HELP Looking to upgrade my Lens

[sturs]

Well the time has come to upgrade my lens. I have been using the Canon 75-300 f4-5.6 USM now for about 12 months and it has served well. The only problem I now have is that I seem to be changing between this and the kit lens alot whilst out on walks.

I have been looking at the sigma 28-300 f3-5-6.3

But the big question is being is this a upgrade in lens or not??? Obvioulsy the apperture is larger but will I loose quality when at 300mm???

Are there any other lens you would reccomend?? I mainly shot motorsport and wildlife.

Thanks for the help.

 

[hashcake]

How about a Tamron 18-270VC?
Don't write this lens of due to the focal range, go and try one as I think you will be surprised.
I really do like this lens and until I tried one I was dubious about the IQ but I find it's a good replacement for my Canon 17-85 & 55-250.
Like you I was getting frustrated with changing lenses and if you can live with losing the 30mm from your Canon 75-300 then fine.
I am also into wildife photography but I don't go out of my way looking for small birds as I know this is where a 300-400mm lens would be ideal.
However, on a recent trip to Windsor great park to shoot the deer, the Tamron gave me some results at 270mm than I am very happy with.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

It seems strange to buy an interchangeable lens camera, then be frustrated with changing lenses.

The first thing I would do in your situation, is to check the last six months photographs and see what focal length and aperture you used and draw up a table.

This will show you very clearly what you use.
You can also use it to establish if a longer or shorter lens is needed by drawing a curve of the results , much like a histogram. If the two ends of the graph are highly populated, then perhaps you do need the longer range.

The same check can be done with the apertures, to see if you need a wider aperture.

The third thing you can do is to look to see how you have used the photographs... are they only printed to a small size or only used on the web or computer.

If that is so, maybe a DSLR is overkill and a bridge camera would serve all your needs in a more convenient way.

 

[hashcake]

It seems strange to buy an interchangeable lens camera, then be frustrated with changing lenses

Perhaps like me, the OP is finding that he needs to change the lens more often than he would like to.
As an example on a walkabout in London, I was sat outside a cafe when I saw a good candid shot in the making, I needed to change to a longer lens as I wanted a close head and shoulder shot that would not require too much cropping.
Not long later, I need to use a wider angle to take a shot of a building.
The ability of being able to do a walkabout with one lens does make sense.
Build in the factor that you can then have a SWA lens for landscapes and architecture and a fast lens for being able to take good hand held low light shots, then a DSLR is far better than a bridge camera.

I don't print out my photos very often but I have two big canvases of photos that I am very please with and again, I know these two shots would not be the same if they were taken with a bridge camera.

The first thing I would do in your situation, is to check the last six months photographs and see what focal length and aperture you used and draw up a table.

As the OP has stated he mainly liked doing motorsports and wildlife, I think he has justified his need for a DSLR rather than a bridge camera.

I'm not having a pop at you Terry and I recognise the fact that you have many more years of photography experience under you belt than I do.
Howeve, as technology moves on, the ability to have one lens that covers a wide and long focal range as a general use lens that can produce a good photo is now feasable.
Granted that we are not talking about pro level lenses but if the lens can produce a photo that impresses the user then fair enough.

 

[sturs]

It seems strange to buy an interchangeable lens camera, then be frustrated with changing lenses.

The third thing you can do is to look to see how you have used the photographs... are they only printed to a small size or only used on the web or computer.

If that is so, maybe a DSLR is overkill and a bridge camera would serve all your needs in a more convenient way.

Changing the lenses is not a problem if you have the time and don't miss the shot i.e. static objects. What I am after is a good walk around lens where I don't miss the spare of the moment shot due to having the wrong lens on.

Example
I was walking around the local chase and saw a number of deer, got some shots at 300mm and all was good. Next minute I walk around a blind corner and a stag is standing about 6ft from me. 75mm was to big.
I asked the stag to stay still and not to move whilst I changed the lens but guess what??? he didn't and the shot was missed.

As for a bridge camera I upgraded from this 12 months ago and would never go back.

Hashcake
I will take a look at the Tamron and thanks for the advise.

 

[andyred]

Well the time has come to upgrade my lens. I have been using the Canon 75-300 f4-5.6 USM now for about 12 months and it has served well. The only problem I now have is that I seem to be changing between this and the kit lens alot whilst out on walks.

I have been looking at the sigma 28-300 f3-5-6.3

Doesn't help with your initial problem, but the 70-300 IS lens is a cracker to upgrade to.

Not sure about the Sigma lens, I know Canon do an 18-200 lens, which gets good reviews, but you loose out in the zoom end, but do gain in the wide angle range.

Unfortunately, there is always a compromise of some description, esp with a lens like this, an example would also be Canon's 28-300 IS L lens with is pushing £2k !!!

If you are interested in having 1 lens like the Sigma, try to find it in a local shop and try it out, take your own lens with you and do some trial shots at similar focal lengths to see if you can see any noticable difference.

Hope this helps, but I doubt it does :shrug: