Lens and kit suggestions please?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

the_niner_nation - 28 Jun 2007 00:38 GMT

Hi..Im looking to decide between these 2 lenses for my Canon 400d....

EF 70-200mm f/4L USM

or EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

I'm looking at these particular lenses because I want a nice lens to take
with me on Safari to Kenya later this year.

I need a decent telephoto, and although the 70-200 mm is a *teeny* bit out
of my price range, I might push for it and get my 1st ' L' series glass.

However, i also like the 70-300mm because of the extra on the telephoto and
IS is important for me as I dont have the steadiest hands..I realise the 'L'
series lens dosn't have IS..I do have in my bag the 70-300 mm NON IS lens
that I'm thinking of ebaying to raise funds for one of the above 2 lenses.

I understand that the 'L'series lens will have much better build quality and
probably better Picture quality, but do those who use that lens use it hand
held, and if so what sort of results do you have?

I have used the 70-300 mm NON IS lens and kinda like it, hence the upgrade
to the IS version..on safari the extra 100 mm might prove to be very useful,
but maybe the IS might not be so useful at the 300 mm end with poor light?

any impartial ( or even partial!) advice would be really useful.

Just for the record, I am intending to take on safari with me ( there is
very little chance of any electrical points to charge equipment, maybe the
cigarette lighter of the overland truck)

Sony w12 with 5gb of duo memory sticks
Canon 400d
18-55 mm kit lens
50 mm 1.8 lens
70-300 mm NON IS NON USM lens ( that i will probably ebay)
28-135 mm IS lens.

Manfrotto tripod ( cant remember the model, but it weighs under 1kg and
packs really nice!)

Bean bags
Epson p4000
4x canon 400d batteries

1 battery charger that runs off a 12 v car cigarette lighter that charges 2
batteries simultaneously

2x 4gb SanDisk Extreme III
2x2gb Lexar premium 80 speed CF cards
1x1gb Lexar premium 80 speed CF card
2x 2gb SanDisk Extreme III

If there are any I should leave at home, or general comments, i'd also
appreciate that, too...be nice to take an extra body, but I just can't
afford that :-(

Signature

Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Reply to this Message

Joel - 28 Jun 2007 04:47 GMT

> Hi..Im looking to decide between these 2 lenses for my Canon 400d....

You may want to check with www.fredmiranda.com for end users' feedbacks,
or www.dpreview.com for end users' worshiping <g>, or www.photo.net for more
opinions

> EF 70-200mm f/4L USM

Nice lens, but I would spend extra money to go for 70-200 f2.8L for
low-light and faster focus for sport, and you can use with teleconverter for
extra reach.

I don't own Sigma 70-200 f2.8 to know much about it, but if I have to go
for 70-200 then I would go for f2.8

> or EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

*If* it's one of the top_of_the_line then may be ok, but if it's just
another average lens then I wouldn't.

> I'm looking at these particular lenses because I want a nice lens to take
> with me on Safari to Kenya later this year.
>
> I need a decent telephoto, and although the 70-200 mm is a *teeny* bit out
> of my price range, I might push for it and get my 1st ' L' series glass.

That's a good part of life <bg> we just don't have enough $$$ for
everything and that keeps our wishes alive to make life more enjoyable. And
it's more than just getting a good lens, cuz you may find out.

- 70-200 f2.8L is a great lens, and fast lens for sport and low-light, but
70-200mm is an ODD range plus 1.6X crop factor making the lens even harder
for daily use. But if you use for sport (and with teleconverter like 1.4X
or 2X etc.) then it can be useful.

- Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 may not be a fast lens, but if you don't shoot fast
moving subject or low-light etc. then Sigma 50-500mm is a good choice for
the $$$, and it has good IQ (Image Qiality). I think you can find it
between $800-900's range.

I have both Canon 70-200mm f2.8 and Sigma 50-500mm, and because Canon is
very good with high ISO so I have no problem using Bigma indoor low-light
situation. I don't use long zoom often like used too, and I bought the
Canon 70-200 f2.8L for local parish's event, and the Bigma 50-500mm for once
a year out of state 2-3 days event (around 70,000-80,000+ people)

> However, i also like the 70-300mm because of the extra on the telephoto and
> IS is important for me as I dont have the steadiest hands..I realise the 'L'
> series lens dosn't have IS..I do have in my bag the 70-300 mm NON IS lens
> that I'm thinking of ebaying to raise funds for one of the above 2 lenses.

You may have longer reach but poor quality then it's a waste of time and
money. I am 71 years young and I have no problem with 70-200mm and 50-500mm
sometime I even add the 1.4X converter to make my hands shakier <bg>. Well,
2 years ago my hands get shakier that it's harder for me to handle long
zoom, so I have to use monopod.

And you may want to do little more about the "IS" as depending on
situation or shooting style, it may not what you have in mind.

> I understand that the 'L'series lens will have much better build quality and
> probably better Picture quality, but do those who use that lens use it hand
> held, and if so what sort of results do you have?

Skill + technique + setting + tool etc..

> I have used the 70-300 mm NON IS lens and kinda like it, hence the upgrade
> to the IS version..on safari the extra 100 mm might prove to be very useful,
> but maybe the IS might not be so useful at the 300 mm end with poor light?

I had used P&S 10X with IS before, but didn't pay much attention to non-IS
to know much difference. But I read IS is good for non-moving object not
moving and especially fast moving (most people advice to turn off the IS)

> any impartial ( or even partial!) advice would be really useful.
>
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> 70-300 mm NON IS NON USM lens ( that i will probably ebay)
> 28-135 mm IS lens.

I think 28-135 and 70-300mm would cover both long and short range, but I
don't know abut the IQ. Of course you should be able to get great IQ out of
those lens *but* not easy, or require extra work.

> Manfrotto tripod ( cant remember the model, but it weighs under 1kg and
> packs really nice!)

I would go for Monopod which make thing much easier to travel

> Bean bags
> Epson p4000
> 4x canon 400d batteries

I think you have plenty of juice for long shoot.

> 1 battery charger that runs off a 12 v car cigarette lighter that charges 2
> batteries simultaneously
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> appreciate that, too...be nice to take an extra body, but I just can't
> afford that :-(

You may want to spend around $50-60 on a photo-vest to hold your gears
(better than backpack). I have the "Cabela's Safari Series" (by Cabela's
company) and I like it very much.

And if you go for Fishing-Vest then pay attention to the length, because
fish-vest usually shorter to avoid getting wet, so the pockets are so close
to the chest making harder to reach the lower pockets.

Reply to this Message

Koekje - 28 Jun 2007 09:33 GMT

the_niner_nation enlightened us with:

> EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM
>
> or EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

I'd definitely would go for the 70-300. The extra range is nice, and
the IS is really wonderful. Especially at such ranges IS becomes
important if you don't want to haul your tripod everywhere.

> I have used the 70-300 mm NON IS lens and kinda like it, hence the
> upgrade to the IS version..on safari the extra 100 mm might prove to
> be very useful, but maybe the IS might not be so useful at the 300
> mm end with poor light?

Based on my experience and comments from Ken Rockwell
(http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/image-stabilization.htm) you want the
IS.

Koekje

Reply to this Message