Canon 70-300l or Sigma 70-200f2.8os

K

Kiaboy

Messages
52
Name
Rich
Edit My Images
Yes
Help! Which to choose this is my short list. I haven't got a super telephoto lens and it will be mated to a 60d. Mainly going to be a walk around lens, but would love to take some wildlife and some Motorsport shots. Would it be worth while getting a sigma tele-convertor if I went with the siggy to give me more reach or would I lose IQ. Seen great reviews in both lens. Oh which way to go.
 
Hi Rich

There is a thread here http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=412730 about the Canon 70-300L.

Which is more important for you, a constant F2.8 or the extra reach - this will probably decide which way you go ?

Personaly, I would find either lens not suitable as a general walk about lens - I'd be looking for something wider.

I would have said that you need the longer lens you can get for motorsport - circuit dependant and esp birdwatching. I use a 200 / 300 or 300 + 1.4 TC focal length for oulton park, depending on what I'm shooting and where...

Hope this is of some help...
 
Thanks for the reply. I have read the thread you mentioned and found it most interesting. I have a 17-40 f4l with I use most of the time, but I don't have a long tele zoom lens. Would like to be able to cover all bases think I'm swaying towards the xtra reach of 300. Thanks for your input.
 
Kiaboy said:
Thanks for the reply. I have read the thread you mentioned and found it most interesting. I have a 17-40 f4l with I use most of the time, but I don't have a long tele zoom lens. Would like to be able to cover all bases think I'm swaying towards the xtra reach of 300. Thanks for your input.
Click to expand...

If you can afford it, the Canon 70-300L looks like a cracking buy - it's on my "to look at" list when financies allow...

Another alternative is a prime, the Canon 300F4 IS is a belter and takes a 1.4TC well, but obviously you loose the zoom function
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top