DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> What Canon Lenses to buy now?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 31, (reverse)
AuthorThread
09/17/2010 05:07:13 PM · #1
OK, you guys gave me great advise on rental lenses for the Yellowstone Photography trip, now I am trying to decide on whether or not I should buy some lenses instead. We have a limited budget at this point. Here's what lenses we are looking at to share between 2 Canon 40D's:

We have a Canon EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM (that's it, 2nd camera was body only). :-)

For sure we want to rent a Canon 500 F4L and a Canon 1.4x teleconverter. For 11 days it's $462 (with Damage Waiver) (unless there is a 500 & a teleconverter we could buy for the same amount, but I doubt it).

After that we have about $438 left for lenses. So, our options are to rent the wide angle, macro, and a normal lens (for the 2nd camera) or to buy a lens so we have something for the 2nd camera after the trip.

I found a refurbished Canon 75-300mm 4-5.6 III USM AF for $140.
I also found a Tamron Zoom 18-200mm 3.5-6.3 XR Di II LD Aspherical IF Macro for $289.95 (it also has a $100 rebate, but we won't get it till after the trip).

I haven't had any experiences with any other lenses for Canon than what I own. I would love your opinions. What would you do? Rent L glass with the extra $438 or buy some lenses. If you would buy, what would you buy for $438 or for $1,000 if we don't rent the 500mm (but we would really need a super telephoto for the trip)?

Thanks so much!
Julie (writeheart)
09/17/2010 05:33:42 PM · #2
Wow... That 500 is a beast... You will need to practice with that... and I am not sure what your taking pics of if you want to rent a 500. It's too hard without some idea....

You could do a Tamron 28-75f2.8 ($350) and a Canon 50f1.8 ($100) for that price and get a good setup for normal range and have a lens for each body... no wide and nothing close to that 500.

You could rent a 10-22 if you wanted wide (great little lens).
09/17/2010 05:34:23 PM · #3
I haven't been to yellowstone, but it seems a real shame to spend $462 for 11 days.

I'd buy the 75-300 and purchase a 10-22mm and maybe rent a tele-extender.

I lived with the 75-300 for a number of years and the 70-300 for a couple years after that. And the 10-22 is a majorly cool lens.

Message edited by author 2010-09-17 17:35:38.
09/17/2010 06:15:12 PM · #4
I imaging that they say we need a super telephoto and extender for wildlife shots (they suggested 500 instead of 600 because it's lighter).

They also suggested a wide angle, a normal lens and a macro. We are in Yellowstone for 7 days of instruction and hands on shooting and will probably do a variety of wildlife, landscape, flower macros and maybe even some portraits. We don't have the whole agenda yet, but this is what I imagine so far.
09/17/2010 06:22:48 PM · #5
i don't know but it seems like a waste to spend that kinda money on renting a lens when you could buy something like the 10-22 or the 100mm macro...
09/17/2010 07:29:12 PM · #6
The 500 would obviously be for shooting wildlife?? Will you be hiding in a blind and waiting for wildlife or are you just hoping to run across animals as you hike around? If you're just hiking around then there is the potential you won't see any animals of significance. This would be such a shame.

I would not even bother with the 500 and use the money on wide-angle lenses. At least you would then be guaranteed some awesome landscapes!

I would also recommend renting L glass only!! I can't stand to shoot with non-L lenses...not meant to sound like a snob or anything but the sharpness is spectacular and the clarity can't be beat. I would also recommend prime lenses because they are just the much more sharper.

Anyway, my two cents...
09/17/2010 10:03:31 PM · #7
my $.02 would be to buy a 70-200 f/4 for ~500, rent an extender (remember that your 40D is a 1.6x crop body so 200*1.6*1.4= 448). i dont shoot wildlife so maybe im wrong and that isnt long enough but 462 just for renting seems not worth the investment for one trip. the 70-200 could be used for portraits and for tele landscapes. id use the rest of the money to get a wide angle. you could rent a 10-22 or a 17-40 (a much more reasonable rental price than the 500mm). or you could spend an extra 200 bucks over your proposed budget and become the proud owner of a used 10-22 (FANTASTIC lens). on the other hand you could sacrifice the wide angle and go with buying the tamron 28-75 which ive heard is a pretty nice lens :). as jwilerton said, if this trip isnt specifically catered toward wildlife photography you probably wont be spending your days in a blind and hiking around will provide many probably more amazing photo opportunities than the occasional bird or mammal. i feel like a trip to yellowstone that chooses to not focus on the landscape for at least a reasonable period of time is a missed opportunity in itself

-Max
09/17/2010 10:18:53 PM · #8
The Canon 75-300 is not a very good lens. It's that cheap for a reason. The Tamron might be OK, but suffers from slow focusing and distortion. If you're looking at that range, I'd suggest the Sigma 18-200 OS or Tamron 18-270 instead, either of which would also give you the benefit of stabilization.
09/17/2010 10:50:12 PM · #9
This is great input...I am researching as fast as my little fingers can type. I knew that tapping into all of your experience would prove good. Keep it coming!

Has anyone used a Tokina lens before? I came across that as I was researching another lens suggested here.
09/17/2010 11:02:20 PM · #10
Considering the amount of wildlife in the park, you probably would not need the 500mm lens (which weighs a ton by the way.

I managed to shoot this ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/15000-19999/18367/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_126845.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/15000-19999/18367/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_126845.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' with a Canon G3 a few years back. Considering all the truly stunning locations in the area, you might want to either stock up on CF cards or bring a laptop and portable HD to store all the photos you take

Ray

Message edited by author 2010-09-17 23:06:18.
09/17/2010 11:26:02 PM · #11
Originally posted by michaelmonn:

my $.02 would be to buy a 70-200 f/4 for ~500, rent an extender (remember that your 40D is a 1.6x crop body so 200*1.6*1.4= 448). i dont shoot wildlife so maybe im wrong and that isnt long enough but 462 just for renting seems not worth the investment for one trip. the 70-200 could be used for portraits and for tele landscapes. id use the rest of the money to get a wide angle. you could rent a 10-22 or a 17-40 (a much more reasonable rental price than the 500mm). or you could spend an extra 200 bucks over your proposed budget and become the proud owner of a used 10-22 (FANTASTIC lens). on the other hand you could sacrifice the wide angle and go with buying the tamron 28-75 which ive heard is a pretty nice lens :). as jwilerton said, if this trip isnt specifically catered toward wildlife photography you probably wont be spending your days in a blind and hiking around will provide many probably more amazing photo opportunities than the occasional bird or mammal. i feel like a trip to yellowstone that chooses to not focus on the landscape for at least a reasonable period of time is a missed opportunity in itself

-Max


This is great advice.
09/17/2010 11:41:27 PM · #12
Originally posted by michaelmonn:

my $.02 would be to buy a 70-200 f/4 for ~500, rent an extender (remember that your 40D is a 1.6x crop body so 200*1.6*1.4= 448). i dont shoot wildlife so maybe im wrong and that isnt long enough...

It was never enough reach for me when at the zoo or out shooting birds, and those animals are probably a heck of a lot closer than Yellowstone wildlife. I was usually either at max zoom and hoping for more or a critter would suddenly appear up close when using the 1.4X extender and I couldn't zoom OUT enough. Bear in mind also that some of the lenses you mentioned that hit f/6.3 on the long end and will prevent autofocus from working on your camera at that setting. IMO, the cheapest reasonable option for a lot of telephoto power is the 100-400mm. The 400mm prime is similar in price, but you lose the flexibility of zoom without a significant gain in quality.
09/17/2010 11:43:31 PM · #13
Canon EF-S 15-85 IS..

Probably the only lens you'll need for the entire trip.. (Yellowstone wildlife is essentially an open air zoo, well, actually, you can't get that close in a zoo)..

If you think you need something long, rent the EF 100-400mm L IS .. Together the two cover a vast range, and with superb quality..
09/18/2010 01:57:26 PM · #14
Thank you all again for your help. Still haven't completely made up my mind, but looks like here are the possibilities (no renting involved :-). Any thoughts? Substitutions? I would have really liked to get a Canon 10-22, and a Canon 70-200 f4L, but that limits the other lenses I could get and doesn't give me the 400mm length. So, I think I will save up for those for later (then I can get the 2.8 for the L glass).

Option A
Canon 50 f1.8 ($100)
Tokina 80-400 f4.5-5.6 ($500)
Tokina 35 f2.8 Macro ($300)
Kenko 1.5 extender-used($150) Total for Option A $1050

Option B
Canon 50 f1.8 ($100)
Tokina 80-400 f4.5-5.6 ($500)
Tamron 10-24 f3.5-4.5 ($400) after rebate Total for Option B $1000
09/18/2010 02:07:49 PM · #15
Originally posted by WriteHeart:

Thank you all again for your help. Still haven't completely made up my mind, but looks like here are the possibilities (no renting involved :-). Any thoughts? Substitutions? I would have really liked to get a Canon 10-22, and a Canon 70-200 f4L, but that limits the other lenses I could get and doesn't give me the 400mm length. So, I think I will save up for those for later (then I can get the 2.8 for the L glass).

Option A
Canon 50 f1.8 ($100)
Tokina 80-400 f4.5-5.6 ($500)
Tokina 35 f2.8 Macro ($300)
Kenko 1.5 extender-used($150) Total for Option A $1050

Option B
Canon 50 f1.8 ($100)
Tokina 80-400 f4.5-5.6 ($500)
Tamron 10-24 f3.5-4.5 ($400) after rebate Total for Option B $1000


I have only one question:

If you were preparing dinner for you and another person, and had the option to split a very nice steak, or to have three McDonald's hamburgers each, what would you do?

--

What I'm getting at is that every lens you've listed will probably deliver OK results, nothing spectacular, nothing terrible. When I first started getting lenses, I bought a Canon 80-200mm, the 28-135 IS, and even an Opteka 500mm lens.. In the end, each lens delivered a workable package, but I was always displeased with the quality from all of those lenses.

Today, if I had the choice to shoot with my 15-85 or the 80-200, you can bet the 15-85 would go on the camera and I'll just crop the image - and still get better results than I would with the cheaper lens. Essentially, I would seriously consider getting one really good lens, and not worry about the rest.. A set of somewhat limited pictures, of really good quality, are far better than a complete set of images that, while taken at the perfect zoom, are full of chromatic aberration and lack fine details.

Just my $.02, but I've learned not to buy cheap glass for important shots.
09/18/2010 07:29:33 PM · #16
Every third party lens i have ever owned has been a disappointment (other than my Lensbabies)... But when I have spent good money on the top rated Canon lenses (some L, some not) I have never been disappointed.

I REALLY recommend not wasting money on third party lenses and buying the Canon 10-22 and a Canon 70-200 f4L instead of the options you listed. IMHO, the listed lenses won't be nearly as good as the two I listed above. I know. I know. The reach... Sigh...

Tough choices.

PS
And for the macro, get the Canon 100mm.

09/18/2010 08:25:08 PM · #17
I will throw out an idea that you may or may not be able to do.

Buy a used 500 4.0L for about $5,250+/- (ebay, fredmiranda and POTN are good sites to look on). Enjoy the use of it for the trip. Sell it when you get back. Not likely your sale price would be much different than what you pay. Instead of $500 to rent it costs you little or nothing.

Regarding the 70-200L +1.4x and crop sensor suggestion... That was my combo there 2 years ago. It wasn't long enough to shoot wildlife other than bison.
09/18/2010 10:02:27 PM · #18
Don't rent....
Get the 80- 4000mm 3.5 -4.5 L f0r $1200. And if you want that wide angle... go for the Sigma 10-20mm Amazing and cheap lens.
09/18/2010 10:33:15 PM · #19
Well if you are interested Canon (NZ) are donating cameras,lens, etc for a charity auction on trademe all proceeds to the Canterbury Earthquake fund sothere could be a few or more bargains there be quick tho.Check it out its going at the moment Trademe. its like Ebaybut better !!

Message edited by author 2010-09-18 22:36:56.
09/18/2010 11:07:01 PM · #20
i agree 110% with CoryBoehne. he could not have put it better

09/19/2010 10:58:26 AM · #21
Originally posted by michelaudette:

Don't rent....
Get the 80- 4000mm 3.5 -4.5 L f0r $1200. And if you want that wide angle... go for the Sigma 10-20mm Amazing and cheap lens.


The canon equivalent is the 100-400mm L IS, which is a great, versatile lens - If you can afford it, and you must have a long lens, then I would fully recommend it.

As for the sigma 10-20? Bah, if you're gonna buy a wide angle, get the new 8-16mm Sigma, it's rectilinear and STUPID wide. (only works on EF-S compatible bodies)
09/19/2010 11:05:08 AM · #22
Cory did put it best.

But if I can chime in I find it unbelievable that you could mention "limited budget" and "$462 for 11 days [rental]" in the same post. Surely an economics class was slept through.
09/19/2010 03:07:59 PM · #23
Originally posted by bohemka:

Cory did put it best.

But if I can chime in I find it unbelievable that you could mention "limited budget" and "$462 for 11 days [rental]" in the same post. Surely an economics class was slept through.


Thank you all again for your input.

:-) as far as the limited budget, I just mean that I can't go out and buy the $2,000 to $4,000 lenses that I have been told to get :-)

I will look again at the steak options instead of the hamburger options. ( I love that analogy, thank you!!!)

Julie
09/20/2010 07:53:03 AM · #24
I think we have it now. We were able to borrow some lenses and are renting some, but only renting ones that are within our reach to buy soon (so no $500 lens rentals, only $50 rentals :-)
So, we are spending very little of our lens budget and are saving the rest until we decide which lens to buy (I was looking at the Canon 70-200 f4L or just the Canon 200 2.8L as the first lens). By borrowing and renting I can try them out and see what we want. Also, we were able to get a 500mm length. So here's the line-up:

Canon 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro
Canon 200mm f/2.8L
Canon 50mm f/1.4
Canon 70-200mm f/4L
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5
Kenko 1.5x Teleconverter for Canon
Canon 2x Teleconverter
Tamron 200-500mm f/5-6.3 SP Di LD for Canon
Tokina 12-24mm f/4 Pro for Canon
09/20/2010 08:16:01 AM · #25
Originally posted by michelaudette:

Don't rent....
Get the 80- 4000mm 3.5 -4.5 L f0r $1200. And if you want that wide angle... go for the Sigma 10-20mm Amazing and cheap lens.


80-4000mm f3.5-4.5 L? That thing must be about a 890mm filter for UV or Circ Pol? Probably a cost to factor in... ;op

At least it is white though.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/04/2020 09:15:34 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 04/04/2020 09:15:34 AM EDT.