Budget Tele Lens

I'm looking for a budget tele lens for airshow use primarily. My 70-210 gives great results but I think it might be too short for anything except flightline passes.

I could probaby spend £350-400 maximum. I've been looking at:

Canon 100-300 USM
Sigma 170-500
Canon 70-300 IS USM (non-L)

Can anyone share their experiences with any of these lens for taking photos of aircraft at airshows? (specifically, pison engined). Also, any other suggestions, hidden gems etc?

Thanks very much guys.

Air show pictures from a Sigma 150-500mm optical stabilizer lens, the current equivalent to the Sigma 170-500mm.

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Thanks very much for your samples and advice Weight is definitely a consideration, as we usually do a lot of walking at airshows, as opposed to picking a spot and staying put! I'll look at the Tam 70-300 too

danjama wrote in post #13835502
I'm looking for a budget tele lens for airshow use primarily.

Make sure thats EXACTLY what you want... Ive spent (and lost) a bunch of money by "saving" money buying inexpensive lenses. To the effect my top of the line lens I currently shoot with has actually cost me ~$10k rather than the $7k list when factoring in money lost in past lens purchases of a similar focal length. "Saving" money has cost me $3k at the end of the day. Also pro lenses are just nicer in every aspect I've found.

Whatever lens you buy, I'm sure you'll make it work. My only advice is to buy the lens that you'll be satisfied with in the long run - ability to pay aside, naturally.

As for weight. It certainly makes life more difficult, but should never be a deal breaker (weight = quality). I literally took up weight lifting to work up to the ability to shoot a full day handheld with the aforementioned lens, and its still exhausting. I do a fairly rigorous exercise program and it makes hauling a 40lb pack all day at an airshow less tiring that's for sure. Like they say, you get out of it what you put into it. Dont want to practice; quality will suffer. Can't afford to play the rich man's game; quality will suffer. Think physical fitness plays no part in photography; my results have certainly differed. Unfortunately, I've learned the hard way photography is really about mitigating expectations and continuous improvement than what the latest gear is and what gear I should shoot.

danjama wrote in post #13851651
Thanks very much for your samples and advice Weight is definitely a consideration, as we usually do a lot of walking at airshows, as opposed to picking a spot and staying put! I'll look at the Tam 70-300 too

These examples aren't from air shows, but they are of moving subjects, and they give a hint of what the Tamron 70-300mm VC lens can accomplish.

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

The Tamron looks pretty damn good, think ill do some research on that! How is the focus speed?

Thanks for the detailed post too, Matt. That's a very good point about saving money in the long run, unfortunately i'm fairly young and do not have a solid career yet, only a below average job, as well as having other priorities/objectives (holiday, car etc), so i couldn't realistically spend the money on the lens I really want for airshows, the 100-400L. I'm quickly realising photography is more of a rich mans game, but i'll play anyway. It's a lot of fun, and I really love aircraft.

Well, little update. I found a very cheap but new condition 100-300 4.5-5.6 USM on ebay, so snapped it up. They usually sell for £100-130, I bought it for £75 delivered. The USM and good samples on flickr are what attracted me to it. If i find the lens to be superior to my 70-210 f4, I'll sell that, although the 70-210 is good for macro and constant f4, and is very sharp.

If I'm not happy with the 100-300USM, i'll simply sell it on again and look at the Tamron or other. Thought it was worth a go for the silly price. Of course, i realise there will be compromises, such as stopping down for sharpness, but that should not be a problem while shooting airshows, especially if it's bright outside. If the flickr images are anything to go by, I think i'll be very happy.

Sigma 170-500:

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Thanks for that. They're quite impressive.