Need help with Telephoto Lens choice

[Jwreich]

Wow ther e is lots of information here on this forum. I've been able to search and find some great posts, but some were a little dated. I'm new to photography and would like to get the advice of those who are a little more advanced.

I'm looking for a lens to help with portraits, candids, city scapes and arcticture shots. I don't have much interest in wildlife shots. Right now I have a Tamron 28-75/2.8 and it's a little short.

I have a budget around $600, I want something at least 200mm and I use a Rebel XT.

Now I've looked at the Canon 70-200f4L as well as the Sigma and Tamron offerings. I can't afford the fast (2.8) telephoto's at this time. I read lots of great information about the Canon, no question it is solid, but before dropping that much coin I wanted to see what others here think.

So I've listed my plans for the lens and my budget, what are your thoughts and opinions on good telephoto's?

Thank you for your time and suggestions.

Regards,

[LightRules]

"Now I've looked at the Canon 70-200f4L as well as the Sigma and Tamron offerings. I can't afford the fast (2.:cool: telephoto's at this time."

You can get the 70-200 f4 for under $600. The Sigma is worth taking a look at too, though it'll get you at around $700. The f4L is no slouch; you should consider it, and add a 1.4xTC when necessary in good light.

[tim]

With that budget i'd look at the 70-200 F4, perhaps the Sigma 70-300, or the Canon 100-300.

[Bob_A]

I just ordered the 70-200 f4L with a 1.4 extender after also doing a lot of soul searching. If you are open to buying a Sigma, their 70-200 f2.8 is pretty reasonably priced, so you may want to investigate that option also.

[condyk]

Based on experience of both I would personally opt for the better light performance of the f2.8 Sigma. The f4 is nice too and not heavy to carry around. The Sigma is bigger and heavier, but comes with hood, tripod mount and case! If you're mainly outdoors in decent light I would go for the Canon L. If I thought I may encounter less than decent light conditions on a regular basis then the Sigma is a better investment. Adding cost of Canon hood and tripod mount then prices similar!

[robertwgross]

For a general purpose telephoto lens, I think it is important to have a fair range of zoom. So, a zoom range of 70-200 or 100-300 makes a great deal of sense.

Later on, if you have specific requirements, like for general wildlife, or for birds, then other zoom ranges and other primes come into the picture.

---Bob Gross---

[Jwreich]

According to BH, the Sigma is about $800, more then I can pay at this time. I'm leaning more and more to the Canon F4. From looking around I could sell it to upgrade with little loss in value. That means a lot to me. Sounds like others have struggled with this before :lol:

--

[gasrocks]

If you get the Canon 70-200/4 L, you will have no problem selling it later. I consider it a "Best Buy." Did you notice the thread about best lens for the $? It is mentioned a lot. I consider it to be small (easy to use,) fast and sharp. Then you will have something to go by if you yearn for the 2.8 or 2.8 IS later.

[Acousticmood]

I've noticed that no one mentioned the Canon EF 75-300 IS usm. Its right in your price range and at 300m takes pretty good shots with the IS on.

George

[Jwreich]

I've seen that lens on the Canon website, however I didn't really consider it because I don't hear many speak of it. Do you have experience with this lens George?

Thanks for the suggestion, I'll look into it more.

[formula4speed]

You can get the Sigma 70-200 2.8 for $680 http://sigma4less.com/sess/utn;jsessionid=1542af414597a2f/shopdata/0020_Lenses/0040_Zoom/0050_Tele+Zoom/product_details.shopscript?article=0010_Sigma%2B70-200mm%2Bf%3D26slash%3D3B2%3D252E8%2BEX%2BAPO%2BIF% 2BHSM%2Bfor%2BCanon%2BAF%2B%3D28SG70200F28CA%3D29

Also you could consider the 200mm 2.8L prime. If you plan on using the long end of the lens this is a very sharp lens.

[blue_max]

If you like zooms, the quality of the 70-200 is very high. If you like bokeh, the 135mmL f2 is fabulous. As mentioned, the 200 is also very high quality.

Truth is, you won't go far wrong with any of them - or the third party ones mentioned, if you buy second hand. Even new, you won't be too much out of pocket. There will always be a bigger market for the Canon lenses as you need more product knowledge to buy the Tamrons and Sigmas.

Enjoy your choice!

Graham

[tim]

I've noticed that no one mentioned the Canon EF 75-300 IS usm. Its right in your price range and at 300m takes pretty good shots with the IS on.

George

Have a read of the reviews on this lens on fredmiranda.com or photographyreview.com, then you'll know why.

[Bob_A]

You can get the Sigma 70-200 2.8 for $680 http://sigma4less.com/sess/utn;jsessionid=1542af414597a2f/shopdata/0020_Lenses/0040_Zoom/0050_Tele+Zoom/product_details.shopscript?article=0010_Sigma%2B70-200mm%2Bf%3D26slash%3D3B2%3D252E8%2BEX%2BAPO%2BIF% 2BHSM%2Bfor%2BCanon%2BAF%2B%3D28SG70200F28CA%3D29

Also you could consider the 200mm 2.8L prime. If you plan on using the long end of the lens this is a very sharp lens.

www.reselleratings.com (http://www.reselleratings.com) has only 22 reviews of sigma4less, but the reviewers gave them an amazing 9.55 rating.

[Asmodeus]

Since Sigma has released the new DG version of the 70-200 f2.8, a couple vendors, including Broadway Photo and A&M Photo World have the old version, brand new, for $599

http://www.digitalsaver.com/stores.asp?productid=566101

[MrChad]

I own the Canon 75-300mm IS USM lens, I purchased it at the recommendation of a good photographer friend, he used it for weddings. I've used it for numerous things, the reach and IS combined make for an excellent lens IMO. I've yet to find a tele I'd rather own for $400.oo.

I use mine at the race track often with good results, the AF is a bit slower then I'd sometimes like but I can prefocus 99% to solve the issue. It's also very light and easy to pack. I fly a bit with my gear so I like the size. If I didn't own this lens I likely have the 100-300mm Canon becuase I find the 70-200mm f4L too short to carry around in my bag. I likely wouldn't mind the 70-200 f2.8 with the 1.4x extender but that's alot of heavy gear and nearly triple the $$, and quite heavy.

Again this lens gets a bad rap at the 200mm+ end but in it's defence the 70-200 f4L doesn't have a 300mm end. And I need all the IS help I can get at the 300mm too, especially on the 1.6x crop factor Drebel were 300mm is cropped to 480mm.

[Croasdail]

if you do lean to the sigma - I can personal tell you that Sigma4less gave me awsome service.... shipped same day as order - arrived from UPS 3 days later.. and no upsale attempt. I use them for everything sigma and B&H for everything else.

[sjprg]

Take a close look at the Sigma 18-200. The price is right.
Also the Canon 75-300 non IS is a lot better than most people give it credit for.
$600.00 should buy both of them.

http://www.pbase.com/sjprg/image/42416223

http://www.pbase.com/sjprg/image/21594328

[I Simonius]

Wow ther e is lots of information here on this forum. I've been able to search and find some great posts, but some were a little dated. I'm new to photography and would like to get the advice of those who are a little more advanced.

I'm looking for a lens to help with portraits, candids, city scapes and arcticture shots. I don't have much interest in wildlife shots. Right now I have a Tamron 28-75/2.8 and it's a little short.

I have a budget around $600, I want something at least 200mm and I use a Rebel XT.

Now I've looked at the Canon 70-200f4L as well as the Sigma and Tamron offerings. I can't afford the fast (2.8) telephoto's at this time. I read lots of great information about the Canon, no question it is solid, but before dropping that much coin I wanted to see what others here think.

So I've listed my plans for the lens and my budget, what are your thoughts and opinions on good telephoto's?

Thank you for your time and suggestions.

Regards,

I'm VERY happy with the 70-200f4L

[Andy_T]

Since Sigma has released the new DG version of the 70-200 f2.8, a couple vendors, including Broadway Photo and A&M Photo World have the old version, brand new, for $599


You might want to know that these two resellers are THE SCUM OF THE UNIVERSE, as far as camera shops are concerned :shock:
This definitely is ONE OF THEIR NEW SCAMS!!!

Do a search on the forum here or check them at www.resellerratings.com:
Broadwayphoto (http://www.resellerratings.com/seller1995.html)
A+M photo world (http://www.resellerratings.com/seller1988.html)
... and DO NOT TOUCH THEM WITH A FLAGPOLE!!!

Best regards,
Andy