$200.00 for a lense - What should I get?

First - I know that $200.00 is not a lot for a lens and I should buy xxx lens for $500.00. Thing is I am an amateur this is my hobby and I can't spend that kind of money for a lens so please try to stay in my price range.

I am looking for a lens that I can take pictures of my dog and other dogs at the dog park (outside)

I have a canon 28-105 3.5-4.5 I love this lens it seems fast to me just not fast enough.

What are my options for a lens at around $200.00 used is fine.

I own a nifty fifty, a quantaray 70-300(thanks ritz guy it sure is better then the canon:rolleyes and the canon 28-105 3.5-4.5

any help would be greatly appreciated

thanks
fuel

oh and I would like to try and get this lens asap so come on and give me some advice.

you already have the two lenses I'd suggest for the price. The thing is, fast glass is pricey. Even the non-canon fast lenses are pricey. It's hard to give you good advice. While there are a lot of lenses out there, there are very very few decent ones for the price that you have to spend. I can appreciate that you don't want to spend more though, I just don't think you'll find better than what you've already got for that price.

Permagrin wrote in post #2975139
you already have the two lenses I'd suggest for the price. The thing is, fast glass is pricey. Even the non-canon fast lenses are pricey. It's hard to give you good advice. While there are a lot of lenses out there, there are very very few decent ones for the price that you have to spend. I can appreciate that you don't want to spend more though, I just don't think you'll find better than what you've already got for that price.

I understand that I was wondering about the sigma 75-300mm is that a good lense to get?

No. The Sigma 70-300 is worlds better.

...but..I thought you wanted fast glass?

For $200 there are very few choices. If you had $300, you could consider the 85 1.8. Can you save up a little more?

50 1.8

and Sigma 55-200

That's what I plan to get anyway, for my $200! Covers a lot of ground for the beginner I think.

85 f/1.8 used, about $300

50 f/1.4, around the same

SuzyView wrote in post #2975178
For $200 there are very few choices. If you had $300, you could consider the 85 1.8. Can you save up a little more?

for $200 he won't do better than the 28-105. like you say $300 and then you have some choices...like the tamron 28-75 or 50 1.4 (or the 85 1.8).

ed rader

Save.......You will have better selection and less regrets. i would try to find a used Tamron 28-75 in that range.

I agree with the others. You should save your money and buy better glass. There are more choices in the $300 to $400 range.

Use your 50mm. The best your going to get under $200.
What is your opinion on your 50mm?

gorby wrote in post #2975218
50 1.8

and Sigma 55-200

That's what I plan to get anyway, for my $200! Covers a lot of ground for the beginner I think.

If you are an avid photographer, and serious about becoming better, one day you'll realize you are no longer a beginner. And then you will wish that you had some "non-beginner" lenses.

There really is not a market for used "beginner" lenses. Then you will have to save $300-$400 just to buy something to satisfy your level of experience, where you could just save another $100-$200 now, and get a decent lens. If you decide to sell those, you will probably break even. It's like renting a lens for free.

If you are not satisfied with the performance of your current lens, you either need to get some better glass, or you need more practice using what you have. As you can see from the other posts, no one is recommending cheap (quality & price) lenses.

Try borrowing or renting some higher quality glass, and you will notice the difference. Good luck.

does this mean there are no lenses for $200.00 it's not a question of saving this is a hobby I could spend more if I where going to pursue this as a means to make money. But I only want to spend $200.00 I can't believe that there are no faster lenses for what I want to do