I have 200 to spend on a lens

gkarris wrote in post #9165414
When do you "bite the bullet" and get something to at least start shooting with?

If good glass is forever, why do people sell?

people often sell lenses when they're upgrading... some of us arent collectors i guess.

i started off cheap too with a sigma 18-200 as an all rounder and it performed well, but i found for shooting cars the two best lenses i have would be my sigma 10-20 wide angle (which cost me about $600 back int he day - needless to say it just might be a little cheaper now) and the 50mm 1.8 which set me back a little over a $100 but well worth every penny.

so when we need to make a start i'd recommend the 50mm for sure. its sharp, cheap and ridiculously light weight. definitely a good place to start especially in the 200 range. i can vouch for most 50mm owners that its definitely a great lens for cars, portraits and pretty much most things.

canon 55/250 period amen

DStanic wrote in post #9156416
Or save up another $200 and get a 70-200 f/4L

Since when does the 70-200 f4 cost $400? I sells for $600 at B&H

EmmaRose wrote in post #9156418
Save up for something decent imo

I agree, unless you want to buy a $70 50mm f1.8. $200 isn't much for a lens. Save a little more and get a 55-250 IS. It's a bit better than the poor 75-300 III USM (that really should be just destroyed and not sold anymore since it'll never be bought new by someone with a FF dSLR and the 55-250 IS is really the replacement for that lens anyways).

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=799538

Buy this for $200, save another $200, sell this again for $200 (just lose paypal and shipping)

DStanic wrote in post #9160048
I don't see what IS has to do with being a beginner or not. Yes it will help save some shots (beginner or pro), but if you really have no idea what you are doing then it doesn't matter either way.

The 70-200 f/4L non-IS is great for outdoors, I often will set my camera to ISO400 just to be safe with fast shutter speeds. Indoors you will need to use a flash or it's pretty limited.

You might also want to consider the EF-S 55-250 IS lens. It's suppose to be pretty good and cheaper then the 70-200s.

I have the 70-200 f.4. I was an uber noob when I bought it (I'm a bit of an equipment freak) and I was told that the lack of IS would bother me. Well in all honesty it doesn't. I find it's not a great lens for action shots that's for sure. But for portaits, or shoots where I'm not having to move around really fast it's beautiful. Takes gorgeous photos! I do wish I could have afforded the 2.8 with IS though. And yes, if you use a tripod with that lens it gives you crystal clear photos.

HappySnapper90 wrote in post #9254526
Since when does the 70-200 f4 cost $400? I sells for $600 at B&H

I spent a grand on mine!