jhphotography1 Posted March 9, 2008 Share Posted March 9, 2008 I have a canon xti and i'm looking to get a "nice" zoom lens for it. although iam on a budget so i want the best, "bang for my buck." my price range is $150-$200 (give or take say...30 bucks) thanks for the input! John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred_c1 Posted March 9, 2008 Share Posted March 9, 2008 18-55 IS: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00NQN2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhphotography1 Posted March 9, 2008 Author Share Posted March 9, 2008 oops! i forgot to specify i'm looking for a 75-300mm or something in that range my fault! thanks you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m_barbu1 Posted March 9, 2008 Share Posted March 9, 2008 Hey, I want to join your club! ...I want a camera that has the features of the 1D Mark III, but I only want to spend $1500. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rainer_t Posted March 9, 2008 Share Posted March 9, 2008 A 2nd hand EF 100-300/4.5-5.6 USM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terry_smith2 Posted March 9, 2008 Share Posted March 9, 2008 Chances are that you won't go wrong with the latest version of the Sigma 70-300/4-5.6 APO DG Macro and it is less than 200 dollars in the USA from the better mail order/online places like B&H and BuyDig. It's the best in the class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken munn Posted March 9, 2008 Share Posted March 9, 2008 Canon 55-250mm IS. About to be available in the US. Photozone review here: http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon%20EOS%20Lens%20Tests/45-canon-eos-aps-c/194-canon-ef-s-55-250mm-f4-56-is-test-report--review Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bryan_lardizabal Posted March 9, 2008 Share Posted March 9, 2008 All the suggestions above are great examples for the $150-$200 price range, but they lack the sharpness compared to a used 70-200mm f4L (non IS) that sells for $450-$500. You should start saving to get this lens instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_hanlon3 Posted March 9, 2008 Share Posted March 9, 2008 Hello John, First, I would recommend that you buy a Canon lens rather than a third party brand. The Canon lens will better hold its value should you decide to upgrade in the future (which you surely will as your financial status improves):) A Canon 75-300f/4.5-5.6 III would be well within your price range. Take a look at B&H's listing here: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=search&A=search&Q=&sb=bs%2Cupper%28ds%29&sq=asc&ac=&bsi=&bhs=t&shs=&ci=8454&at=Lens+Type_Zoom+Telephoto&at=Price_+125+%3C%3D++%3C%3D+199.99&basicSubmit=Submit+Query You will notice a used one for $119. If you click on it you will see "Email for Condition" which means the lens is Canon refurbished which equals like new condition for a bargain price. Second, Bob Atkins has an excellent overview of Canon lenses for new Canon DSLR owners here: http://bobatkins.com/photography/digital/10d300dlenses.html definitely worth reading to give you a good idea of what to expect in lens performance. Finally, I hope M Barbu's sarcastic and useless comments will not inhibit you from seeking future advice from photonet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaeljlawson Posted March 9, 2008 Share Posted March 9, 2008 I have been using the 75-300 USM for a liitle over a year on an XTI. I wouldn't recommend it except in cases of financial limitations like yours, and then only if you can't wait until you can afford a better quality lens. It does a good (not great)job most of the time, but is quite soft especially at 300mm. You can checkout my porfolio for wildlife shots I've taken with it. The Redtailed Hawk shots were taken from about 12-15 feet away while it was feeding, then sitting on a post. Not as sharp as I would like, but you can decide for yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_hanlon3 Posted March 9, 2008 Share Posted March 9, 2008 Hello Michael, Just been looking at your nice portfolio. Your pictures are a great example of what can be achieved using modest equipment. I especially like "Feeding time" and "Swallows on a fence"; the butterfly shots are also excellent. I would not agonize over any perceived lack of sharpness, all that that takes is money; lighting and composition are far more important, as you so ably demonstrate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhphotography1 Posted March 9, 2008 Author Share Posted March 9, 2008 anyway, i believe i have narrowed it down to the canon ef-75-300 and the sigma 70-300dg apo as of right now i am leaning towards the sigma, simply because of the countless reviews i have seen saying that the canon lens is for the most part extremely soft and the sigma is much more sharp. if anybody else has some input that could sway my decision pleas let me know! i am taking into consideration what John Hanlon said about the canon keeping it's value better... im just curious if it has the same/better performance as the sigma. i happened to stumble across a forum on the web this morning where somebody was asking the same question as me (deciding between the sigma and canon) and it was an almost unanimous decision to go for the sigma. normally that would make me want to go for the sigma right away but now the "canon will hold its value better" fact is sitting in the back of my head... any help!? thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoff_foale Posted March 9, 2008 Share Posted March 9, 2008 Wait a bit longer and save some more money; then get the Canon 70-300 IS. You will end up getting that lens eventually so it will work out cheaper in the long run to wait until you can afford it. I think it is one of the best value for money zooms and you won't be disappointed with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keith_lubow Posted March 9, 2008 Share Posted March 9, 2008 Used 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 II. Keith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken munn Posted March 9, 2008 Share Posted March 9, 2008 My experience says steer well clear of the C 75-300. It was certainly the worst C lens I ever owned, and a consequence I didn't own it for very long. The store took it back against a C 100-300 f4-5.6 which was much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_hanlon3 Posted March 9, 2008 Share Posted March 9, 2008 Hello John, My recommendation to buy Canon was just that, a recommendation; please don't have any nagging doubts over anything I said! Also, I did not mean to imply that that the Canon would perform better than the Sigma. On the basis of the higher price (you get what you pay for) and the B&H user reviews, you would probably be happier with the Sigma. Thinking about it, I guess the resale value of either lens wouldn't be that high anyway. Actually, after futher consideration I would echo Geoff Foale's excellent advice and save up for the Canon 70-300 IS, you would certainly would not regret it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark u Posted March 9, 2008 Share Posted March 9, 2008 Good Canon lenses usually hold their value fairly well. This is not the case for the 75-300: even on ebay, where buyers often overpay for lenses generally, expect to lose around 30% if you decide to resell it immediately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james_alexander Posted March 9, 2008 Share Posted March 9, 2008 I bought my first Sigma lens for my Elan IIe. When I upgraded to an EOS 3, the Sigma lens was not compatible. At that point it became both my first and last Sigma lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhphotography1 Posted March 9, 2008 Author Share Posted March 9, 2008 thanks a lot for all of the input everybody! im going to research a little more and then decide what i want... ill let you know! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grear_howard Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 While I certainly agree that the Canon 75-300 IS would be preferable to the Sigma, for the budget you suggest, I would not hesitate to consider the Sigma. I own three Canon lenses. I am not at all against Canon glass, but in this case,I think you might be surprised what can be had for around $200. I own the Sigma and have had very good success with it. It certainly has its limitations, but what sub $200 lens doesn't? It has a very effective macro feature that I did not expect along with some accessories for which Canon charges extra- lens case, lens hood. I am pleased with mine and encourage you to look into it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhphotography1 Posted March 10, 2008 Author Share Posted March 10, 2008 thanks a lot Howard! i think once i get my tax return (either that or give plasma a few more times) i will probably go for the sigma! thank you for all the help everybody! it is MUCH appreciated! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_froio3 Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 When I moved from my Elan IIe to the xti, my 28-135IS lens became a great medium tele and my main lens. I know it's more than you want to spend but lenses don't really wear out and you'll kick yourself for not getting the better equipment the first tme around 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