1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

What new lens

Discussion in 'Photography & Video' started by teaboy5, 3 Jun 2006.

  1. teaboy5

    Soldato

    Joined: 12 Jan 2006

    Posts: 5,543

    Location: NI

    Ok i want a new lens for the 350d, i was thinking a tele for wildlife and sports etc. Some at least up to 500 but if below that all the better. I want the best one i can get within this price range. I noticed this one on ******* (can i say that name here?) Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM is it any good i cant really find any good reviews on the web. Anyone got a lens similar to this maybe? Any thought would be good as i only have the camera a few weeks.
     
  2. philio16

    Gangster

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 158

    Location: Manchester, UK

    No you can't say that name here I'm afraid!
     
  3. yak.h'cir

    Mobster

    Joined: 26 Aug 2003

    Posts: 4,486

    Location: The North

    Not a big wildlife photographer so can only really pass on what i've heard. That is you really need at least 300mm. Also the Sigma bigma is always getting rave reviews as a relatively cheap long lens.

    For reviews on any lens your interested in search google for POTN, its a massive canon forum with first hand reviews on everything canon or otherwise.

    Also lots of reviews at http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/

    I've got the canon 70-200mm f4 which is awsome. Probably not long enough for your needs but it is a great lens.
     
  4. teaboy5

    Soldato

    Joined: 12 Jan 2006

    Posts: 5,543

    Location: NI

    Think i am going to go for the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Lens and see what happens. :)
     
  5. JET_PILOT

    Gangster

    Joined: 23 Nov 2003

    Posts: 436

    Location: Leicestershire

    The Canon 70-200 f/4L is an awesome lens,

    Quite a few people on this forumn have this lens too.
     
  6. Spanker

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 1,547

    Location: Snipers hide

    Sigma 100-300 f4 gets very good reviews.
     
  7. Sleepyd

    Hitman

    Joined: 30 Sep 2005

    Posts: 696

    You need more than 200mm for wildlife, or a converter - it depends how close you're going to get.

    I would consider the Sigma 70-200 2.8 with a 2x converter (becomes F5.6 wide open) or a Sigma 100-300 F4 with a 1.4x converter (becomes F5.6 wide open).

    I actually have the 70-200F4, I love it because it's very portable and sharp but it's too short for wildlife and you can only use a 1.4x converter or you'll lose autofocus.
     
  8. teaboy5

    Soldato

    Joined: 12 Jan 2006

    Posts: 5,543

    Location: NI

    I fully understand that i would need at least 300mm for wild life but the kind i would be shooting the moment will be close enough anyway. I will hopefully be using this more for sports and motorsports for example i go to a lot of rallies and hopefully this will come in useful.

    So if i dont like it i can always bring it back :p
     
  9. Braeden

    Hitman

    Joined: 15 Feb 2003

    Posts: 853

    Location: West Yorkshire

    I have the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM and I think it is a cracking lens.

    I chose this over the 70-200 f/4 L because of the extra reach and the IS (which I really need as I have very unsteady hands) and I wasn't disappointed at all.

    A sample:

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: 4 Jun 2006