Printable View
hello, I am new to SLR photography and I have a very small experience in lenses and this stuff.
I want to buy a telephoto lens for Canon XTi.
I thought about the 75-300mm F/4-5.6 III telephoto lens or sigma 70-300 but I'm very worried because they don't have image stabilizer. I don't know how much this image stabilizer would effect the quality. and I can't afford buying a canon IS lens. any recommendations ?
Hi Ashooor,
Welcome to the CiC forums, great to have you join us.
As I wrote to someone else this afternoon about the Nikon 70-300mm:
If you substitute Canon's "IS" for the "VR", the message I'd give is still the same.Quote:
I would rather go without than buy a non-VR lens, especially as I am not a regular tripod user. I just know that every time I got a good shot ruined by camera shake, I'd regret not waiting/spending the extra.
Two questions, for more accurate advice:
What's the longest focal length you have now?
What do you want to photograph with the new telephoto?
Best regards,
I agree with Dave here, cheap lenses are cheap for a reason. The best of them can have acceptable image quality but are constructed from all plastic materials and won't stand the knocks and wear like the higher priced alternatives. And by the time you have purchased 2 of them you haven't saved anything.
I would advise against the Canon 75-300 which is one of their less successful older lenses. The replacement 70-300 IS however is an excellent 'lower price' lens which I would recommend. Although at around £400 you might not regard it as a budget price lens.
My honest advice, however, would be to keep putting all your spare change into a jar until you can afford something like this.
The Canon 55-250 gets reasonable reviews http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/19...report--review although sharpness at 300 mm doesn't compare with the better, but considerably more expensive, lenses. However it may be worth a thought for light use.
And to add one more partial question to Dave's reply;can you tell us exactly what lenses do you currently have?
I've had one, and although you do "get what you pay for" the 75-300 III is still capable of taking a good photo.
If it's all you can afford then - personally - I'd say "go for it", but you'll have to accept that without a tripod you'll need to keep your shutterspeed in the 1/100th to 1/400th region, and you'll need to treat it with care.
thanks Dave, Geoff and Collin. I really appreciate your welcome. this is really a wonderful forum :)
actually I don't have any lenses. I have Sony DSC-H20. and I'm about to have a Canon XTi body. and this will be my first lens to my first SLR.
So, I thougth a telephoto lens might be the first all in one camera that's why I searched for one.
but I see from your comments that I'm way wrong. I'm willing to learn from you. thanks again.
Well to be fair all round here is a review of the Sigma 70-300 http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/32...report--review which is generally on a par with the others, but still doesn't score very highly at 300 mm.
So if you are just starting out on your journey in the 'real camera' world, the most important question is exactly what do you intend to photograph? And added to this question, what are your future expectations with regard to future photographic interests?
For a general purpose lens, friends, family occasions, landscape, etc, I found the Canon 28-135 mm lens was a decently constructed piece of kit which covered a handy size range and wasn't overly expensive, although still not cheap.
The Canon 55-250 also covers a handy range and is probably better for an all inclusive size lens than a 70-300 mm.
But, depending on your requirements, you may find that a couple of prime (fixed length) lenses would initially suit you better. You can get some good performance lenses considerably cheaper than buying a zoom; and you use your feet to achieve the zoom effect. I know they don't suit every style of photography, especially mine, but they could well provide a realistic alternative.
Possibly get a 50 mm to begin with then expand your range to something like 18 mm or 90 mm as approx examples. This can mean frequently changing lenses and your ground position but many photographers wouldn't use anything else and consider that zooms just encourage lazy photographers.
You should be able to obtain a good quality 50 mm lens for around £200, although you could spend over £1000 for the very best! Anyway, for an example, here is a review of the Sigma 50 mm which could suit you http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/29...report--review Always remember to state the required camera fitting (Canon in your case) when ordering third party lenses.
thank you, this was really helpful. I liked both of the 28-135mm and 55-250mm. I mainly focus on portraiture and macro. though, I guess the 28-135mm would be better as a start to be an all around lens and I might go for it. I really want the extreme focal length of the 55-250mm, but I'm afraid that I'll miss the wide angle of the 28-135 :(
You might want to check out the new 18-135mm IS from Canon, the quality seems better then the 28-135mm and it is a little bit less heavy. I use a 28-135mm on my XS, but I want to replace it for the 18-135mm, so I do not need to carry my standard 18-55mm IS anymore. For tele I use a EF 100-300 F4.5-5.6, which quality is in balance with a XS (1000D). I do not mis the IS on it as I like to shoot birds etc. They are fast moving so I need a short exposure time anyway. And if if need longer exp. time I use a monopod.
thanksss for that info, but wouldn't you miss the zoom of the 28-135mm ?
Hi Ashooor,
Here are some sample photos taken with the 75-300 f/4-5.6 III on a Rebel XSi...
http://backup.cambridgeincolour.com/...e/IMG_0991.jpg
300mm, 0.6s, f/5.6 @ ISO-800
http://backup.cambridgeincolour.com/...e/IMG_1919.jpg
180mm, 1/1600s, f/5.6 @ ISO-200
It's not a fantastic lens in my opinion with visibly less sharpness (even mounted on a tripod). As Colin mentioned earlier, you really do get what you pay for when it comes to these lenses and this is definitely not one of their stellar performers. I rarely pack this lens in my bag due to the fact that it lacks IS and I generally need to mount it on a tripod or pump the ISO right up to get a decent shot. Especially at a 100% crop (as above), the sharpness just isn't there when you compare it to even the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS (not a fantastic lens either but performs better than the 75-300). If you can afford it, I'd be more inclined to go for the 70-200 f/2.8 IS lens (pricey but from what I've seen, it's worth it).
Just my 2c though.
Dan
The thread linked below contains some shots taken with a 55-250IS at full telephoto on an XTi. There's a 1:1 crop in there as well that should show the detail that you can expect.
https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/forums/thread2020.htm
They might not be particularly interesting photos, but I don't think that one could complain about the equipment, especially given the quite reasonable price.
Will
Just a thought of consideration Ashooor,
If the area you're living in is prone to airborne dust, consumer grade zooms are not sealed against dust and moisture as the commercial grade L's (some requires protective filters to complete the sealing) are. The zooming in and out action will create slight vacuum effect that will pull dust into the lens interior. Servicing will be eventually required later down the road.
Primes are less lightly to accumulate dust since there are no moving parts involved. You will just need to do basic sensor, lens, and filter cleaning to avoid dust speck marks on your images.
Yes no moving parts on a prime lens; at least not the movement that can suck in dust.
But the downside is that if you have to keep changing lenses you are more likely to get dust on the sensor. It really depends on your style of photography.
As an alternative for a smaller zoom. I have replaced my 28-135 with the 24-105 IS L lens which is an excellent well constructed lens, but about twice the price!