Looking for advice

[storeman]

My 75-300 lens has finally died and I think it would be cheaper to replace it than get it repaired. I bought it used for about £90 and just recently was throwing up lots of err99. Today it also stopped closing the aperture then showing the err99 after trying to take a shot.

The advice I'm seeking is whether I should get another 75-300 or go for a different range ?

I currently only have the 18-55mm kit lens and was looking at maybe a 50mm 1.8 which I know lots of people like. The problem being a very limited budget and can only get lenses one at a time so which lens would be your next choice as an addittion to the kit lens. I don't really have to have 300mm although occassionally the 300 comes in usefull IF i have a tripod or something to rest the camera on. I'm considering maybe purchasing up to 125mm and then sometime in the future maybe looking for a longer lens if needed. Some of the Sigma lenses are beginning to catch my eye due to the price compared with similar Canon lenses but I'm hoping that you guys can give some pointers based on your practical experiences.

I don't shoot sports and don't do any night photography to any real extent. Low light issues aren't a really major thing but don't want to be too limited so that I would need flash for everything that wasn't a really bright sunny day :)

L glass is not an option and used equipment is the most likely to be the one I go for.

[jimlp]

What is your budget?

[storeman]

What is your budget?

That is a hard question to answer. I 'm trying to get some idea of reccomendations so I can either buy now or resign myself to a wait.

Current budget is around £150 but would make do with just the kit lens for a while to spend a little more and be better served with a more expensive purchase.

Granted that people will be thinking 'OK - Save up and buy an IS L lens' but I don't figure on waiting that long :)

[condyk]

You might pick up a Sigma 70-300mm DG APO for that budget. Add a 50mm 1.8 if you want to and you should be nicely covered. You can get good shots with these lenses. You do not need an L lens for that.

[storeman]

Thanks for the reply - Currently looking at the same Sigma 70-300mm that you mentioned. Hopefully it will come my way. Maybe I'll be lucky & get the same 50mm f1.8 that another uk member got when I decide to go for it :)

[iHEARTfood]

whats 150 pounds in USD?
Go for the 50mm f1.8 if you do lots of indoor stuff... its quite awesome for that because of its low ap and all that. I have the same telephoto that you have, and id say you should get another one like it if indoor photography isnt something you find yourself doing a lot, because its relatively cheap, and covers a large range of focal lengths.

[ron chappel]

I'm thinking you should possibly go for another 300mm zoom.That's what i'd do anyway.
Yes the 50/1.8 is great for what it is but i feel the long zoom may be more versatile(?).
Of course if you like doing portraits then the 50/1.8 should come first!:)


The one thing that makes me slightly hesitant about recommending another 300mm zoom is the fact that you said you rarely use the whole length.Unfortunately there are very few lenses around that offer just the length you are looking for, don't overlap the kit lens and fit the budget as well.

A couple that do come to mind are the 200mm kit type zooms.
Canon do make a 55-200 zoom to match the kit zoom but i've had no real experience with that one.I think it's also abit expensive (?)

There is also an 80-200/4.5-5.6 II lens that is well worth looking at. The image quality it gives is very similar to the 18-55 kit lens ,it's tiny and inexpensive.Even the (non usm) focus is pretty fast.
On the bad side it does feel light and cheap (just like the kit lens).One important thing-make sure you get the 'II' version. The original version ansd the usm version both have the older inferior optics.
Here are a couple of photo's from this lens -
http://members.dodo.com.au/~l8r_ron/pages/ef%2080-200II%20@140mmf5.6%20%5B270k%5D.html
http://members.dodo.com.au/~l8r_ron/pages/ef%2080-200%20II%20@200f11%20%5B140k%5D.html


If you do want to go for a 300mm zoom then try for something like the sigma 70-300 Apo as Condyk suggests.It's maybe abit above your budget but most buyers of these seem to be very happy with them.It's one the best you can get without spending big on pro lenses.

[storeman]

I don't do any kind of portrait work - mainly photographing places that we visit. The long focal length was usefull for those places that you just can't get near enough to to get a good photo. We visit a lot of historical buildings as well as scenic places but was considering the 50mm for those times when I want to get a reasonably close shot with the shallow DOF.

I've gone for a Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 lens which I think was a good price - £46.50 (about $81.84 US). Used Canon 75-300mm lenses are about twice the price if you get lucky. That leaves me enough to go for the 50mm 1.8. Maybe I'll try the same seller as the member who got the 1.4 when he bought the 1.8

My technique needs to improve a huge amount before I can even consider risking the wrath of the boss by spending £300 + on something as (in her words) 'trivial' as a lens.

[condyk]

I've gone for a Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 lens which I think was a good price - £46.50 (about $81.84 US). Used Canon 75-300mm lenses are about twice the price if you get lucky. That leaves me enough to go for the 50mm 1.8. Maybe I'll try the same seller as the member who got the 1.4 when he bought the 1.8


There are two versions of the Sigma and it seems you bought the cheap and cheerful version. The DG APO is the one to go for ideally. The cheaper one may suit your needs but my expectations wouldn't be high.

[storeman]

There are two versions of the Sigma and it seems you bought the cheap and cheerful version. The DG APO is the one to go for ideally. The cheaper one may suit your needs but my expectations wouldn't be high.

Just realised, it's the Sigma 70-210 i've bought. I was looking at the 70-300 but the price was too much.As long as it works ok when I next take a trip out then I'll be reasonably happy for now. When I can start producing decent images pretty consistently then I'll be able to justify some better glass. My wife isn't anywhere near as critical as some members here and it is way easier to impress her than to impress on these forums. When this happens I'll be able to say 'But just think how much better this would have been if I had this lens' and hopefully she would agree to getting the better glass.

Got to keep the peace :)

[ron chappel]

Wow a 70-210
I havent seen one of those for awhile.Did you buy it new?

[TimSewell]

It's a shame you already jumped. The Tamron 70-300 4/5.6 gets pretty good reviews on fredmiranda and retails in the UK for £90. Worth a look if the 70-210 fails to satisfy. Here (http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=254&sort=7&cat=43&page=1)'re the reviews.

[storeman]

It's a shame you already jumped. The Tamron 70-300 4/5.6 gets pretty good reviews on fredmiranda and retails in the UK for £90. Worth a look if the 70-210 fails to satisfy. Here (http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=254&sort=7&cat=43&page=1)'re the reviews.

Looks like a nice lens. Maybe I'll end up getting it and hopefully get my money back on the Sigma

[storeman]

Well the Sigma 70-210 arrived but it wasn't compatible with the digital body so I sold it on and made a very small profit. I'm now looking at both the Sigma 70-300mm DG APO and the Tamron 70-300 4/5.6 and trying to decide which to get as a replacement.

[steved110]

The Sigma 70-300mm II APO Macro Super got a much better write -up than the Tamron. It also has a red stripe on the barrel by the front element, which matters in some parts...
The APO means apochromatic, so coloured light gets aligned more accurately ( so they say, physics was always a murky area for me, I prefer to believe in magic...)
The benefit to all this is that it is very sharp especially at the long end of the zoom range, but it suffers from a degree of pincushion distortion similar to that of the cheaper sigma lens. You should be able to pick this up for about £180.
Please note I have distilled the essence of this info from the write-up in Practical Photography May '05. I have an absorbing interest in lenses at the moment, which accounts for a rather anoracky ability to remember strings of letters and digits and words like 'apochromatic'.
Hope this helps,
Steve

[condyk]

I'm sure both will do the job for you, but the Sigma is generally well respected (I had one pre DG version and it was very decent for the price) and so might just be easier to sell on should you ever upgrade. The Tamron is perhaps more of a risk in that regard.

[storeman]

Finally decided which lens to go for. After looking at several items on ebay going for more than I wanted to pay for an unseen & untested lens I decided to go for a new one with a guarantee. I've ordered the Sigma 70-300mm APO DG. Best price I could find was at Pixmania - £159.70 inc shipping. Just got to wait for it to arrive.

Thanks for the suggestions. Just hope I can do it some justice :)

[steved110]

Let us know how you find the lens, I hope you have a lot of fun with it!