Canon Zoom Lenses...

Pete, many thanks for the repsonse...

Useage, my track days (this year at least) will be Combe & Silverstone although will be trying to slip in a couple of others if I can manage it, it will be track not Rally. Throw into the mix some drifting (Manchester street circuit and Silverstone).

Budget, ideally £500, £750 at a push and have no problems with second hand kit if it's been looked after. If this budget is not enough for the right kit I would rather wait and get the right kit for the job rathaer than spend a lot of money (well to me at least) on something that won't do the job properly...
 
Another thought if 400 is the way to go would a 200L and 2x convertor help or be a waste of time...
 
TheNissanMan said:
Another thought if 400 is the way to go would a 200L and 2x convertor help or be a waste of time...
Click to expand...

waste of time - apart from IQ issue, AF would also be an issue...
 
grahamsewelluk said:
For that reason, if you are going for Canon L lenses, I would have suggested the 100-400mm. As this is one of the few that is long enough for any motorsport unless you have pit passes and can get inside the safety catch fencing. Even then, you are still behind the tyre walls and a long way from the action in most racing.

So, if it is a choice between 70-200L, 55-250 cheapo, and 70-300 IS - I would probably go for the cheapest as none of them will get you the results you want!
Click to expand...

If you cant get results from any of the above lenses then you seriously need to look at your technique!! I have the 55-250 (in fact its the first lens I ever bought, aside from the kit lens that came with my 400d) which I bought when it was released. And in 3 years I've not felt the need to upgrade it, I've had some cracking results and some fantastic motorsport shots from tracks all over the place. If you look at some of my recent threads on this subject you'll see some of my sample shots.

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=203449 Even in challenging conditions (such as the wet qualifying at the moto gp last year) it still delivers.

The 55-250 IS really is a surprising lens, especially for the price and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend this.

However the OPs budget you could get the 70-200L which has supurb IQ but not really the range you need. Therefore with all the available options and budget, I'd probabally go for the 70-300 USM IS. (NOT the 75-300!).
 
AndyElliott said:
Absolutely... I have chosen a system without a 'full frame' route - and it wasn't because I hadn't noticed. The problem with the EF-S lenses is that although you could marry them to a 7D body, you won't get a weather sealed system, because Canon won't make a weather sealed EF-S lens because they want you to go 'full frame' (what is medium format - really full frame :cuckoo: ) and L series. In effect, Canon perpetuates the snobbery by not producing EF-S 'L' lenses (they could paint your 10-22 white and weather seal it!).

Full frame is far from a panacea - worse (I'm not saying APS-C or fourthirds is perfect, just better overall) vignetting, worse corner sharpness, great tendency for lateral CA and fringing.

The Depth of Field thing is an interesting one. Shallow is great for portraiture (although not essential) but bad for macro and being able to use long telephotos at full aperture (and get all of the bit of wildlife you are shooting sharp). So Full-frame is better at some things and worse at others. The extra reach of the crop-sensors is great for wildlife too.

Add in weight and size and the reason why APS-C is not about to disappear is fairly evident. Anyone who tells you that full-frame is taking over and APS-C is dead is, frankly, barking...

Andy
Click to expand...

Indeed. You only have to look at all the APS-C bodies out there, and the 7d being APS-C which I think surprised a few people...
 
Jim

If you look at the recent success of microfourthirds, particularly amongst folks who already have DSLRs, there's definitely an appetite for smaller cameras with excellent IQ. Check out the dxomark comparison of the 7D vs the Panasonic GH1 - same pixel pitch - add in the D300s and you find they are almost identical, with the GH1 edging the 7D in some ISO ranges. With the use of on-sensor phase-detect AF and better EVFs, there may come a day in the next few years where mirrors in cameras become obsolete - which I won't be too sad about.

Anyway, off topic and not helping TheNissanMan...

Andy
 
I think it'll be hard to predict the future, and if we do go mirrorless, they will be able to produce a large sensor camera that'll be able to fit APS-C lenses! Only then they'll have to work out how to get full frame coverage from them, hmmm!

But yes, back on topic! :lol:
 
So in summary the ideal lens by the sound of it is the 100-400mm L which is out of budget atm (approx 1k used from a quick glance), second best option is back to the 100-200 L non-IS which although isn't the "ideal" lens would get some good results on a tripod at tracks like Combe...
 
TheNissanMan said:
So in summary the ideal lens by the sound of it is the 100-400mm L which is out of budget atm (approx 1k used from a quick glance), second best option is back to the 100-200 L non-IS which although isn't the "ideal" lens would get some good results on a tripod at tracks like Combe...
Click to expand...
No need for a tripod for that lens.
 
TheNissanMan said:
So in summary the ideal lens by the sound of it is the 100-400mm L which is out of budget atm (approx 1k used from a quick glance), second best option is back to the 100-200 L non-IS which although isn't the "ideal" lens would get some good results on a tripod at tracks like Combe...
Click to expand...

No your ideal lens for your budget would be the sigma 120-400mm f4.5-5.6 at £600 new or £500 2nd H, or you could look at a 2nd H sigma 100-300mm f4, 2nd H price £600-750, so those would be the lenses I would choose. A 70-200mm for Silverstone is definitely too short, you would need 400-500mm at that track, unless you have a media pass, castle combe can't comment, but I would still say 200mm too short......
 
Thanks for that Pete, last question I promise lol...

Looking at the prices of the Sigma lenses would I be better with the 120-400mm as suggested or would I be better spending a fraction more and getting the Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM APO Lens ?
 
TheNissanMan said:
Thanks for that Pete, last question I promise lol...

Looking at the prices of the Sigma lenses would I be better with the 120-400mm as suggested or would I be better spending a fraction more and getting the Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM APO Lens ?
Click to expand...

Forget about the 150-500mm for motorsport, slow autofocusing, its f6.3 so will only work well in good light, soft wide open, so you'll need to stop it down to f8, so you will require good light conditions to get the best from it... maybe a wildlife lens, but for fast moving subjects, forget it.....even the 120-400 (like the canon 100-400mm) will struggle in poor light.
 
Right then, 120-400mm it now seems to be :)

Have just found out I may even have some goodiesd (lenses) coming in Friday if not will be getting one ordered up asap so I can get some playing and practice done :)

Thanks for all the advice :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top