Jump to content

Best telephoto Zoom lens for $200


rfdphoto

Recommended Posts

I'm trying to pick up an additional lens to build up my focal range. (so far all

i have is a 17-85mm and a 50mm). I'm going on a trip for about 13 days and was

thinking about renting some L glass, but for about the same price as the rental

I could just buy a new lens and not have to give it back - though sadly no L

glass. I'm going to Europe (Mostly France & Italy)

I'm not really worried about weight as I won't be backpacking or anything (I'm

visiting my family).

I'm not too sure what the subject will be, but as I'm keeping the lens after the

trip it will more than likely be a combination of landscape, portrait, sports,

and if I get the macro feature - then macro.

 

I'm looking at the Canon 75-300mm iii USM, the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG

Macro, and the Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD 1:2 Auto Focus Macro. I know that

none of these are amazing lenses but this is what is in the budget at the

present time.

 

I've used the 1st generation Canon 75-300mm before and got pretty good results

but haven't touched any others. As of right now I'm leaning towards the Sigma

just because it has the macro feature and I've heard from some people that it is

a better lens.

 

My price range is as close to or under $200 as possible. I can pay a little

extra for shipping but I'd like to stay close to $200 so please don't tell me

that I should go buy the 75-300 IS USM, or the DO, or the 70-200 F/4L as I can't

afford any of them.

 

I'm interested in people's experiences and opinions.

Go ahead everyone - hit me back with your wisdom.

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two things. Is this trip very special? And will you need this longer lens for other shoots aside from this trip? If this trip is very important to you and you won't be using the longer lens much otherwise, then I'd go back to renting an L lens like the 70-200 you can't afford to buy.

 

However, if this trip is more routine and you will be needing longer lenses again, I'd go with the Sigma. It has very decent Image Quality accordign to Photozone's tests. http://photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_70300_456/index.htm

 

As a rule most kit/consumer zooms aren't all that bad stopped down and in the middle of thier zoom range. Not so with that Canon 75-300 though. It pretty much sucks all around.

 

I don't know anything about the Tamron. Whatever you get, hopefully you'll be shooting in good daylight. Stop down at least one or two stops from the lenses maximum aperuture to get to the sweet spot, if you can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Bob O'Sullivan,

 

this is a trip to spend Christmas with my parents. It has been an annual trip but they just got reassigned, so it will be the last time for a while that I will be there.

I'll use it for landscape and maybe a couple portraits while there, but once I get home I will use it for portraits and for sports mostly.

 

That being said, I'd really like to have something to show for the money other than just photos - which is why I really want to buy a lens instead of rent one.

I'm looking at $200-225 for rental of a 70-200 F/2.8L USM (no IS), vs $210 for ownership of the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG Macro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you aren't in a rush, I'd consider the Canon 55-250 IS lens. It will probably beat your $200 limit, but to get IS it would be worth it, IMO. Since I suspect you won't be carrying a tripod on much of this.

 

Saving that, I'd look at the Sigma 55-200 or Tamron 55-200. Bob has a review of the Tamron posted on his website, I believe. I came very very close to buying one of these for traditional travel use myself, but am probably going to deal with my heftier and sharper 70-200/4 instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I got my first EOS camera in 1992, or so, I bought it with the 100-300 lens, was all I used in EOS for a year or so. It's an OK lens when stopped down. For about two years I've owned the 300 f4l IS lens, but I still use the 100-300 if I want to travel light or use the zoom, or don't want to carry a big white lens. The lens is signinficantly smaller than the 70-200 2.8 I believe. I just checked and can still buy new 15 years later for 279 wow which is close to what i paid if I recall. If your budget was bigger, I'd go for the 70-200.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a budget canon 70-300 III non-USM that I bought on a whim from Walmart for $160 on clearance. I had my new 30D and was itching for a new lens and thought it would be a good learning tool. First, at 300mm you will need a tripod and good lighting to get a good image. Not great but good. I have a few images that I like a lot from the lens and a whole bunch I'm not happy with but for memory sake have kept. USM would be nice for it focuses slow. I am saving for a 300mm prime or even an L if I can wait.

 

As far as buying a low-end lens now and realizing it's just a stop gap measure until the good glass arrives, I'm doing the same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're thinking about traveling, why don't you try the Canon 80-200 4.5/5.6 lens($100). It's compact meaning it can easily fit in your backback, it's very light and takes great pictures especially head-and-shoulder portraits. It can also be used as a macro lens with a magnifying filter. I think the 70-300 IS is way overated. You dont need to scare any tourist away with such a huge lens.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a vote for the Canon 100-300. Available used on ebay for as little as $135.00. I have had good luck with it for a variety of events. Take a tripod if you are going to use it in low light.

 

If you are going to rent, which is also a good idea, try the Canon 100-400 IS L - but it's big and heavy. To rent it for 13 days (including shipping) would be close to buying the 100-300. If you are always using it in bright light, you may not notice much of a difference. I didn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you can find a copy of a Canon EF 70-210 f3.5-4.5 USM on ebay then I think that would be a good choice. It should be under the $200 mark. It has the same build as the Canon 100-300 USM but is faster, sharper and contrastier, and stopped down a stop approaches the L lenses optically. It is a good travel size.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just got a Canon EF 70-210mm f3.5-f4.5 USM lens off e-bay for about $180 + shipping. This is a fantastic and classic lens. As others above have suggested - this is a good choice. I have had mine for a little over a week, and love it so far. On my Canon 20D it gives me the field of view of a 112-336mm lens - and at f4.5 (at most).

The focus is super fast! Mine hase a little zoom creep - but otherwise I am happy with the purchase.

 

Incidentally I sold my Canon EF 75-300mm f4-f5.6 USM a year ago - this is a better built lens - and it is faster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've used the Sigma 70-300 Macro. A bit slow to focus, but not a bad lens at all. And on my 1.6x crop dSLR it's more like 480mm at the long end, great for candid portraits. I used it recently at a wedding I was shooting and in this regard it was ideal. Of course if I'd the money I would go for the Canon 70-300 IS USM ;) - if possible try out both your proposed options on your camera body in a store before you buy. Test the zoom and focus speed by taking a couple of shots from outside the store...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...