which lens would you choose

P

paul1968uk

Messages
57
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
Im looking to add a telephoto lens to my kit and woundered which of these below you would choose.

The camera is a canon 30D

Canon EF 75-300mm USM MK III f/4.0-5.6 Lens Ultrasonic
SIGMA 28 - 300mm (f/ 3.5 - 6.3) DG - ZOOM LENS
Sigma 18-200mm f3.5 -5.6 DC zoom lens
Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO DG Macro Lens
Tamron 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR LD Aspherical Macro

or any other equivalant at a reasonable cost with quality
 
I can un recommend (if thats the right terms) the 28-300mm and 18-200mm Just becuase from what i've heard is that because of the huge difference in focal length and quite a cheap price it compromises quality.

Just my thoughts
 
Out of the lenses i put up theres 2 that id be looking at to compliment the lenses that i have but thought id put a few more up to get your thoughts on those 2, plus any i may have overlooked.
 
Whats your budget Paul?
 
At moment a few hundred pounds eric, what i would go for if i had the funds would have to be the canon 70-300IS as have heard good raves about this lens
 
Have a look to see if you can find a Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG APO Macro HSM (MK I). There are still a few about since the Mark II version came out and can be had for good money.
 
No matter what you choose, try to get the fastest lens you can. I too would look at the 70-200 f4L. Not that much if you buy second hand.

You have 17-70 range covered by the very nice Sigma lens you own. Don't buy one of the long 18-XXX zooms. Quality is not on a par.......
 
Chillimonster said:
Have a look to see if you can find a Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG APO Macro HSM (MK I). There are still a few about since the Mark II version came out and can be had for good money.
Click to expand...

Thats also what I was going to suggest Paul(y) As sharp as a very sharp thing (some who have owned both reckon they are as good as a Canon 70-200 2.8L) and being 2.8 you've always got the option of a converter should you need more length;)
 
Eric Mc said:
Thats also what I was going to suggest Paul(y) As sharp as a very sharp thing (some who have owned both reckon they are as good as a Canon 70-200 2.8L) and being 2.8 you've always got the option of a converter should you need more length;)
Click to expand...


I'll go with this also, I've got the sigma 70-200 F2.8 (non macro). and it's very sharp, and with the 1.4 converter it's still excellent (and light enough to carry around)
 
Just had a quick scan for that 1 and can only find the mk11 for over £400
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top