witolda_maruszewska

I agree with Amol - take a look at the Canon 75-300 range as you won't go far wrong if you are working on a tight budget.

I've used the 75-300 USM for a couple of years as my primary lens and I've no complaints at all. Although not my main subject matter, I've taken some cracking landscapes and candid portraits with it

However, if you do chose this lens, I would definately recomend buying good quality film to use with it as it suffers badly when used with cheaper films (grainy, flat colours etc...) As a result of some experiments I did, I found that Fuji films probably offer the best colour rendition and sharpness.

Hope this helps, and happy photographing! :)

Try a different dealer :)

Some won't hold certain lenses in stock - you have to order and sometimes wait up till 6 weeks. Reason is, if it is an expensive lens and they don't sell many, they don't want to be stuck with something that they can't shift.

I went through a similar dillema recently i.e. should I stick with my EOS5 and spend money on better glass or go and buy a digital SLR and stick with the lenses that I have. The reason behind this is that when I go to a race meeting (motorsports) I shoot on average six rolls of film - every fortnight roughly from April till October.

Anyway, here's how I thought things out and I hope it is useful:

Six rolls of film translates to a hell of a lot of scanning, but with my scanner/laptop combo (ACER 630 Travelmate & Epson 2450), I can do thall that film in something like four or five hours. That includes a small amount of cropping and adding a digital signature onto each image. So its not too bad really - just tedious. I use a good processing lab so I don't have problems with things like colour balance etc.

However, going digital will take away this extra step and eventually save time and money, but using film makes me think carefully about each shot I take and how I set it up. I like this because it forces me to think about my photography, whereas with digital, I just bin a shot if it doesn't work out. I find I can't learn as much from my mistakes as I can by looking at a print.

Also, for what I shoot, I still think that at the moment, my EOS5 still gives me better performance over the D30 certainly, and possibly also the D60 in terms of frames per second and auto-focus speed. (1D is another matter...)

In the end, I decided to put my money into good glass for the 5 and wait for another season before I take the plunge and get a digital EOS. Top-quality lenses are always a good investment and I can use them on whatever body. In the mean time, digital SLRs are becoming ever more affordable and closer in performance to semi-pro and pro film bodies.

If you do decide to get the EOS3, maybe look in upgrading your scanner as well.

Jerry - the mount size is the same for all EOS-fit lenses irrespective of the barrel diameter. So it doesn't matter that one lens is 58 mm in diameter and the other 77.

This is always stated in lens specs, and it is important to keep this in mind when you are looking for accessories such as filters, lens hoods (if they don't come supplied with the lens) and easily misplaced items such as front lens caps.

If you do decide that you want to try out some filters, you don't have to get screw-in ones that only fit one lens in particular. You can get ones that are square bits of glass that slot into a holder. Depending on the manufacturer, these holders can be adjusted to fit onto lenses of different diameters. Cokin is one that springs to mind. Because the holder will fit on any lens, you don't have to worry about having the same set of filters in different sizes.

Hope this helps - and happy photographing! :)

No- you're not breaking any protocols. Everyone has to start somewhere... :)

What lens you pick depends on how big your budget is, but you'll get more for your money if you go secondhand - as you did with your camera body. However, as you are still learning about SLR photography I would suggest that while you go for as good a quality lens as you can budget for, don't go for anything expensive only to find out it isn't what you are looking for.

When I started in SLR photography I bought a Canon 75-300 USM III and have used it to a great degree of success over the last two years to photograph motorsports. Although not stellar in terms of overall performance and specifications, I've taken some cracking long distance action shots with it and have not been disappointed with it.

I would suggest you take a look at this lens (you can always find them secondhand without too many problems) as it is a good tool with which to learn about telephoto techniques. Another reason I would recomend you look at the 75-300 is that unlike the other lens that you've mentioned, it gives you a small degree of focal length overlap with the lens that you have already.

As for the explanations of USM and IS, I can't add to that as both have been excllently explained... :) What I can say is that ring USM and IS make a long telephoto lens a joy to use...

But whatever lens you choose in the end, happy photographing :)

I honestly do think that IS will help you out - I have just bought a 100-400L IS lens to shoot motor racing and it seems that you are looking at the same types of shots that I am, except at slightly slower speeds! :) (Techniques are essentially the same though, as is the issue of wasted film...)

This lens has two IS modes: 1 for static or head on shots, and 2 for pan shots. In mode 1, both gyroscopes work to help keep the whole image steady, while in mode 2, only the vertical one is switched on allowing you to pan in the horizontal while still keeping the image level.

I used it for the first time in anger at the Easter weekend F3-GT meeting at Snetterton and returned proportionally far more keepers (portfolio & saleable shots) than with the lens that it replaces. The only shots I lost to shake were the ones where I got the settings crossed up. I took a monopod but ended up not using it as the lens is actually well balanced despite its weight - on an EOS 5 body at any rate. It actually encourages you to hold it properly and I find the tripod mount useful for making sure I hold it the same way all the time.

This lens stayed on my camera for virtually the whole weekend and I photographed a whole range of stuff from driver portraits to pit & paddock stuff, head-on and panned shots. And when I got it right, the results are well worth the investment I put into the 100-400L IS; crisp, sharp, good colour rendition etc - even using 400 speed film in some very variable light conditions.

The results speak for themselves. Not just because of IS, but also because the optics of L-class lenses are excellent as well. Despite the gadgetry appeal of IS to some people, I believe that it is a useful tool to have when using long lenses. I don't think that I could hand hold this lens without IS and I know from the results that I can use it confidently without having to carry a monopod / tripod around with me.

Some of the shots that I took at Snetterton will quite readily enlarge to A4 as the quality of the image is so good.

I can't comment about the 50mm f1.8 because I don't own one, but I do use the 75-300 F4-5.6 lens and may be able to help you in your choice.

My main subject matter is motorsports, and I've used the 75-300 quite successfully for some two years to shoot Formula 3 single seaters, sportscars, saloons (BTCC) and ASCAR oval stockers for both my own enjoyment and also as a freelance.

It isn't comparable to pro lenses by any means, but as an amateur lens, there's not much wrong with it. It has a good and useful zoom range, and when used with a camera loaded with good quality ISO 400 speed film proves to be more than adequate when shooting action shots i.e. head-on and pan. In decent lighting conditions it produces sharp pictures with good crisp colours, but I have found it to struggle somewhat in low-level light. It is not a particularly heavy lens either - perfect for walking around with trackside all day and easy to hand hold.

I tend to manual focus when I shoot motor racing (focus on the apex of a corner or on the racing line) as I find it gives me much more control over AF - but the performance of the AF is often down to the camera body that you have and how well the electronics in the camera and lens communicate with each other.

If you want to see what I turn out with this lens, have a look at www.thruxton.f9.co.uk/gallery-circuit.htm.

Hope this helps some.

I've never used an EOS 30/33 so I can't really comment on it, but the EOS 5 is my primary camera body and it sees a lot of heavy use in all conditions - mainly to shoot motorsports. I've had mine for two years now and I think I made the right decision in choosing it over the 30 - which was just being put on the market at that time.

While I'll admit that it may be somewhat outdated in terms of technological gadgetry when compared to the more modern EOS bodies, the EOS 5 does the job well and reliably. And I still see a lot of pros (motorsports) shooting with the 5 if they're using film.

Even though the 5 is an older design, it still copes with just about any situation that you can throw at it (also depends on the lenses you use). It also has far more features than I would ever need to use so I'm not entirely fussed about what it hasn't got - in most situations, extra features only serve to make using a camera yet more complicated. I'm happy with the number of focus points (5), the metering and the shooting modes (I tend to use shutter & aperture priorities or full manual), custom functions etc. My only minor gripe with the 5 is that the eye-controlled focus only works in the horizontal.

What I really love about the EOS 5 though, are the ergonomics. It fits well in my hand, feeling substantial but not overly heavy or clumsy. All the controls are just where you want them to be and have a good positive feel to them. It is a camera that you can use instinctively.

Ultimately though, a camera is just a light-tight box to hold the film...

If you want a cheap(ish) workhorse of a lens to shoot motorsports, why don't you look at the Canon 75-300 4/5.6 USM?

It isn't particularly stellar in terms of overall performance and specifications (compared to pro lenses certainly), but I've used it quite successfully for some two years to shoot Formula 3 single seaters, sportscars, saloons (BTCC) and ASCAR oval stockers for both my own enjoyment and also as a freelance.

However, it has a good and useful zoom range, and when used with a camera loaded with good quality ISO 400 speed film (Fuji is what I use), proves to be more than adequate when shooting action shots i.e. head-on and pan. In decent lighting conditions it produces sharp pictures with good crisp colours, but I have found it to struggle somewhat in low-level light. It is not a particularly heavy lens either - perfect for walking around with trackside all day and easy to hand hold.

If you want to see what I turn out with this lens, have a look at www.thruxton.f9.co.uk/gallery-circuit.htm.

Just thought I'd add my twopennyworth here based on my own experiences...

My primary subject matter is motorsports - I got interested in photography by taking photos at race meetings, starting with single use cameras and then graduating to a Pentax Espio 35-70mm point and shoot. That was fine for a while until I decided to get a bit more serious - that was when the problems started over the camera not being able to cope with what I was trying to do. Typical issues were not enough zoom, no control over focus, parallax errors and more crucially, shutter lag, resulting in a lot of binned shots.

This was two years ago: when I decided that the point & shoot no longer served my needs, I started looking for an SLR. I sat down with an experienced friend and we brainstormed over what I wanted to do with a camera/lens setup. My initial wishlist of an EOS 300 mated to a Tamron 28-300 went straight in the bin, as did my original budget.

I ended up buying an EOS 5 with Sigma 28-105 and Canon 75-300 USM lenses, spending twice as much as what I had intended. I have had two years hard use out of this kit and in no way do I regret the decision that I made. Mind you, the time spent thinking carefully about what I NEEDED rather than what I WANTED was well worth it and prevented some potentially expensive mistakes.

The EOS 5 taught me a great deal about using an SLR as it has everything from "idiot mode" to full manual control - I still haven't reached the limits of this lovely camera. The lenses, while not stellar in terms of quality, features (and price) are above average performers that are durable and produce good photographs. More importantly, with this fairly inexpensive setup (£800) compared to what Don is after (makes me wince when I think of it), I learnt more about what I liked to photograph, my own personal style and what focal lengths I needed to use to achieve what I wanted in a photograph.

As it turns out, I use the whole focal range that I have with respect to lenses, but I do tend to spend most of my time at the telephoto end. The 75-300 has been my main lens, but I have now just replaced it with the 100-400L IS because I can JUSTIFY the payoff between the cost and the amount of use it is likely to get.

My suggestion (as a result) is this:

Don't go out right away and buy expensive L glass - particularly if you are stepping up from a P&S to a (digital) SLR - until you can justify the purchase cost and the amount of use you will get out of the lenses. The difference between the two types of camera (P&S & SLR) is immense and the learning curve for any SLR newbie is steep.

If I were you, get yourself an inexpensive film EOS and some secondhand lenses (or borrow/hire if you can) and just have a play before you commit yourself to a 10D and the associated peripheries on your wishlist. Jumping straight in at the deep end could lead to some very costly mistakes, so have a good hard think about what you like and what you don't like, what focal lengths you use most, what your style and personal preferences are before spending what amounts to hideous sums of money.

Pick up some experience first with a basic SLR and a couple of lenses and if you do decide you like what you have, by all means move up to a 10D and L glass. You may even decide to keep the lenses that you have and use them on the 10D...

I use a 75-300 USM as my primary lens - I've had mine for nearly two years and it sees quite a bit of hard use in typical British weather. So far, it hasn't let me down though, no bits coming loose, falling off etc... It is a good workmanlike piece of equipment - no frills attached but it does the job well enough and has the advantage of not being especially heavy or bulky.

I can't say I've noticed any vignetting problems with it at all, whether shooting through a chain link fence or otherwise. In good light and with decent quality film, it produces surprisingly good pictures.

My experience of shooting through fences comes from motor racing photography as despite the fact that I freelance, I can't always get the necessary passes at some circuits.

If you want to see the sort of work I turn out with the 73-300 USM, then have a look at my website: www.thruxton.f9.co.uk/gallery-circuit.htm

Errr, I think F5.6 is probably still faster than what I have at 300mm at the moment...

Also the problem, as I see it, with a prime is that at some circuits you can't move around as much and therefore are limited to one particular view/angle and it's sod's law that it's not the view you want. For instance at Russell (Snetterton), with a zoom, you can from one spot, take cars coming into the chicane using the long end and zoom down as they exit - particularly useful since it is a place where things can and do go wrong...

As for a bag - I need to upgrade anyway because mine has gotten too small and I can't get my flashgun in it. Am working out of a LowePro Nova 2 at the moment, but am waiting to get something bigger until I get the new lens. At the moment, oddments (film, lens hoods, light meter) live either in my pockets or in my backpack with food, racecard etc.

I've done a bit more research and asked a few pros that I know and I've started to think much more specifically - note that there are no prime lenses in my final shortlist. As it stands, my three choices are:

1) Sigma 135-400

2) Sigma 170-500

3) Canon 100-400 IS

I know the Canon lens is double my budget, but as I may actually be working on behalf of a race team this year, the purchase of this lens may be justifiable.

What I am planning to do is hire each lens, run a test roll for each and then compare the results. OK, I know the Canon will probably blow the other two into the weeds, but outright performance is not just the only issue. I want to find out whether I can live with the lens or not, whether I can cope with carrying it around with me all day, whether I like the ergonomics etc. IMHO, picture quality counts for nothing if you don't like using the lens.

Only then will I make a final decision.

Anyone who has experience of these three lenses would be welcome to let me know exactly what they think of each.

I'm not going to discount anyone's advice just because it doesn't meet my criteria - if that was the case, why ask for advice in the first place? :) I suppose the bottom line is that for lenses longer than 300mm, there aren't that many options, particularly for someone with a small budget so it is always going to be a compromise. Also lenses are generally more expensive in the UK than in the US...

Kyle - out of curiosity, what film speed do you suggest I shoot if you say that 400 is too fast?

C Terry - glad you like the photos I've posted. Also, I'll keep the 400 5.6 in mind as I can see what you mean about duplicating focal lengths...

Cheers Simon - nice to know someone's read the original question.

Poster is female, BTW :)

Thanks, looks like I�m getting plenty of useful advice on lens selection, BUT just to make things slightly clearer:

1) I DO NOT want to use a teleconverter in combination with a shorter lens i.e. less than 300mm long end. That is essentially what I am using now and I am not happy � hence the request for a lens with a long end of around 500mm so that I do not have to use a teleconverter at all

2) Changing the teleconverter is also not an option, as the ones that have been suggested do not fit the lenses that I have. The rear lens element clashes with the TC glass � the problem I had when buying the converter in the first place

3) I am not considering getting rid of my 75-300 USM � I really like this glass and it is my basic lens when I am shooting trackside or candids. If I am going to part exchange any part of my outfit, it will be the teleconverter.

4) Changing my camera body / acquiring a second body is not an option either. I just do not have the money to do that at present and I am happy using the EOS 5.

Thanks again for the good advice though. Looks as though Sigma 50-500, Sigma 170-500, Sigma 135-400 or the Canon 100-400 are viable possibilities. Depends what I can find for the sort of money that I am prepared to spend.

I am a keen amateur motor racing photographer (have sold prints

though) and I am looking for a long lens to give my outfit some added

flexibility.

As it stands, the contents of my camera bag is as follows: EOS 5

body, Sigma 28-105, Canon 75-300 USM, Kenko 2x teleconverter, Canon

430EZ Speedlite, lightmeter & monopod. I usually tend to shoot Fuji

Superia 400.

In most situations, the long end of my 75-300 lens is more than

adequate, but at times, I find myself wanting something just that

little bit longer so that I can fill the frame without having to crop

and/or home in on an object or driver without having to get close.

Also, at some circuits (Silverstone, Snetterton & Rockingham) you are

shooting quite far away from the action.

I bought the teleconverter to use with the 75-300 to try and get

around this problem, but to be honest, the image quality just isn't

there and the combination is tricky to focus. It's left me with a lot

of wasted shots and the frustration is mounting. (NOTE: I tend to

manual focus most of the time (for head on shots at the apex of a

corner and for pan shots) excepting for crashes, podium (victory

lane) shots and candid driver portraits.)

As a result, I am looking for a good quality long zoom lens to give

me the extra reach that I want - something that has a long end of

500mm would be ideal. I DO NOT, however, want either a prime or a

mirror lens. Being a research student, budget is an issue as my

ceiling is about £550 ($800) and I am not ruling out buying used as

opposed to new.

I am hoping that someone can give me some pointers as to what will

meet my brief - both from lens quality, suitability and cost points

of view. For anyone that is interested in the sort of work that I do,

my online portfolio is located at

http://www.thruxton.f9.co.uk/gallery-circuit.htm