eric_wirz Posted September 12, 2003 Share Posted September 12, 2003 Is there a decent telephoto lens on the market (300mm range) that dosen't cost an arm and a leg yet does't sacrifice optical quality. The ultimate question, I know. Any help is appreciated. EW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmublueduck aim Posted September 12, 2003 Share Posted September 12, 2003 what's an arm & a leg? the EF 300/4 is excellent, a zoom to consider is the EF 100-400 IS, & Sigma makes a great 120-300mm. give us your price range ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric_wirz Posted September 12, 2003 Author Share Posted September 12, 2003 You're right, I should have been more specific. $300-400 range is what I had in mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitmstr Posted September 12, 2003 Share Posted September 12, 2003 I guess the key words here are "decent" and "sacrifice". Canon makes a 135 f/2.8 which is within your budget. If, on the other hand, you are willing to spend a little more you can get the 70-200L f/4 or the 200L f/2.8 which are great lenses that you will enjoy for a long time. IF you look at the used market they are both within (or very near) your budget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edomazlicky Posted September 12, 2003 Share Posted September 12, 2003 I would go to KEH.com and check out their third-party prime lenses. They usually have Sigmas or Tokinas in the 300mm range for not too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark u Posted September 12, 2003 Share Posted September 12, 2003 Be sure to check that a Sigma prime and some of the older zooms work with your body - it may need re-chipping. On the other hand, the Sigma 100-300 f/4 EX HSM is an excellent lens which you might be able to find second hand at the top of your price range and has no known chipping issues. Tokina made a similar lens which is now out of production, but also highly rated optically. The Canon 300 f/4 L and 70-200 f/4 L + 1.4x TC or 200 f/2.8 + TC are also excellent but out of your current price range, even second hand. If you can stretch to another $100-150, your options start to open up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david arnold eugene, oreg Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 If you're looking for "a decent telephoto lens...(300mm range) that doesn't cost an arm and a leg yet doest sacrifice optical quality" you might be tempted by Canon's 75-300 f/4.0-5.6 IS. Don't be. That consumer lens looks good on paper ($389.95 from B&H (plus $24.95 for the hood) for at 300 mm f/5.6 lens you can hand-hold it at 1/60 of a second, even slower if you brace yourself), but optical quality, while not as bad as a Coke bottle, isn't a heck of a lot better, especially beyond 200 mm. I owned one for a year and a half, found its lack of FTM and extremely slow AF annoying, and never got any images with it that I was really happy with, especially beyond 200 mm. I finally sold it last week and replaced it with Canon's 70-200 f/4.0 L, and my only regret is that I didn't do it sooner. True, I no longer have anything beyond 200 mm, but for all practical purposes I didn't before, either. My test slides show the 70-200 to be sharper wide open than than the 75-300 was stopped down, and the lens is much contrastier. Build quality, as you'd expect from an L, is excellent, and weight is, depending on which of Canon's stats you look at, either the same or one once heavier. Price (w/ included hood) is about $125 more than for the 75-300 ($540 for the currently out of stock import version, $580 for the US). That's about 1/3 of the arm and a leg you'd have to pay for the 17-200 f/2.8 IS, not to mention the arm, shoulder, and back you'd pay for schlepping that more than twice as heavy behemoth around (great lens though it be). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stacy_f Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 Eric, Consider the Canon 100-300/5.6L. This lens is superb optics wise. The zoom is a bit outdated, slow focus and push-pull design. I love using primes and do not care for zooms, but I also was looking for some good glass around 300mm. I ended up buying one of these used (they are discontinued). You can find one for $250-$350. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gareth_harper Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 Look out for secondhand L lenses or the better stuff from Sigma and Tokina. Make sure you test the lens on your own camera before parting with cash. Buy from a good dealer for peace of mind. Make sure the optics are absolutely perfect and I would advise against buying anything that looks like it has been in a thousand press scrums. Go for the minters and bargin hard. I got a mint secondhand 70-200 f4L and the results are superb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted September 14, 2003 Share Posted September 14, 2003 I second the 100-300/5.6 L suggestion. Happy shooting , Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric_wirz Posted September 15, 2003 Author Share Posted September 15, 2003 Thanks to all for your advice. From the sounds of it, I'll have to be willing to part with at least one arm to get what I'm looking for. Thanks again! EW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david arnold eugene, oreg Posted September 15, 2003 Share Posted September 15, 2003 Well, at least you'll still have one arm, and you'll be armed with a high quality lens. (And if anyone suggests I'm pulling your leg...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now