Telephoto recommendations please

[Pixels]

A newcomer, I own an EF 50 1.8 II, and have a 17-40 L on order. For the telephoto end of the range I need a lens that can fulfil the following requirements:
1) Be VERY sharp
2) Not cost the earth - could be 3rd party
3) Zoom, probably around 85 - 130, or thereabouts - this is flexible
4) Not be too bulky
Does such a piece of glass exist?
Would welcome suggestions, and samples if possible.
Incidentally camera is 350D.
Many thanks in advance

[EricKonieczny]

Save Up and get the 70-200 2.8 or f4

[condyk]

2) Not cost the earth - could be 3rd party


The earth is very expensive. Even Ronald Jnr would struggle to find the cash :lol: :lol: but seriously, giving a budget would help a lot otherwise it's how long is a piece of string?

[Pixels]

Hello Condyk, yes you're right - I should have given some guidelines budget-wise!
In Euro, I would say somewhere around €400/500 ceiling.

[peacock]

500 euro thingys = 339 gbp for which you could get a canon 28-135 IS

I'm biased though cos I have one :D

I'll leave it for others to comment on sharpness (i'm sure they will;) )

but it is sharp :lol:

[condyk]

Tricky, tricky ... hmmmmm

Dunno a zoomer that will fit the criteria. You know what ... I think we need to know what you'll shoot with it. That is such a funny kinda range. The 70-200 f4 is the obvious choice and ticks a number of boxes, but ... hmmm?! Maybe a cracker of a prime like the 85mm 1.8 might work if you're a portrait type. The 135mm 2.8 Soft focus too can be really good if you don't use soft focus and most ignore it because they only buy the 'usual suspects' ... ebay will get you one for £175-200 or so. Someone may come along and recomend the 28-135 IS but please resist.

EDIT ... ooops, sorry peacock, you beat me too it ... we can just disagree. No harm done. Each to their own as they say ;)

[tim]

Canon 70-200 F4L (quite light, not too large), or Sigma 70-200 F2.8 (larger, heavier).

[Ronald S. Jr.]

hardy har har...good one, condyk. What, you think I'm made of money? ;-)

[Ronald S. Jr.]

oh, and to answer your question... "how long is a piece of string?" Well..it's twice the distance from the middle to one end.

[peacock]

Tricky, tricky ... hmmmmm

Dunno a zoomer that will fit the criteria. You know what ... I think we need to know what you'll shoot with it. That is such a funny kinda range. The 70-200 f4 is the obvious choice and ticks a number of boxes, but ... hmmm?! Maybe a cracker of a prime like the 85mm 1.8 might work if you're a portrait type. The 135mm 2.8 Soft focus too can be really good if you don't use soft focus and most ignore it because they only buy the 'usual suspects' ... ebay will get you one for £175-200 or so. Someone may come along and recomend the 28-135 IS but please resist.

EDIT ... ooops, sorry peacock, you beat me too it ... we can just disagree. No harm done. Each to their own as they say ;)

no harm done at all :lol:

but you didnt even list a zoom in the criteria:lol: you named 2 primes and a superb zoom 50 % over the top end budget:eek:

not a dig back cos I respect your comments on the marketplace , usually:lol:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-28-135mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

[condyk]

no harm done at all :lol:

but you didnt even list a zoom in the criteria:lol: you named 2 primes and a superb zoom 50 % over the top end budget:eek:

Sure ... and that's the difficulty from where the OP is. Look at the criteria and it's hard to recommend much within the set budget. S/he either needs to downgrade expectations, which is cool, or upgrade budget. I was trying to offer some options in case s/he is a portrait shooter. Many are at that kind of focal length and below. But s/he needs to tell us what kind of shooting the lenses are mainly for to offer better advice. Could be the 28-135 Is is the best option. I thought that too when I bought mine ...

[Grimnar]

The 200 2.8 L is a good choice, but no zoom.....

[peacock]

Sure ... and that's the difficulty from where the OP is. Look at the criteria and it's hard to recommend much within the set budget. S/he either needs to downgrade expectations, which is cool, or upgrade budget. I was trying to offer some options in case s/he is a portrait shooter. Many are at that kind of focal length and below. But s/he needs to tell us what kind of shooting the lenses are mainly for to offer better advice. Could be the 28-135 Is is the best option. I thought that too when I bought mine ...

I will finish that sentence for you.

I thought that too when I bought mine ! then I bought my 70-200 f4l (which costs 50% more ) and I hardly use the 28-135 anymore:lol:

but it does fit the criteria and in untouched raw 100% crops it is not far off the sharpness of the 50mm 1.8 @f8

[peacock]

The 200 2.8 L is a good choice, but no zoom.....

not a zoom and @ £500 ish is again 50% over top end budget:confused:

[condyk]

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=40746

Might be worth an offer Pixels?

[Pixels]

Very interesting and lively responses to my query!
The type of shooting I want to do - some wildlife,some subjects such as ships/boats at sea, occasional portraits, although I would probably use EF50 1.8 II for latter. Does this make sense? The other option might be forget zoom and get prime lens something around 135 mm(film camera rating), so that would be an 85mm on the 350D.

[condyk]

Very interesting and lively responses to my query!
The type of shooting I want to do - some wildlife,some subjects such as ships/boats at sea, occasional portraits, although I would probably use EF50 1.8 II for latter. Does this make sense? The other option might be forget zoom and get prime lens something around 135 mm(film camera rating), so that would be an 85mm on the 350D.

Wildlife other than zoo or backyard you need 400mm and over PLUS the 1.6x crop factor, otherwise the number of decent shots is so reduced, basically the lucky ones when the animal or bird is asleep ;) , make it too frustrating. I would largely leave aside for another day that desire ... personally! I costs a lot to get a good wildlife lens and so you really need to feel it's your big thing. It is for me, but unless I really knew that I would be loath to spend out.

Ships/boats ... of course it depends how far away you are here too.

The 85mm is a truly nice lens and would more than meet your sharp criteria ... but it's much more than sharp, an over-rated attribute I think, it really adds a high colour and 3D feel to everything you shoot. Images are more alive than any of the consumer level zooms that Canon make, which in comparison are really mediocre.

Same with the 70-200 f4, which would be a very good addition too. I can't help thinking this would be your best option. The 70mm end can take some very fine portraits and the longer end will get you some of the boat/ship stuff and some closer wildlife. It's also not too heavy or bulky. They seem to be in short supply so the SH option could be a good route. They normally go around the £340-350 mark, but shortage of new ones means costs have gone up.

[xuxu1]

....the following requirements:
1) Be VERY sharp
2) Not cost the earth - could be 3rd party
3) Zoom, probably around 85 - 130, or thereabouts - this is flexible
4) Not be too bulky
Does such a piece of glass exist?
You can´nt have it all probably. But there are nice lenses available that don´t cost a fortune .

....you could get a canon 28-135 IS
I'll leave it for others to comment on sharpness (i'm sure they will;) )

but it is sharp :lol:

peacock... how dare you mention that lens!:shock: we´ve been through all this some time before. have´nt we condyk? :grin:

peacock i agree. It is a sharp lens. I should know.... (But it ain´nt an "L"). Approx. € 450,00 at internet shops in central Europe.

Depending on how far away and how large/small those ships/boats are... it certainly can be a nice lens for that purpose. :lol:

Here an example pic (no critisism please because "saved for web"):

Click here for .... SHIP PIC (http://members.aon.at/aircanon/mypics/ship.jpg)

Shot with .... yeah.... Canon EF28-135IS.

Now... i´m not saying that you can´t get that shot with another lens. :lol:

ED

[Sikario]

How about either the Sigma 18-125mm or Sigma 18-200mm.

Go here (http://www.pixagogo.com/0280105208) for photo comparsions between the 18-200mm and Canon 28-135mm IS.

[xuxu1]

How about either the Sigma 18-125mm or Sigma 18-200mm.
Do these lenses have to be rechipped to work on a 5D body or do they work straight out of the box?

ED

[craigsinclair]

Do these lenses have to be rechipped to work on a 5D body or do they work straight out of the box?

ED

Who knows? And with the 20DN a year from now? And the 350DN a year after that? Rechip now and you can't rechip later (only one "chipping" allowed). OR, get a brand of lens that won't ever need rechipping.

[peacock]

You can´nt have it all probably. But there are nice lenses available that don´t cost a fortune .



peacock... how dare you mention that lens!:shock: we´ve been through all this some time before. have´nt we condyk? :grin:

peacock i agree. It is a sharp lens. I should know.... (But it ain´nt an "L"). Approx. € 450,00 at internet shops in central Europe.

Depending on how far away and how large/small those ships/boats are... it certainly can be a nice lens for that purpose. :lol:

Here an example pic (no critisism please because "saved for web"):

Click here for .... SHIP PIC (http://members.aon.at/aircanon/mypics/ship.jpg)

Shot with .... yeah.... Canon EF28-135IS.

Now... i´m not saying that you can´t get that shot with another lens. :lol:

ED

Lol you guys:lol:

Seriously , seeing as yo are getting the 17-40 if it were me I would wait and save to get the 70-200f4L at the moment you could get one for approx 590 euro as canon have a £70 discount voucher going !