Lens help please

[Mickee]

Thx again for your help
As I told you a few weeks back I am going with the Rebel XT
and the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM for my indoor sporting needs.

However I am undecided between these 2
EF 70-200mm f/4L USM
EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
Please help me make my decision.

Also a recommendation other then the kit lens would be appreciated.

Thank You,

 

[mabas9395]

Are you wanting to use your new zoom lens for your indoor sports or did you have another purpose in mind?

It also looks like from your lens choices, your budget is in the $600 range. Is that where you want to stay for your zoom or can you bump that up some?

And do you already have the kit lens and just want to upgrade it, or do you not have it at all?

 

[Anewman]

Thx again for your help
As I told you a few weeks back I am going with the Rebel XT
and the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM for my indoor sporting needs.

However I am undecided between these 2
EF 70-200mm f/4L USM
EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
Please help me make my decision.

Also a recommendation other then the kit lens would be appreciated.

Thank You,

Well neither is really fast enough for indoor sports and IS will not help when shooting outdoor sports(other than golf). I would grab that L lens, but it will be 160mm shorter than the 70-300. Picture quality will be sharper.

 

[Mickee]

Sorry I wasn't clear.

The zoom will not be for indoors sports, I am going to use the 85mm for this.
Zoom will be used for landscape, birding, kids, boats & planes.
I was budgeting the $600ish for the zoom with hope to leave some for the other lens.
I do not have the kit lens. looking for advice here on which to look at,
depending on cost of this lens,I may have some to bump up the zoom and would like to hear what you are thinking of bumping up too.

Thx again and sorry for confusing you.

 

[mabas9395]

Between the two you are looking at, you have to decide what is more important to you; image quality or reach? The 70-200 L lens you are looking at is known for very high image quality (like all L lenses are). However, it is doen't reach as far as the 70-300 IS, and if you are going birding, you need all the reach you can get. But just because the 70-300 IS is not an L, doesn't mean you won't get sharp photos from it. I've seen some great examples from both.

If you don't have the kit lens, you will need something wider. Many people suggest the EF-S 17mm-85mm f/4.0-5.6 USM IS lens as a kit replacement. You said you wanted to do landscapes so a lens wider than the 70mm end of the zooms will be necessary. It can be found for the $500 price range.

If you are tight on a budget, some of the 3rd party lenses (those not made by Canon, like Sigma or Tamaron) can be a cheaper alternative. Some are good enough so that your average eye wouldn't notice a difference for casual shooting.

 

[TwoOldPoohs]

Mickee,

I agree with everything mabas9395 said. As an alternate to the kit lens, I bought the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 and I've been generally satisfied with the results. I do have both the 70-200 f/4L and the 70-300 IS, and I've been increasingly dissatisfied with the latter. I would buy the 70-200 f/4L, and also pick up the Tamron 1.4 teleconverter to give you the extra reach you want for birding. You will probably need to use a tripod, though.

 

[Kelly Grannell]

Currently I'm using 70-200 F/2.8L IS, but as a walkaround lens, when available (when my boss is not using his), I use his 70-300 f/5.6 IS and it's good enough, especially considering the price).

Another lens I can recommend (based on Canon demo a couple of days ago) is Canon 18-55 f/2.8 EF-S IS. I think it's going to retail around US$900.

 

[ndelaware]

The IS on the 70-300IS is Canon's newest IS system. It has two modes, one of which is a panning mode especially for moving subjects. This lens has also recieved alot of praise is for it's image quality which is very close to "L" glass levels.

 

[mhutchinson]

Either lens will serve you very well and personally, I would decide which of the limitations you would be able to live with easier from either. Another alternative to consider if you go with the 70-200mm f/4 L, you can get a 1.4X converter for it in the future which would change it to a 98-280mm (close to the 300mm upper range before the crop factor) and you will be using 'L' glass on a lens that is consistantly highly rated.

btw Amazon has the 70-200mm L on sale, a little bit off everyone elses regular price.

Amazon Lens Sale

Mike

 

[Kelly Grannell]

I agree. Unless you need that extra fast lens (f/2.8) and IS, the 70-200f/4 is THE sharpest lens I've ever used. Even sharper than 70-200 f/2.8L IS.

PS: 70-200 f/2.8L IS also uses the new IS technology (one for regular shake, and another for panning)

 

[blackjackdelta]

What about a Sigma 17-70?

Jack

 

[Kelly Grannell]

I never tried that one. No more Sigma for me, at least for the time being. My clients are 'blinded' with L series lens and demand that I use L lenses all the time.

 

[Mickee]

Thx again all for the direction,

I think I have it narrowed down to the following.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
Canon EF-S 17mm-85mm f/4.0-5.6 USM IS

By summers end I should be able to get some thing long for birding.

Let me know your thoughts.