Dreaming of a new lens.

norvic-boy

norvic-boy

Messages
2,233
Name
Toby
Edit My Images
Yes
Hey all,

I thoroughly enjoy wildlife photography... in fact, I love it.

About 6 months ago my 15year old trusty 100-200mm went up the shooter, it was basically a write-off. For my photography exam I borrowed a 135-400mm sigma...

Soon I'll have to give it back... So basically (being a student and saving for a car) I starting to think about setting myself a target on a new lens. Maybe something around £600.

Preferably something with USM and IS. I'm not to worried about max aperture... so F/4 - F/5.6 would be fine.
Atm I'm looking at the Canon 70-200mm F/4 L USM. and the Sigma 150-500mm DG OS USM..

The Sigma is slightly more than I wanted to spend... but would it be worth it because it has the OS (Is this the equiv to IS?) and the USM? (And while we're here what is DG?), yet I here the Canon 70-200mm is a pucker bit of kit?


So please, any advice would be greatly appreciated!

Oh and I'd be hooking it up to a Canon 450D!

Thanks for taking the time to read.
:D
 
I did ok originally with 200mm... however I must admit... the extra 200mm has been very nice, and has made things a lot easier going.

That prime would be nice. But I just can't justify that kind of money being a student n all!
 
Hi Toby, firstly the letters.....

IS, OS, VC and (if you use Nikon) VR are all the same thing. Some are better than others, but they all try to do the same job. Sigma lenses either come in DC or DG versions.....think of it as DC being Canon EF-S (for crop sensors only) and DG being Canon EF (for both full frame and crop sensors).....

Secondly, only you'll know what kind of focal lengths you need to be looking for. Personally, I very rarely want for more than 200mm on a crop body so the longest lens I have is a 70-200mm. Ask yourself how often you wished you'd had a longer lens while you were using the 100-200mm, if it's not often, then why look at anything longer?! :shrug: If you were always wishing for an extra 50-100mm, then you should probably look at one of these: http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-canon-ef-70-300mm-f4-5-6-is-usm-lens/p1010309

The 150-500mm is great value for money, but if it were my money, I'd be looking at the 70-200mm f4 and a 2x converter.....2nd hand that should add up to no more than £600 if you buy mint examples!

What you up to tomorrow? :thinking: If you're free at all, I can bring you my 70-200mm f2.8 for you to have a play with.....:shrug:
 
200mm is too short for wildlife. A second hand Sigma 120-400mm OS should be within your price range and give very good results. I'm very happy with the results from mine.
 
Everyone keeps telling me I need the 400/5.6L ... maybe you do too? :)

It's under £1k new, so maybe could be had for 600-700 used.

And yes, it's slow at f/5.6.. but no slower than most 400mm lenses (or lens + tc combos. And the AF gets rave reviews everywhere, as well as image quality wide open.

Another one to think about.
 
vaizki said:
Everyone keeps telling me I need the 400/5.6L ... maybe you do too? :)

It's under £1k new, so maybe could be had for 600-700 used.

And yes, it's slow at f/5.6.. but no slower than most 400mm lenses (or lens + tc combos. And the AF gets rave reviews everywhere, as well as image quality wide open.

Another one to think about.
Click to expand...

Its a prime as well - everyone loves a prime. :love:
 
You sometimes find a 70-200 f4 IS going for 600-650 ish and it's a stella lens. Add a 1.4x TC at a later date and you're laughing.
 
Just don't ever put a 2x convertor on a 70-200L. It'll turn it into a piece of...
 
I've got a 70-200L IS f4 and a 1.4x converter (you can still use IS and AF).
If you want to shoot small birds, unless you can get close to them, forget this lens.
It's good for bigger wildlife providing you are not looking at something the size of a match head in the viewfinder.
I'm also thinking about getting a Sigma 150-500 OS as well but I wont be selling my 70-200 as it's tack sharp and it's a cracking lens.
 
I've tried to convince myself to sell the 70-200 far too many times saying I never use it and its useless - but honestly when I get my full frame and start doing portrait work its going to be invaluable, its sharpness is brilliant - its just not a wildlife lens however attractive the price tag and the little red ring are.

Get a sigma xxx-500
 
Thank you everyone for all the advice I really do appreciate it!

The sigma is looking tempting, that extra reach would be lush. However when I used my original 200mm I found it wasn't too bad... I shot several things like sedge warblers, barn owls etc. I still have a few more months to weigh up options...

Yet the siggy has the OS and USM plus 300mm more reach. Could be worth the extra £100 or so... however by the sounds of things the sharpness of the canon sounds like its next to nothing!


Plus now the other siggy also sounds nice... lol.

Talk about running in cirlce. :lol:
 
However looking at the crop reviews on the digital picture...the siggy looks nasty at 500mm. Click!

Where as the canon looks just amazing! Click!
 
Seriously Toby, I can bring my L zoom out to you so you can have a good play......not for the focal length, but to feel the quality! :love:

I'll be out your way later anyway as I'm 99% sure I'm out tonight with the cameras.....no bother at all! :thumbs:
 
Sorry for the delayed response... that would have been great Damien!! Lol.

Its been a hell of a week with exams and stuff...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top