Long Zoom Lens for the 400D - A n00b in need of help!

A

Alcamin

Messages
26
Edit My Images
No
Hi guys!

I really need some advice about lenses, as I’m at a bit of a loss at the moment. When I look at all of the options for various lens on the internet I just become completely confused, so please bear with me. I’m still in the learning phase (when it comes to equipment anyway :)).

I’m going off to Hong Kong soon which will give me a great opportunity to try out a few new techniques, but I’ve come to realise that I need to bit more range, so now I’m looking for a new long zoom lens. I’ve got the short to medium ranges sorted (with a Sigma 17-70mm Zoom (primary lens), a Canon EF-S 18-55mm Kit (backup) and a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II) so that isn’t a problem, but any farther is a problem.

One thing to bear in mind is that my desire to buy this lens isn’t simply because of this next trip, it’s to enhance my photography repertoire as a whole, so I’m not looking for a quick-fix solution. This is a long term investment for me so I’m reluctant to just go from the cheapest thing I can find. I don’t want to be in the position in a year or so’s time regretting my purchase and wanting to change it.

Having said that the buyer’s budget always comes into these discussions and as I’m a student I’m not in the position to buy any top of the line gear. I’m probably not looking to go much over £400 or £500 but I’m pretty flexible so it isn’t a huge problem. Anything less than that would be a bonus but I’m not hugely bothered if it’s over. :D Realistically then I’m probably looking for a maximum focal length of 200-300mm. Anything more would most likely be a waste of time at this stage of my talents, even if I would like to try my hand at a bit of wildlife photography (I‘m not exactly going on Safari so nothing major is really needed, I suppose ;)).

So what sort of lens should I be looking for? I apologize if the information is a little vague. Like I said before, I’m finding this whole thing rather bewildering so it’s a bit difficult to know what to write down. If you need more info then just let me know.

One other quick question I’d like to ask is whether it is worth buying the lens here in the UK or buying it out there in Hong Kong. I know that a lot of stock is exported from there so I was just wondering if it would be cheaper and easier to get something when I arrive. It’s a bit of a specialised question I know, and I’m not sure anyone will know the answer for sure, but I thought I’d ask anyway. :)

Any help you can give me would be greatly appreciated! Please help out a n00b! (y)

I look forward to hearing from you. Thanks in advance!
Tom
 
As you are heading to HK I would look to pick up something like a 70-300, they differ in price from £100 for the basic to mid £300's for the IS version upto £700+ for the DO IS version. The latter being a superb piece of kit.
 
Or keep your eye out for a 100-400 LIS, a great lens, ok top end of your budget but a long term buy, and you'd always get good money for it if you decide to sell.
 
For a "newbie", I would also suggest the 70-300 IS USM. It works very well on my 350D and is probably on the camera 70% of the time.

If you have the money, the 70-200 F28 is a good option as you can add the 1.4 or 2 x converters at a later date.

Steve
 
you should get a 70-200L f/4 NON IS in HK for less than £300 leaving you enough change for a 1.4x or 2x Tele convertor.
But you will lose 1 stop with the 1.4TC and 2 stops with the 2x TC.
whether you will be happy with a f/4 NON Is in the future is for you to decide though.
The f/2.8L NON IS will be around £600
the f/2.8L IS will be around £900
Prices nicked from flea-bay
 
h4rri said:
As you are heading to HK I would look to pick up something like a 70-300, they differ in price from £100 for the basic to mid £300's for the IS version upto £700+ for the DO IS version. The latter being a superb piece of kit.
Click to expand...

I had a quick look and they certainly sound like the sort of thing I was thinking of. Thanks for letting me know. (y)

But tell me something; is having IS really worth paying extra for? None of the lenses I've had have that capability so I was just wondering if it was worth the money. It certainly sounds good but I don't know how it is in practice.
 
Alcamin said:
But tell me something; is having IS really worth paying extra for? None of the lenses I've had have that capability so I was just wondering if it was worth the money. It certainly sounds good but I don't know how it is in practice.
Click to expand...

Depends on what you use it for. Motorsport I now find it almost "essential", and hand held wild life shots are much better too.

It's about "is the camera/lens going to be moving when you fire the shutter". If it is, IS is a benefit (generally), if it's not, then spend the money on better glass.
 
George said:
Or keep your eye out for a 100-400 LIS, a great lens, ok top end of your budget but a long term buy, and you'd always get good money for it if you decide to sell.
Click to expand...

That lens is not one that I had previously thought of to be honest, but it does sound like a very good one (as long as I'm looking at the right one: http://www.onestop-digital.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=24_26&products_id=144). After reading a couple of reviews it definitely sounds like a quality product. It is perhaps a bit out of my price range but I'll certainly keep it in mind. It may well be something to consider in the future at the very least. :)

Thanks for the suggestion! Much appreciated! (y)
 
Jelster said:
For a "newbie", I would also suggest the 70-300 IS USM. It works very well on my 350D and is probably on the camera 70% of the time.

If you have the money, the 70-200 F28 is a good option as you can add the 1.4 or 2 x converters at a later date.

Steve
Click to expand...


Two very interesting lenses there. The 70-300 IS USM is one that I am grow particularly interested in so it's good to see another good word being put in for it.

The 70-200 F2.8 is another great looking lens, though perhaps a little expensive for me right now (Oh curse my student life style! :D). I am rather cautious about spending too much on something as I'm still learning the ropes and don't want to get the wrong equipment for my needs. I'm playing it safe. :)

Thanks very much for the suggestions! I really appreciate it! :)
 
Cobra said:
you should get a 70-200L f/4 NON IS in HK for less than £300 leaving you enough change for a 1.4x or 2x Tele convertor.
But you will lose 1 stop with the 1.4TC and 2 stops with the 2x TC.
whether you will be happy with a f/4 NON Is in the future is for you to decide though.
The f/2.8L NON IS will be around £600
the f/2.8L IS will be around £900
Prices nicked from flea-bay
Click to expand...


Hmmm. That is an interesting point you bring up there. I was unaware that using those Tele convertor's would result in a loss of quality (although now that I think about it it's not really surprising). I wonder though if it would be better to stick with something a little more straight forward for the time being. As I said, I'm still learning the ropes at the moment so something simple might be best. Getting proper technique is my biggest concern right now.

The 70-200L does sounds like a very good lens though and is definitely one that I am considering. I'll have to take what you said into consideration. Thanks very much for the info and the link! Much appreciated! :)
 
Jelster said:
Depends on what you use it for. Motorsport I now find it almost "essential", and hand held wild life shots are much better too.

It's about "is the camera/lens going to be moving when you fire the shutter". If it is, IS is a benefit (generally), if it's not, then spend the money on better glass.
Click to expand...

Yes, I suspected that was the case. Thanks for clearing that up. (y) Shooting moving objects isn't something I have tried very much but I would like to get into it some time, so it maybe getting a lens with IS wouldn't be such a bad idea. I'll see what I can find. :)

Thanks again!
 
Alcamin said:
Hmmm. That is an interesting point you bring up there. I was unaware that using those Tele convertor's would result in a loss of quality (although now that I think about it it's not really surprising). I wonder though if it would be better to stick with something a little more straight forward for the time being.
Thanks very much for the info and the link! Much appreciated! :)
Click to expand...

No worries (y)
Its no so much a loss of quality ( debate-able point, I don't notice it some do)
I find its more the loss of a stop or two which can be a bugger if you are shooting in "low light"
The 70-300 IS is a great lens most people have (or had) one I certainly did,
but found I out grew it for what I needed, I shoot a lot of horsey stuff ( showjumping) and found the
70-200 2.8 IS was better.
Don't discount the Sigma range which can usually be had cheaper than the Canon range,
a lot of people swear by these as well
( I don't know much about these but a quick trawl around the www, should answer most of your questions)
 
i'd go for the canon 70-300IS. Good reach, super image quality and the IS works very well

Kerso sells them for £320 outside of ebay and with the cash back they're £280 :)
 
Alcamin said:
Yes, I suspected that was the case. Thanks for clearing that up. (y) Shooting moving objects isn't something I have tried very much but I would like to get into it some time, so it maybe getting a lens with IS wouldn't be such a bad idea. I'll see what I can find. :)

Thanks again!
Click to expand...

Don't forget that using a long lens on a tripod may also involve some movement (wind etc.) so that's something to think about.

With the budget you have, the 70-300 is probably the best option, and don't forget, with the smaller sensor models you'll have the 35mm equivalent of 480mm - that's quite some reach !

HTH

Steve
 
Buy the best glass you can afford.

Go into your local shop and try a few out before you buy, ideally before your trip.

Do your homework before hand - sites like those posted below are very useful. Not sure if I'm allowed to post links like this but what the hell:

http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon EOS Lens Tests

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/

If you are looking for a long term investment then stick to EF lenses only, in case you upgrade to a full frame camera in the future. And if you can afford it, go for L lenses - you wont be dissapointed with the quality! :)

My 2p worth ;)

 
Another vote for the 70-300IS. It's a great lens IMO. I paid £370 for mine about a year ago but you can get one (as an earlier poster mentioned) for £280 now inc. cashback. Excellent VFM.
 
Another option is the Sigma 70-200 F2.8, I have one and it's extremely sharp and sweet, and a whole lot cheaper than the canon lens.

You can get the sigma 1.4 TC to add, giving you the extra range.

I used this combination for my last series of images I posted here

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=52310
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top