300mm Lens

Hi, new to the forum and pretty much an amateur when it comes to digital photography.

I'm looking for a 300mm lens, haven't got a large budget. My camera is an EOS 400D.

Off to the Lakes shortly and fancy trying so wildlife photography.

Also anyone recommend a decent lens for landscapes?

Cheers
Karl

What IS your budget? Not sure what a "not large" budget is. Want a prime or zoom? What kinbd of image quality are you looking for? Want Image Stabilization? Your best bet is probably the 55-250mm IS for about $199.

Budget would be between £150 and £250. I want to get as close as I can if you know what I mean so zoom lens would be preferable. Image Stabilization would be an added benefit.

If you are going to the lake district, you're more likely to find tourists than wildlife at this time of the year. Remember on a crop body thats a 480mm field of view on a full frame. Hence without IS, your min shutter speed for handholding is 1/500 sec which means high ISO and on some occasions insufficient light if you get a deluge. The 55-250 IS has had reasonable reviews and would fall within your budget. The only possibly downside is the slightly shorter focal length and the f5.6 aperture at the long end but the beauty is the lower handholding speeds and the flexibility that a zoom offers. Disclaimer any advice is my own opinion and ultimately the buying decision must be yours.

Yeah, the 55-250 IS is going to be your best option.

hsmoscout wrote in post #10448518
Yeah, the 55-250 IS is going to be your best option.

Thanks, I've looked at others but going out of my price range really.

The difference from 250mm to 300mm won't be that great and you probably wouldn't even notice a difference. I would suggest the 55-250mm as well. The IS in that lens is solid and it's a good little lens for the price.

corkneyfonz wrote in post #10448483
If you are going to the lake district, you're more likely to find tourists than wildlife at this time of the year. Remember on a crop body thats a 480mm field of view on a full frame. Hence without IS, your min shutter speed for handholding is 1/500 sec which means high ISO and on some occasions insufficient light if you get a deluge. The 55-250 IS has had reasonable reviews and would fall within your budget. The only possibly downside is the slightly shorter focal length and the f5.6 aperture at the long end but the beauty is the lower handholding speeds and the flexibility that a zoom offers. Disclaimer any advice is my own opinion and ultimately the buying decision must be yours.

Thanks I might go for the one suggested (55-250IS). It will be a start.

I will get a tripod as well for sitting at side of lake or river, see what pops up

brandon9585 wrote in post #10448541
The difference from 250mm to 300mm won't be that great and you probably wouldn't even notice a difference. I would suggest the 55-250mm as well. The IS in that lens is solid and it's a good little lens for the price.

the 300mm with IS is over £400 but I can get the a 300mm (without IS) for around £160.

Anyone got any opinions about this one
http://www.amazon.co.u​k …=467128473&pf_r​d_i=468294

Hi , just thought you might like to look at a Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro, i got some good pic's in the lakes of red squirrels , the apo version is a great lens not sure on the new version ( os added with price hike to match ! ) have a look at a pic http://www.flickr.com …/29409940@N04/2​833448801/

Karl White wrote in post #10448566
Anyone got any opinions about this one
http://www.amazon.co.u​k …=467128473&pf_r​d_i=468294

Canon's worst lens, sometimes called the worst lens in existence. IMO you get what you pay for with the 75-300mm. You get a great deal with the 55-250 IS. Great starter telephoto, best bang for your buck.

Thanks for all the replies, been a great help.

Some great photos Corpy.

cheers ! good luck with lens hunting & enjoy the lakes !