He loves wildlife fotography and so we let him play with our 400 mm. If that's the case, than suggesting people to go for pro-grade lenses at pro-grade prices just isn't realistic.īesides that: if I had a 350D I'd certainly look for a lense that doesn't disturb the balance of the camera body completely. They do so because they want more than just a "me-too" compact but do have to shop at a budget. However: most people that buy an entry level camera like an EOS 350D or a D50 are not making that choice because they truly feel they are getting a superior pro camera. I have some samples up here when I was comparing it with other lenses:īest regards generally speaking you are right, as usual. On my SD10, the 70-300mm needs lots of light, I rapidly found I didn't use it often. I thought I 'needed' tele- lens but I found my preference was in mid-range mm and wide angle! The two Sigma lenses I use most are 28-70mmEX and 10-20mmEX. Couple points a) watch out what you're buying if you go with the Sigma, there are several versions of this lens out there APO non-APO. a 70-300 came as kit lens with my first SLR - the film Sigma SA7. How about a Sigma 18-50 low-cost kit lens, or 17-70 EXĮxcellent point. Nothing but a long lens is going to make nothing but lousy Something on the wide end, not the long end. If you really don't have a lens yet, I would strongly recommend I have 2 options for my first lens for my 350 D: It's up to you to decide if you want to buy the cheap lens now to get started or skip right to the end game.
People who use theses lenses a lot usually end up buying the better and more expensive lenses in the end. However, the next step up in quality brings you to the at least the $500-$600 (US B&H) price level of the 70-200 F/4L and 70-300 IS. If you are not enlarging past A4 or cropping, they can be acceptable if you do a little extra post-processing and avoid shooting wide open. They work best in bright, contrasty light (except for the CA). There is not a large difference.Īll of the inexpensive xx-300 zooms are slow focusing, soft above 200mm, and prone to purple fringing and other CA. Sigma, more people seem to like the Sigma APO than the equivalent Canons although these consumer level lenses seem to have more sample-to-sample variability than most. In the Sigma line: avoid the non-APO version (formerly known as the DL.) Most users think that the extra money for the APO version is worth it.Īs for Canon vs. So is your suggestion to consider a $900 lens or a $1000 lens really helpful? If you must attempt to talk them out of a cheap lens, at least explain why the 5x cost is worth the difference.Įnough griping bout your answer, here is mine: Think about what this person is asking: he's asking if he should buy the " Sigma DG Macro Autofocus Lens ($140 at B&H) or the Canon 90-300 F4.5/ 5.6 (the US model equivalent is the 75-300 that costs $150 at B&H.) You might want to consider the Sigma 100-300mm EX.it's an f4.0Īnother option would be the 80-400mm EX OS (optically stabilized) That you can't afford better glass right now, that would be the one If the Canonįocuses faster and you need that capability (sports), then assuming The Sigma does tend to be a slower focusing lens. It's a ton more money than either of your choices. John gave an excellent suggestion with the 100-300 EX.
Same concept for basketball, soccer, hockey, steeple-chase, car races, etc.you know where the action is going to take place, so get a focus lock there and wait. Some photos taken with my SD10 and the 80-400mm EX OS: For baseball and softball, things can be pretty predictable.a batter will attempt to hit the ball, so get a focus lock on the batter and shoot, shoot, shoot.a runner on 1st will try and steal 2nd, so get a focus lock on 2nd base and wait for them to go. While focusing can be slow, I think for sports photography you really need to pick a spot and wait for the action. I had considered the cost as well, but I figured it's a one time expense and why not go for the quality.as long as Canon does not change it's mount, that lens will be used for a long time and give many quality photos.
0 kommentar(er)
