Which Lense?

matthab

matthab

matthab

Soldato
Joined
19 Apr 2009
Posts
3,159
Which Lens?

Hi Guys

I took my Canon 500D to the Renault World Series and only had a 15 - 55mm kit lens at the time. This was fine in the paddock and display area but when taking shots of the racing I was struggling.

I didnt have the budget to get a better lens then so I made do. My cusin how ever had a 55 - 250mm and that was a lot better.

I plan to take a lot of pictures of Model Kitcars and Motor racing (Just as a hobby not as a professional) which would be the best lens to get to cover both of these sports?

I was looking at the 55 - 250mm lens or the 70 - 300mm lens but stuck what to go for. Any help would be much appreciated.

Matt
 
Last edited:
ooops sorry, typed this post out quickly at work.

I have a end limit of £300 but dont want to go over that unless it really worth it but simulary if theres a lense which is less but does the job that will be fine.
 
£300 for a NEW telephoto lens, well,..that is not enough really !
Best bet is a USED lens, Tamron do a 18-250 I think, not stabilized though and apx f4.5 I think

Sigma is your next choice i.e DG 70-200 will give you a crop factor as well so that’s 112-320, again USED is your only road.

Canon do a EF 70-300 IS USM, so again crop factor comes into play, again USED lens you can get for £300.

Other than that then is cheap low telephoto lens with tele-convertor on, again it will have to be USED !
 
70-200mm f/4 used should be about £330-£380ish depending on condition. You'll get fast AF and a good dollop of reach at a reasonably fast aperture. Then you can always 1.4x TC if you need more.
 
Tysonator said:
£300 for a NEW telephoto lens, well,..that is not enough really !

Other than that then is cheap low telephoto lens with tele-convertor on, again it will have to be USED !
Click to expand...

You can buy nearly two new 55-250s for £300!
The 55-250 is one of the best value lenses around IMO, but I'm not sure if it's suited enough to your purposes f/5.6 on the long end isn't that fast... - have never done any racing shots personally.
 
Last edited:
Well i was going to look on ebay but sadly this is blocked at work :(. Instead i had a quick look on Amazon and found the Canon EF 70-300 IS USM here:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-70-30...m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_r=04YWD8DH2XWS3NZ2ZCH1

I also found the 55 - 250mm which I used on the day: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-55-250mm-Telephoto-Selected-Digital/dp/B000V9D5LG/ref=pd_cp_ce_1

Now apart from the increased zoom whats the main differences and why am I paying double for the 70 - 300mm. The 55 - 250mm ive been reading is nice choice as it continues off from the kit lens.

(As you can tell im still abit new to Photography at this level. But ive had some great results from the kit lens and im now hungry for more)
 
Last edited:
p0ss3s3d said:
70-200mm f/4 used should be about £330-£380ish depending on condition. You'll get fast AF and a good dollop of reach at a reasonably fast aperture. Then you can always 1.4x TC if you need more.
Click to expand...

Trust me here that this is a better lens than either. If you can't afford it just go for the 55-250. But if you can ignore the 70-300, go straight for this stuff. It's top notch.
 
p0ss3s3d said:
Trust me here that this is a better lens than either. If you can't afford it just go for the 55-250. But if you can ignore the 70-300, go straight for this stuff. It's top notch.
Click to expand...


Is that the one you mean:
http://www.jessops.com/online.store/products/22119/show.html

I will obvisoly look for one used just wanted to make sure Ive got the right one. I would love to get that lens as the reviews about it really recommend it.
 
Last edited:
Thats the one.

Very good lens. You could also consider the sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 (third party made, but a faster lens that will get you blurrier backgrounds - downside is that below 120mm it's softer and it's a bigger and heavier lens).

Canon 70-200 f/4L - £330 for scruffy, £360 average £400 mint.
Sigma 70-200 f/2.8EX - non-macros are older but claimed to be the sharpest sigma 70-200 - my non macro was very, very, very good (better than my current f/2.8 IS :p). I'd advise buy a non-macro just because of my personal experience, but feel free to try the macros. Some are very sharp, some are very soft. Wheras the non-macros seem very consistent in the sense that 99% of reports (including mine) say the older lenses are very sharp, hence the reason I'd advise non-macro. Scruffy (collar will be scruffy, just look at the barrel)- £370, average £415, Mint £450.
 
p0ss3s3d said:
Thats the one.

Very good lens. You could also consider the sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 (third party made, but a faster lens that will get you blurrier backgrounds - downside is that below 120mm it's softer and it's a bigger and heavier lens).

Canon 70-200 f/4L - £330 for scruffy, £360 average £400 mint.
Sigma 70-200 f/2.8EX - non-macros are older but claimed to be the sharpest sigma 70-200 - my non macro was very, very, very good (better than my current f/2.8 IS :p). I'd advise buy a non-macro just because of my personal experience, but feel free to try the macros. Some are very sharp, some are very soft. Wheras the non-macros seem very consistent in the sense that 99% of reports (including mine) say the older lenses are very sharp, hence the reason I'd advise non-macro. Scruffy (collar will be scruffy, just look at the barrel)- £370, average £415, Mint £450.
Click to expand...

I had the 70-300 Sigma macro. It's VERY soft, so I'd agree with you.
 
I have read the 55-250 IS is a cracking lens for the money. If getting a long reach lens, isn't it always better to get one with IS?
 
koolpc said:
I have read the 55-250 IS is a cracking lens for the money. If getting a long reach lens, isn't it always better to get one with IS?
Click to expand...

Not really. Depends what you shoot. IS/VR is a last resort if nothing else is feasible.

A high quality tripod however, is always worth getting.
 
I bought my 450d as a kit with the 55-250 included, it's capable of taking some very sharp shots and is pretty versatile, TBH for the money I think you'd be hard pressed to find better.

Close up
Dfly.jpg


Fading out background
Pcock.jpg


Action
Rarrows.jpg


If you wanted other examples 90% of the stuff on my Flickr site has been taken with the 450 & 55-250
 
Last edited:
p0ss3s3d said:
70-200mm f/4 used should be about £330-£380ish depending on condition. You'll get fast AF and a good dollop of reach at a reasonably fast aperture. Then you can always 1.4x TC if you need more.
Click to expand...

Ive seen the 70-200mm with IS for almost double of the non IS one I was thinking of. Would I need IS (whats the plus/negatives)?

Most of my shots will be by hand shooting things as I go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom