Tele lens

[alexandrutunschi]

<p>Hi!<br>

I am looking for a tele lens for Canon XSi (450D) (200 - 300). I wish (:D) to be fast (2.8 maybe) and as cheap as

possible. Any advice would be appreciated.<br>

Thank you!</p>

[jack_nordine]

<p>A wonderful telephoto lens is the 200mm 2.8 L. A very sharp lens, that is also very light for this focal range. It is also has excellent build as it is an L lens. I have an XSI and the 200mm and its a great match. Also, this lens works well with the Canon 1.4 extender which gives you a 280mm lens when needed. The lens is reasonably priced as well.</p>

[johnlakkas]

<p lang="en-US">I was in the same position as you one year ago. The Canon 70-200L f2.8 non IS was expensive for me, so I looked at the 70-200L f4, the IS version was also quite expensive as well and quite limited in reach for my taste but it had the 4 stop IS. The 70-200 f4 non IS had small aperture as well as lacking IS so it was limited in many ways. But every one says the f4's are pretty sharp.<br>

So I thought it would be a good idea to get a 70-300 f4-5.6 IS USM for the good light and a 100 f2 for the low light. As the 70-300 has the IS I wanted and the reach. The only downside was the f5.6 @ 300 and 3 stop IS instead of 4 stop IS of the 70-200L f4 IS.</p>

<p lang="en-US">I finally bought the 70-300 f4-5.6 IS USM and the 100 f2. Mind that 70-300 has an excellent image quality so the L counterparts won't be much better in it if better at all, you won't regret. It just has rotating front element and lacks weather sealing. Imagine it's called by many secret L lens... In the first place I though it would be struggling in low light but that's certainly not the case! It's sharp wide open and the IS is really good in real life! In low light does a terrific job! Really! I get better keeper rates with my 70-300 IS USM than with my 100 f2 both wide open in low light situations. Imagine that f5.6 with 3 stop IS is somewhat f2! But with quite steady hands (~little shaky hands) the IS can totally stabilize the scene which the shutter speed can't! Also DOF in 200 mm is SO NARROW (few inches/cm) that focus may be tricky as well as limiting for landscapes! 70-300 bokeh is pleasing nothing to worry and it's quite lightweight lens. Speeds up to 1/20 @ 300mm can come out sharp with a decent rate with some exercise! So you get the 300mm and some serious money saving! For comparable bargain but higher price I would suggest the 100-400L IS.</p>

<p lang="en-US">Sorry for large text... I was quite impulsive...</p>

[johnlakkas]

<p>I forget to mention that (if not obvious) I do available light photography and mostly landscapes but few times I shoot portraits as well. I am a hobbist photographer and I shoot 99% of my pictures on my journeys in Europe.<br>

Also forget to mention that IS won't freeze motion. So if shooting sports or children with available light then wide aperture lenses come first so you can achieve fast sutter speeds.</p>

[matthijs]

<p>What do you mean by cheap?</p>

<p>Cheapest EOS compatible without converter would probably be something like a second hand 70-300 Sigma or 75-300 Canon but that's nowhere near f2.8.</p>

<p>(I do not know anything about "russian" lenses so maybe there are cheap fast lenses available when you're not opposed to using a converter.)</p>

<p>Even a Sigma 18-200 OS or a stabilized Tamron (18-250 or 270?) might be an option if affordable is what you need.</p>

<p>F2.8 however almost never comes cheap. Sigma has a zoom, Canon has a prime but both are around $750 new.</p>

<p>F2.8 @ 300mm? Dream on!</p>

<p>So... what's most important, cheap or fast?</p>

[jack_nordine]

<p>The 200mm 2.8 L that I suggested earlier sells for just over $700. As Matthijs commented, it depends on what your definition of cheap is. For a quality 200mm 2.8, to me this is a bargain.</p>

[nhut-nguyen]

<p>I think the 200 f/2.8L is the cheapest telephoto with f/2.8 aperture. I don't know much about third party. 300 with f/2.8 is really expensive.</p>

[alexandrutunschi]

<p>How about the Canon 55-250mm IS USM lens? I heard good things about it.</p>