Lens help

Amp34

Amp34

Amp34

Caporegime
Joined
25 Jul 2005
Posts
28,857
Location
Canada
My dad and I are looking to get a new lens for our 400D and we're not sure whether to get a telephoto or a wide angle. I would be a lot more interested in the telephoto instead of wide as although the kit lens isnt brilliant it copes with landscapes whereas it can't zoom to 300mm.

Anywho, would a second hand Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM be better than a new Sigma 70-300 APO. The difference in price new seems to be huge, about £150 for the sigma and £400 for the canon. Is it really a lot better (second hand with 6 months warrenty for £250) or would another lens be better?
 
The Canon 70-300 is much, much better than the Sigma 70-300.
The Canon lens is a lot sharper and has image stabilisation which is a must over 200mm.
 
What will you be mostly taking photos of? If you don't take a lot of photos of landscapes then I would go for the telephoto.

If you are looking at spending £400 on a telephoto then I recommend a Canon lens with L glass as it will be better value for money. You could get the Canon 70-200mm F4 L USM for £350ish, or if you need it to go up to 300mm then a Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM would be good.

I have no experience with the Sigma lens, so i'm not sure what's better quality out of the two.
 
After I got my 350d one of the first lens I was looking to get was telephoto lens. In the end I chose the Canon 70-300 IS and while it a good lens I just don't use it much and am currently getting rid of it to fund an ultra wide lens as I take more landscape shots. Based on my experience I would have a real think about what you plan to use the lens for. If you're into sports or wildlife then go for a telephoto if you just want one for no particular reason I would look at your other lens needs.

With regards to the sigma lens it is meant to be good, while not as sharp as the canon and lacking the IS I wouldn't dismiss it easily as it cost half to third of the canon lens. I would also have a look at 70-200L lens that Justin suggested while not as long as the others it is meant to be a very good lens.
 
Thats the thing, at the moment it is mainly landscapes we take photos of at the moment, but I would like to take some wildlife and sports photos in the future (but with a 50mm lens there is not much chance :p ). The sigma always caught my eye as it had a macro mode which the canon seems not to have, so almost two modes in one lens.

To be honest I am not completely convinced by how much difference the extra 8mm at the bottom end of the wide angle will have. That is where we need to chat and see what we want.

The reason for going for this lens is that it is only £250 instead of £400, so the 70-200L is out of the question. Also what would be the best wideangle lens to get for about the same money (£250)? The Sigma 10-20mm?
 
Ok slight mistake, It isn't a 70-300mm it is the EF 75-300mm IS USM. Although being a film lens it should still work on the 400D but is it still a better buy over the Sigma?

Thanks
 
Amp34 said:
To be honest I am not completely convinced by how much difference the extra 8mm at the bottom end of the wide angle will have.
Click to expand...

The difference between 18mm and 10mm on my d40 is huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge. Here are some quick snapshots i took to show the difference between 18mm and 10mm.

sigma1.jpg
sigma2.jpg
 
Thanks for that, there is quite a huge difference then. :)

Thinking about it again 10mm will show almost twice the amount of an 18mm :o

Well my dad got the telephoto in the end but I think the wideangle will come in the near future. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom