Another Lens question NEWBIE HELP...

[93octane]

I just got my D-Rebel with Lens Kit. I want a better zoom lens. Don't need anything fancy just a good lens that able to zoom pretty good. Don't want a huge one that I need to carry a tripod. Somthing in the 300-400mm range and where the 18-55mm leavs off and not too expensive. What do you recommend???

[Johnnynf]

What is your budget? Canon lenses can go anywhere from $75 to several thousand dollars. Also, what do you want to use it for?

[Ferdinand]

If you want cheap, which leaves out L lenses and you want Canon, then Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM at around USD$200 is about what you can hope for.

Next one up at around USD$250 would be the Canon EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM its optically better than the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM.

Cannot really get anything cheap (under USD$300) that reaches out to 400mm.

[Jim_T]

I'd recommend the 100-400L, but it's more than you paid for your camera.. :)

Ferdinand beat me to telling you about the 75-300 and 100-300 f/4.5-5.6..

I have the 100-300.. It is very good, but it's prone to purple fringing in extra bright highlights and reflections. I use it mosty as a macro lens in combination with the Canon 500D close up adapter...

[93octane]

I just want to have a good zoom lense. Being a Canon A70 owner with 3x zoom I always found my self need more zoom for outdoor pictures. Buildings,people,animals,cars..etc... I guess my budget would be $250-$300 max. Like I said I'm not a professional so don't need L glass which would be nice but don't need it. Just a lense thats good or Best Bang for you buck.Thanks guys

[cc10d]

It would break the budget just a bit, but the 28-135 IS lense is pretty good and add the versitility of IS and a bit more reach than the 18-55, One of Canon's better non-L lenses.

[Johnnynf]

I would also recommend the 28-135 USM IS lens. I have it, and I love it. It really is one of Canon's best buys out there. However, it sounds like the original author wants a little more. IF you can stretch your budget a little, and still want the 300mm, I would try to save up a bit and get the 75-300mm IS (~$400). I have the el cheapo 75-300 4.0-5.6 III and with that lens, at 300mm camera shake becomes a problem without a tripod. Don't even think about shooting at 300mm with a shutter speed less than 1/200 or so...the shake is just too much and the pictures just aren't sharp at all. The IS helps this a great deal. If you are going to be doing your shooting primarily hand held, I would highly recommend the IS model. It will allow you a lot slower shutter speed in lower light situations.

[93octane]

Yeah the Canon 75-300mm IS is something I would consider...just the IS for nice stable low light pictures would make the money well spent. I want a lens with good zoom..able to take good pictures in low light and not shake at 300mm so I guess the 75-300mm IS would fit the bill just right...might have to save a little more...but very worth lens it seems..

[intolight]

The EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM at 55 takes off where the 18/55 leaves off. Is reasonalbly priced at around $200 at B&H

If you feel you need a little more the EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM is the next step up for around $170

I was in the same place having bought the 300D kit and am happy with the EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM.

If you plan to shoot in low light go for the IS model.

Don't let the glass snobs talk you into super expensive lenses.

[93octane]

Thanks intolight I will be considering an 28-135mm IS lens because I do want to be able to take low light indoor pictures which is one of my big conserns...but I will be getting a 50mm f/1.8 too.