Which Lenses to Buy?

[JTPAIN]

I am a keen amateur photographer from England and wanted to ask your opinion on which lenses I should consider buying for my new DSLR (either EOS 600d or the mysterious 650d that might be released in February…..). I have strong interests in macro photography and general wildlife photography. Ideally I would like to keep my budget as close to £1600 or $2500 for two lenses as I am a student (of course i don't particularly mind buying more expensive lenses second-hand). You seem to be the most knowledgeable reviewer that I have read, so I wanted to ask for your help with this decision, if you are able to give it?

I had previously considered both the Canon 18-135mm lens, but then decided I wanted something with a little more reach and therefore chose the Sigma 18-250mm, although I believe the 18-250mm to be a better lens overall than the 18-135 (better AF etc.) I am not entirely happy, what do I substitute for that extra focal length? - Also, because of my interest in Macro work I wanted this 'first' multipurpose zoom lens to have macro capabilities and am regrettably ready accept that 1:1 ratio will not be possible. Dedicated macro lenses with longer focal lengths are just so expensive!!

I also wanted the possibility of a super-telephoto (quick AF) zoom to photograph birds and wildlife that may be some distance away - the ideal lens seemed to be the Sigma OS 150-500mm as on the 1.6x crop body this 500mm maximum focal length would effectivley become about 645mm. However almost all reviews of this lens are at best mediocre. Will I have to substitute focal length for sharpness and image quality?

My basic question is this:

What multipurpose IS zoom lens (with macro capability) should I buy -> which lens will deliver the fastest AF, best quality and versatility within my price range [i.e. value for money]?

What secondary super-telephoto zoom lens should I buy with a view to photographing wildlife such as birds in flight that will deliver crisp 'nice' compositions within my price range?

[neuroanatomist]

Welcome to the TDP forums!

Tough questions. The superzoom lenses (18-250 and similar) do sound nice, but that huge zoom range comes with a host of strings attached, mostly in the IQ department. I think they're worth considering for a one-lens travel solution, but IMO they aren't best for general use. IMO, the best general purpose lens for an APS-C body is the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS, but it's pricy. A much cheaper alternative with IQ nearly as good is the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 non-VC. The EF-S 15-85mm is also excellent, trading a slower aperture for a broader range.

For decent macro capability without a true macro lens, consider a set of Kenko extension tubes for the general purpose zoom. Standard and super zooms that are labeled 'macro' aren't even close, usually.

As for the telephoto lens, quality is generally proportional to price. I use the EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS for shooting birds, and it's excellent for that. Other options are the 300mm f/4L IS and the 400mm f/5.6 L. The latter is great for flying birds where you need a fast shutter speed, but less so for handheld shots of perched birds, where IS is a big help at those focal lengths. Getting to 500mm with good IQ is expensive, unless you get an older MF lens (which may not be cheaper than the options above anyway).

Hope that helps!

--John

[Sean Setters]

Welcome to the TDP forums! For decent macro capability without a true macro lens, consider a set of Kenko extension tubes for the general purpose zoom. Standard and super zooms that are labeled 'macro' aren't even close, usually.

Speaking of the Kenko extension tubes, I used them recently (paired with the relatively inexpensive 85mm f/1.8) to get this shot:


Spend Me by budrowilson, on Flickr

[JTPAIN]

Thanks for the help!

Have decided to either go for the 70-300mm L IS or the 100-400mm L IS for telephoto - which produces better images?

The general consensus seems to be that the 70-300mm is better with the more up-to-date technology and IS and generally produces better images, faster. Is this entirely true?

I am guessing that canon will announce a replacement for the 100-400mm in February? hopefully along with a new '650d' with the new processor!!

[neuroanatomist]

Have decided to either go for the 70-300mm L IS or the 100-400mm L IS for telephoto - which produces better images?

The 70-300mm L will deliver slightly better IQ than the 100-400mm. It also has better IS, has a slightly faster AF, and is more compact. But...it's 300mm, not 400mm. Depending on what you shoot, that can make a lot of difference. Personally, I started with the 300mm f/4L IS, and I found that it wasn't long enough...so, I switched to the 100-400mm. Even then, I find myself needing to crop the images quite a bit - and cropping increases noise and decreases IQ. If I had to crop an extra 30% to make up for the loss of that 100mm, I would not be pleased with the results.

If you'll be close to your subjects (at feeders, for example), then 300mm would do fine...but in the wild, I would recommend getting all the focal length you can afford (many birders use the 500/4 with a 1.4x TC). As Dr. Croubie states, the 100-400mm can use the Canon TCs, although you will not be able to autofocus even with the 1.4x, and the IQ takes a hit.

I think a 650D is very likely, but I would not count on a new 100-400mm being announced - and probably not alongside an xxxD camera even so. It's been long-rumored, and would be welcome, but I'm not sure it's coming any time soon. When Canon released the 70-300 L recently, they highlighted how great it was for APS-C cameras, and how with APS-C it was longer than the 100-400mm (on FF, of course, but that's what the 100-400mm was designed for, since it's a film-era design). So, from a marketing standpoint, the 70-300 L might be the replacement for the 100-400mm, and for the pro segment, Canon has a forthcoming 200-400mm f/4. Also, as pointed out above, if there is a new 100-400mm lens (and I for one do hope that happens), it won't be available for quite some time (many lenses are now running at a year or more between announcement and availability, shame on Canon!), and it will be much more expensive than the current version.

As for used lenses, I use Craigslist for that, not sure how active those boards are in the UK. Fredmiranda.com has a popular buy & sell board, too. I think you're far more likely to find a used 100-400mm than a used 70-300 L, because the latter is quite a new lens. I regularly see 100-400mm copies come up on my local CL for ~US$1100.

[JTPAIN]

The 70-300mm L will deliver slightly better IQ than the 100-400mm. It also has better IS, has a slightly faster AF, and is more compact.

Completely understand!

But would you say the AF is significantly faster, or the IS significantly better on the 70-300mm than the 100-400mm - I know it seems it on paper, but in the field...?

[Dave Throgmartin]

Speaking of the Kenko extension tubes, I used them recently (paired with the relatively inexpensive 85mm f/1.8) to get this shot:

Sean,

Interesting shot using the 85mm f/1.8. How much of an extension tube did you need to get this shot? I understand using extension tubes that you lose infinity focus, but how much focusing distance do you lose on the long end with the 85mm setup?

Thanks
Dave

[Dave Throgmartin]

Sean,

Interesting shot using the 85mm f/1.8. How much of an extension tube did you need to get this shot? I understand using extension tubes that you lose infinity focus, but how much focusing distance do you lose on the long end with the 85mm setup?

Thanks
Dave

I just realized that Dr Croubie answered my question in one of the links. Using 68mm of extension tubes the working distance is minimal!

Dave

[Dr Croubie]

At my favourite shops, the 70-300L is tracking around €1200, the 100-400L is around €1400. Noone can be sure if they're going to announce a new 100-400L soon, but my guess is that if it's not announced by the end of Jan, it won't be announced by June. And if it is announced in Jan, I doubt it will be available by June, or for much less than €2000 on launch.

The current 100-400 also works with canon-brand teleconverters, the 70-300 does not. I've got the 70-300L and love it, it's a perfect carry size, but i've tried the 100-400 and didn't see anything too wrong with it, the push-pull isn't bad once you get used to it (or maybe i'm weird, i push/pull my 70-300L by the front element, although i'm sure i'm not meant to).

Also, for makeshift-macro, you can't go past tubes for the price, check out this thread for some tests i've done using tubes...

[JTPAIN]

Does anyone know a good place (UK based) to buy these lens second-hand?