Good Telephoto Lens for a 30D??

[corvette]

Hi I'm looking for a Good Telephoto Lens for mainly static objects for my Canon EOS 30D.
It should also give good quality pictures when fully zoomed in & in low light conditions (Don't mind to use a tripod though).

I'm considering the following :

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM

Canon 75-300/4.0-5.6 EF USM III

Please let me know if you would suggest any others.

I don't know if getting a really expensive lens wold be worth it in my case, since I'm only going to shoot still objects. And I don't mind using a tripod at night time but would like to get good quality night shots when fully zoomed in.

Would the "IS" feature really be necessary for me?


Thanx

[steved110]

I'll put in a vote for the 70-200 f/4 - it's a superb lens, can't say enough good things about it.

If you want a lens that goes to 300mm, then you should swing for the IS version, IS is invaluable at 300mm on a crop camera. Camera shake is fearsome, and it is easy to forget to crank up your shutter speed.

If you don't want to spend the extra for a 70-300 with IS, then the sigma 70-300 APO macro is optically the 'best of the rest'

My telephoto zoom ambitions are 70-200 f/4 and 100-400 IS. If I had the cash I'd love to get the new 70-200 f/4 IS but I've already got the non-IS version and there's no way i'll spend twice as much to get IS on this lens - it's almost as expensive as the 70-200 f/2.8 IS - which BTW is simply the best PJ lens going. But it is big and heavy and I'm happy with f/4 anyway.

[OpenC]

I bought the 75-300 III. It's got a pretty grim reputation, but I got it anyway because it was (relatively) cheap, and I don't really ever use telephoto but fancied a cheap one to stick in my bag just in case. It's OK if your main interests lie elsewhere, but if you really want to take good, sharp telephoto shots then yeah, you're probably best off with something else (that said, I was quite happy with the image in this thread (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=224834), and that was all the way out at 300).

I've got the 17-85 IS and the IS really is effective; I can imagine it's very useful at 300mm where, as the above post says, camera shake verges on the intolerable sometimes.

[Tyreman]

Hi I'm looking for a Good Telephoto Lens for mainly static objects for my Canon EOS 30D.
It should also give good quality pictures when fully zoomed in & in low light conditions (Don't mind to use a tripod though).

I'm considering the following :

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM

Canon 75-300/4.0-5.6 EF USM III

Please let me know if you would suggest any others.

I don't know if getting a really expensive lens wold be worth it in my case, since I'm only going to shoot still objects. And I don't mind using a tripod at night time but would like to get good quality night shots when fully zoomed in.

Would the "IS" feature really be necessary for me?


Thanx

You are going to in all likelyhood need a decent lens.
This generally equates to more $'s.
I would go out with a few "shooters" who has/have a few lenses you may wish to peruse and ask to try them.
I have done this before and its no hassle some are glad to oblige.
Keep in mind your habits will want(perhaps need) something better as you progress.
There is no free lunch on lenses and light.
As for models of lens I will let you decide that.

[corvette]

If zoomed in lets say between 200-300mm, would the (Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM) give me blurred images in bright sunlight when hand held, or using a tripod at night?

Because I want to stand far away to get a flat, compressed perspective but still fill the frame with my image.

[OpenC]

The picture I linked to was 300mm and handheld, and while it's not exactly sharp it's not exactly blurred either. However, it was taken at 1/500th so I'd expect it to be reasonably sharp. It's soft, I suppose, but it doesn't ruin the shot for me.

I've not used any other long lenses, but mine has got an awful reputation at the long end of the scale. I can live with it; you might not be able to.

[Koontsa]

I would get the 70-200 f2.8 if I were you. The 2.8 is indispensible in low-light conditions.

[Adam T]

I used to have a 75-300mm F4-5.6 - I now own a 70-200m F4 USM L - IT IS SO MUCH BETTER!

[corvette]

What about these lenses:

Canon EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM
Canon EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM
Canon EF 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

They have reasonable prices, but would they give me good photos in the conditions that I stated above?

[Tyreman]

What about the Canon EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM Lens?
It has a good price but would it give me good photos in the conditions that I stated above?

I used that lens I believe awhile ago it wasn't that great out on the high end.
I mean its okay when its nice and "sunny' out.
Remember its f's and what you want to do
I wound up with 70-200f/4L

[Hermeto]

Why do we discuss lenses on Cameras forum? ???

[ScottE]

Why do we discuss lenses on Cameras forum? ???

Because we are trying to help someone who asked a question and posted it to the wrong forum. Why do you ask?

[calicokat]

Of the three, the 70-200L is my choice

[ScottE]

Of the lenses you mentioned, neither the 75-300 or 70-300 have ring USM with full time manual focus override. I find it handy to be able to touch up focus by hand in telephoto situations where there is a bit of vegetation between myself and the subject so I won't buy a lens that does not have FTMFO.

You don't say what you are shooting, but for wildlife I find a 70-200 lens to be on the short side with my 20D.

I use two different telephoto lenses. The Sigma 50-500 is generally used from a tripod and gives the range for everything from large animals close up to birds. The main problem with this lens is that it is a little slow for low light conditions.

In low light I switch to my Canon 70-200 f/2.8. As mentioned, it is often a little short, but a 1.4x teleconverter helps if I can live with f/4. I bought my 70-200 before the image stabilized version was even thought about, but if I was buying again I would save up and get the IS version. (Right now I am waiting for Canon to bring out something like a 50-200 f/2.8 IS EF-S that will have the lighter polycarbonate construction and will extend so that it will be lighter and more compact for travelling.)

[liza]

If you truly want to shoot in low light, consider the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. It's a bit pricier, but not as expensive as the Canon.

[Billginthekeys]

definitly NOT the 75-300 or any of the choices you listed after that. if you are going to be shooting indoors a lot you will want to get the 70-200 2.8. (sigma or canon)

but of the ones you listed, the 70-200 F4L

[JimCapaldi]

I have the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens and am very happy with it. The image stabilization works quite well at all focal lengths, including 300mm.

[PostShawn]

I got a 3 used month old Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM for $300. It is an awesome lens. I have never used the others listed but I would think if you can find a used 70-200 F/4L lense for $300-450 it would probably be a better lens. I am extremely happy with mine.

[liza]

You're lucky you found one that cheap. They usually run about 500 bucks.

[celter]

I recommend the Sigma 100-300mm f/4.0. I am really impressed by this lens. Sharp even wide open at 300mm. Build as a tank. Fast autofocus.

[Tee Why]

I'd get the 70-200 f4L.

[inthedeck]

70-200 f4L. Also, consider with it a 1.4x or 2x converter, and you are on your way to some AWESOME quality. I have a 1.4x and 70-200 f4L and they make a great combo. Very versatile, not too heavy, hand holdable, and do well with long exposures. The other lenses might not do so well with long exposures...and might cause more noise to be present, but, YMMV.

[Hockeyphoto]

I would get the 70-200 f2.8 if I were you. The 2.8 is indispensible in low-light conditions.

+1.

If it fits in your budget, get it!!! You won't regret it, this L lens in 2.8 with IS is AWESOME.

[Carn]

Would the Sigma 17-70 f2.8 be a better alternative to the Canon 17-85 USM IS lens on a 30D then ? Considering the pricing is similar would the 2 be comparable IQ wise and in general ?

[Ron Lacey]

Why do we discuss lenses on Cameras forum? ???

I thought this was the Canon EF and EF-S lenses (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=33) forum.:)

Ron