A&P Modest Lens recommendation

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by Ballast, Mar 16, 2004.

  1. Ballast

    Ballast Cold Heartless Bastard

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2001
    Messages:
    7,496
    Likes Received:
    24
    Location:
    London, Ontario
    Hey guys. It's time to play "Ballast is a cheap bastard" again...

    I got my Sigma 28-135, and I love it. I couldn't justify the money on the IS lens from Canon, for more that double the price, and on such a short lens.

    But now I'm looking for a replacement for my cheapo SIGMA 70-300MM 4.0-5.6 DL AF. It retails for $250 canadian, and I got it for $150 thrown in with my Rebel. I'm not looking to spend money on L glass...

    Should I get the standard CANON EF 75-300MM/4-5.6 USM II/III AF (not really sure it it's and upgrade) for $300.

    The CANON EF 75-300MM/4-5.6 ISU IMAGE STAB (not sure if I can justify the money) for $750.

    Or the CANON EF 100-300MM/4.5-5.6 USM AF (I'm really liking this) for $500.


    It might be nice to have image stabilization in such a long lens, but photography hasn't even reached the level of "hobby" for me yet. I don't know how much of an increase in quality I would get with the $300 lens. The $500 seems like a nice medium for me, but it only goes as wide at 100mm, which is really 160mm on my camera.

    Should I bother considering the SIGMA 70-300MM 4-5.6 APO MACRO CANON AF at $400?? I really doubt it.

    They all use the same filter size as I currently have now, so that's not an issue at all. Do any of you guys have one of these lenses? How do you like them?
     
  2. Ballast

    Ballast Cold Heartless Bastard

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2001
    Messages:
    7,496
    Likes Received:
    24
    Location:
    London, Ontario
    no one owns any of these lenses???
     
  3. XtremeSaturn

    XtremeSaturn New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    1,468
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Florida
    I've been looking into the 75-300 f/4-5.6 USM and am having mixed emotions. I've been reading a lot of reviews that almost always come back with this lens being soft after 200mm (looses sharpness and contrast) and image quality can suffer if you get the shakes in low light situations (this is where the IS version is best). If it's a nice day they say you shouldn't have that big of a problem. I've only seen a couple of shots from this lens that look good at 300mm and more than a dozen that seem too dull.

    My other option is the Canon - EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM Lens. This one is $20 more than the 75-300 and seems to not suffer from softness the other does.

    When it comes down to it though, you get what you pay for. I want to go back and take some pics with both lenses and download them on my machine and see what kind of difference I'm looking at.
     
  4. Ballast

    Ballast Cold Heartless Bastard

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2001
    Messages:
    7,496
    Likes Received:
    24
    Location:
    London, Ontario
    i think i'm probably going to go to the camera store with my camera, and take some shots with the lenses there....

    but i read that digital photos aren't the best way to evaluate sharpness... that i should be using slide film, and looking at it with a 10x loop....
    doubt i'll be doing that anytime soon.

    I just don't want to go out and spend more money, if it's not going to be any better than what I have...
     
  5. Vilnius

    Vilnius Bruised, battered, and scarred but hard. OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2003
    Messages:
    16,211
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    Toronto
    Most of the 75-300, are in about the same class, I don't think you'll see an appreciable difference in any one of them, the 75-300IS is a "meh" lens, while it's probably better than your Sigma copy, I don't think it's worth the price difference.

    I know you said you didn't want to spend for a "L" lens, but you might want to check eBay or the classifieds for a 100-300L, (not the same as the 100-300 you have mentioned) it's an older lens, which is now discontinued (it's slow at 5.6) but optically, it's superior to the 75-300 type lenses, and the pricing is about the same.
    V
     
  6. Ballast

    Ballast Cold Heartless Bastard

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2001
    Messages:
    7,496
    Likes Received:
    24
    Location:
    London, Ontario
    thanks for the info. any idea what price i might be able to get on that 100-300L?
    There's not much in London for used camera equipment... but I've heard people talk about places in toronto (I think church street for some reason)
     
  7. Vilnius

    Vilnius Bruised, battered, and scarred but hard. OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2003
    Messages:
    16,211
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    Toronto
    Yeah, there are lots of Camera shops down at Church/Queen area.

    I think, you'll pay more up here from a camera store, (assuming you can find one) than you will even off of eBay where pricing is about $400-450usd (about 525-600CAD)

    V
     

Share This Page