Re: Responses to my Quantaray lens and EOS 20D problem

[shanna_lemke]

This is a response to my question about what to do with a very very

old Quantaray 75-300mm lens on my 20D.

 

Thanks for your responses. I realized that the "error 99" code is a

catch all but the one solution given for that error code is non

canon lens. Look, it's there!

The lens will work for a few frames and then stop. I have to take

out the battery and it will work again for a few frames.

 

I actually called Sigma wondering about getting the chip replaced.

They said that the lens is too old. My solution is to find a Canon

lens to replace it. I am thinking about trading in my old 35mm EOS

and the Quantaray lens to purchase a lens I want. I like the 300

distance because of my kids and I can focus in on them when they are

not aware of it. Maybe a suggestion based on what I eventually want

to accomplish would be helpful. I would like to do weddings and

family pictures, whether it be studio or outdoors. Any suggestions?

I do want quality, but right now there is no way I could afford a

lens even half as much as the 20D. I am poor now!

 

Thanks, Shanna

 

RE: Bob Atkins post - Just wanted to say thanks. I had emailed you a

couple of months ago about your 10D but decided that eventually I

would have wanted the 20D so that is what I got. Thanks again!

[b.j._porter]

I am guessing you have an identical or very similar lens to what I had: Quantarray Tech 10 70-300mm f 4-5.6 LDO Macro Zoom, circa 1997. I had the exact same behavior - it would work intermittendtly and sporadically, then choke the camera.

 

I got $42.02 for mine on E-Bay last December - I got more for the crappy EF Kit Lens that came with my Elan II; must be the brand name, but I wouldn't expect to get a lot for it.

 

I somehow convinced my wife that a 70-200 2.8L IS was a suitable replacement for it ("Honey, the Yugo broke down today and can't be fixed, so I need to go out and buy a new Porsche, OK?")...I take lots of pictures of the kids with it and love it. With the 1.6 factor your field fiew is like a 300mm. However, that does cost around the same as the 20D; the F/4 L version @ $580 might be more in reach if $$$ are tight.

 

For a little less you can get the 75-300 IS, but everything I've read about it says the optical clarity is obviouslnre near the L lenses, but at least you have the IS for climbing around and chasing the kids with.

[b.j._porter]

"optical clarity is obviouslnre near the L lenses" means "optical clarity is obviously nowhere near the L lenses"

[carlos_santos2]

<p>BJ forgot to suggest the 300mm f/2.8, which once you use it you won't want to go back.</p>

 

<p>You can buy one here:</p>

 

<a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=183202&is=USA" target="blank">300mm f/2.8L IS from B&H Photo</a>

 

<p><i>Seriously</i> folks.</p>

 

<p>Shanna, the 75-300 is a very nice lens for the price. You could also look at the 28-135IS, which stopped down is very versatile but it won't give you the 300mm range; it can give you closeups though:</p>

 

<p>Have you seen <a href="http://194.100.88.243/petteri/pont/Pontification/n_Telephoto_Is_For_Wimps/a_Telephoto_Is_For_Cowards.html">this thought-provoking article</a>, it's a funny read from the very gifted Petteri that can change your perspective; if you are lens-less, you may want to take the chance and consider a versatile all-purpose as it lets you experiment; I personally have found family type portraits can be a bit trick, but often much more engaging if done wide-angle and close to people.</p>

 

<p>Art being what it is of course, is subjective. But the 28-135 or 75-300 are wonderful lenses, that still fit within your budget, ditto for some of the EF-S lenses like perhaps the 17-85 IS</p>. You could also try some primes if you haven't tried them. The venerable 50mm f/1.8 is an *awesome* lens for portraits, kids, etc, and it's very bright at 1.8 so you can get nice depth of field effects. It can be had for all of $75 online or $80 or so in a retail store.</p>

 

<p>If you exploit the fact that you've got an SLR and can easily switch lenses around, a couple of carefully picked primes plus a versatile zoom may be the best bet for your money, and chances are they will improve your eye while you're using them</p>.

[dogbert]

Do you like the 300mm length on your 20D (which is actually equivalent field of view of a 460 lens crop fatcor)? If the answer is yes get one of the Canon 75-300s. If you want to recreate the 300 mm field of view as on you older film camera, you could go for a 200 mm lens. Canon's 75-300s are quite good opitcally at the short end and useable at the long end.

 

Weddings on a budget - best to get a couple of fast primes - eg 50f1.8 and 85f1.8. You will probably also need a wideangle. The 18-55 kit lens is the best value and quite versatile, although a 24 or 28 mm prime would be better optically.

[dogbert]

I should add that there is lack of contrast at the long end of Canon's 75-300 lenses. When I say useable you can get reasonable 4x6 or 5x8s though certainly nothing wonderful. On the other hand at the short end you can easily enlarge up to 11x8 and they look great. Also consider the Canon 100-300 USM for about $275. It is supposed to have very fast focussing, which would be good for action.

[PuppyDigs]

I have many nice 'n sharp 8 x 12 and 11 x 14 prints from my EF 75-300 IS USM and

EF 100-300 USM lenses (F11 or 16 with tripod). Beyond that it's a bit soft...

[dave_nelson___atlanta__ga]

My experience is that if you are only printing up to 6x9" then the Canon 75-300 IS at f8 and up is a very good lens and a great value. At larger print sizes the 75-300 can fall short. The 70-200 2.8 L IS coupled with the 2x extender will produce better images but it is much more expensive.