
 
foodpoison said:
Quite a LOT more than his budget :thinking:

Second the 55-250 IS, wicked lens.
Click to expand...

Extra £100 or so is not what I would call alot.:D

That being said, im now looking at the 200 f2L IS as being potentially affordable. :shake:
 
The Sigma 70-300mm APO is the pick of the bunch when it comes to cheap telephotos. However, there's always more than one choice, depending on what use you expect from it...

Canon offer the EF 28-200mm f3.5-5.6 USM for ~£253, the EF 55-200mm f4.5-5.6 USM II for ~£153. And the fabled EF-S 55-250mm F4-5.6 IS for about £220 Sigma do a 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 lens for under £200, give you a walkround lens you'd never take off. They also do an 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC for ~£146, and an Optically Stabilised version for £265 (sell your kit lens, make up the difference?). Tamron also have the 18-250mm F/3.5-6.3 Di ll LD Aspherical (IF) Macro for £289, or the 28-300mm XR Di LD Aspherical Macro IF f3.5-6.3 for £229. They also have the 70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD Macro, but to be honest, the Sigma version trumps it.

Would 200mm be enough for you, or do you think you'd need the extra reach the 300mm zooms would give? The walkround lenses (18/28mm to 200/300mm) would be an all-in-one solution, the 55/70 to 250/300mm would be a second lens you'd change as required...

Of the Sigma/Tamron lenses that I've owned, the 28-200mm was a fairly decent walkround lens, covered 95% of everything I shot at the time. The Tamron 70-300mm suffered from a fair bit of chromatic aberration at the long end, and the Sigma 70-300mm APO was just fantastic for the price.
 
reddeathdrinker said:
The Sigma 70-300mm APO is the pick of the bunch when it comes to cheap telephotos. However, there's always more than one choice, depending on what use you expect from it...

Canon offer the EF 28-200mm f3.5-5.6 USM for ~£253, the EF 55-200mm f4.5-5.6 USM II for ~£153. And the fabled EF-S 55-250mm F4-5.6 IS for about £220 Sigma do a 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 lens for under £200, give you a walkround lens you'd never take off. They also do an 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC for ~£146, and an Optically Stabilised version for £265 (sell your kit lens, make up the difference?). Tamron also have the 18-250mm F/3.5-6.3 Di ll LD Aspherical (IF) Macro for £289, or the 28-300mm XR Di LD Aspherical Macro IF f3.5-6.3 for £229. They also have the 70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD Macro, but to be honest, the Sigma version trumps it.

Would 200mm be enough for you, or do you think you'd need the extra reach the 300mm zooms would give? The walkround lenses (18/28mm to 200/300mm) would be an all-in-one solution, the 55/70 to 250/300mm would be a second lens you'd change as required...

Of the Sigma/Tamron lenses that I've owned, the 28-200mm was a fairly decent walkround lens, covered 95% of everything I shot at the time. The Tamron 70-300mm suffered from a fair bit of chromatic aberration at the long end, and the Sigma 70-300mm APO was just fantastic for the price.
Click to expand...

Thanks for this, good insight. I am lead to belive the 250mm will be enough, if i want something longer after then fine.
D
 
I have the Sigma 70-300mm APO too, and agree image quality is superb. Just a word of caution, I find the auto focus micro motor quite slow compared to USM/HSM auto focus motors.

The OP was talking motorsports, I think it might struggle a little to keep up with the action. Any other thoughts on this?

Pete
 
reddeathdrinker said:
The Sigma 70-300mm APO is the pick of the bunch
Click to expand...

I'm not sure thats true anymore, it's been the best for a good few years now but I'd say for a crop sensor the 55-250is is a better bet these days. It's very sharp and the latest generation IS is a massive plus for making a cheap telephoto easily useable.
 
just picking up this old thread.
how much less would a 250mm's reach be than a 300mm lens
any examples?
thanks alot
ian
 
I've got the Canon 55-250 IS and the mrs has the Sigma 70-300 APO, the extra 50mm reach isnt really noticable, the Canon focuses faster and the IS really helps in low light situations. The Sigmas redeeming features are that is cost us nearly £100 less than the 55-250, and that you can use it on a teleconverter. We picked up the Sigma around a year ago for £130 from onestop-digital, and the Canon a few weeks ago for £220 from London Camera Exchange.
 
I went with the 55-250 in the end, really pleased with it actually, went to a RSPB nature reserve at the weekend. (y)

D
 
The only thing I was a bit wary of was the 55-250 has a plastic mount where as the 70-300 has a metal mount so I opted for the 70-300
Bob
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top