Ok, to start off, im not exactly the most educated person when it comes to lenses, BUT i am willing to learn and listen. With that said I would like to now say that I am looking at different lenses for my Canon 300D and I believe that I am outgrowing my kit lens (18-55mm), I want something with a good zoom so I do not have to be so close to my subject. I realized I needed this pretty quick this weekend when I was at the beach and wanted to catch some shots of some exploding waves and some seaguls eating starfish...haha. Anyways, I was checking out the 70-200mm Canon F4L, and I on the right track? is there any quality price point alternatives to this? anyone have any good readers or anything comparing lenses and their specific uses?
I was looking at various Canon zooms, and decided on the 70-200 f4L based on quality. I've been very happy with this lens and have used it mostly with a 1.4x teleconverter. This setup worked very well at the zoo as well as a recent trip to Yosemite National Park. I would definitely recommend this lens. If you have the money and need it, the 70-200 f2.8L might be worth looking at too. The following examples were taken with the 70-200 f4...
The Canon 70-200mm f/4L is a sharp lens. I wouldn't go any wider then that on the zoom range though, as the wider ranging zooms such as the EF 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 or the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L tend to hunt more while trying to focus.
Make no mistake: The Canon 70-200mm f/4 ($579.95) you are looking at is a great lens. It's an incredibly sharp lens with great reviews. You'll be hard-pressed to find anyone who was disappointed by this lens.
If you need a bit more flexibility in the 70-200 range, you have a couple options. If money is no object, consider the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM ($1,649.95). This lens is a stop faster than the f/4 and also includes an image stabilizer, which will allow you to handhold shots about 1 or 2 stops longer (2x to 4x as long) as you could typically handhold without it. This same lens is also available in a non-IS version ($1,129.95).
My personal "best of both worlds" choice is the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX HSM ($749.95). This is actually the next lens I plan to buy. The reviews I have seen suggest that while this lens is not quite as good as the Canon f/2.8, but if $1,150 is out of your budget, the Sigma is a great way to get the flexibility of the f/2.8L at a price point close to the Canon f/4L.
I have allthough heard that the Sigma is not usable until at F4 becouse it is so soft wide open :/
The Sigma 70-200/2.8 is fairly sharp at 2.8. Most lenses, including L and D lenses are sharper once stopped down several f/stops, but this particular Sigma is no softer then most wide open. This is one of Sigma's finest lenses.
Ok, to start off, im not exactly the most educated person when it comes to lenses, BUT i am willing to learn and listen. With that said I would like to now say that I am looking at different lenses for my Canon 300D and I believe that I am outgrowing my kit lens (18-55mm), I want something with a good zoom so I do not have to be so close to my subject. I realized I needed this pretty quick this weekend when I was at the beach and wanted to catch some shots of some exploding waves and some seaguls eating starfish...haha. Anyways, I was checking out the 70-200mm Canon F4L, and I on the right track? is there any quality price point alternatives to this? anyone have any good readers or anything comparing lenses and their specific uses?
Any help is appriciated, thanks in advance.
- Chris
A lot depends on what kind of shooting you plan on using the new lens for. And whether it is going to be a permanent part of your collection, or rather a next step as you move toward the more expensive lenses latter on.
Here are a couple of alternatives that fall into the "next step" category.
Canon EF 75-300 f 4.0-5.6 IS USM. Nearly the same aperture as the more expensive 70-200 4L, but with more range and image stabilization. It goes for $415 at B&H.
Canon EF 28-200 f 3.5-5-6 USM. I think this lens's sharpness is underated, see my Candid II for an example. It goes for only $360.
While 3 of my 4 lenses are Canon (and i am tres happy with them)they can sometimes be unafordable. That's when I look to the B team - Tamron. Check this link ----> //www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/autofocus.asp
and see if they have anything you might need.
(I'll be checking it myself to see if they offer anything like the Canon 70-200 2.8)
Oh, and no, I do not sell cameras, equipment nor am I a rep - they have to dress better than I.
If you are on a budget the Tamron AF28-300mm 1:3.5-6.3 XR Di aspherical is a pretty good lens that can be had for as low 349.00 plus 20 dollar mail-in rebate. A smidgen soft on the long end but not quite as soft as the canon budget lens (non IS) IMO.
There's a new Sigma 18-200mm 3.5-6.3 coming out that, if as good as my Sigma 18-125 will be a great all around lens.
Bear in mind that if you want to shoot indoors without flash a lot, then you will also need something to cover that, something like the new 30mm Sigma F1.4 that's coming out would be a good choice for that.
The Sigma at F3.5 works indoors pretty well at the 18-24mm end of the scale, but like all variable aperture lenses, there's less light coming through at higher magnifications.
Im not sure what you plan on shooting, but you might concider the Sigma 50-500 also. I love this beast's range and if you hand hold it you can skip your upper body work out. I also own the Canon 75-300 is, and while I like the small size and the IS, if I had it to do over again, I would probably go with the 70-200 f4 instead.
Shot at 500mm + the 1.4 extender+ the 1.6 crop = net equivalent of 1120mm. You can't beat that reach at anything like that price.
