2 lens needed. Advice?

[mpderksen]

Note, I'm decent with my camera, but no where near needing pro level gear.
Current kit is: Canon Rebel XSi, kit lens 18-55mm, fixed 50mm ES, and a Speedlite flash. Nothing fancy, I admit, but works great for me.
In June I'm taking the Alaska inland passage cruise with the whole clan for my parents 50th anniversary. Considering that I expect some pretty amazing scenery, I would like to purchase a zoom lens of some kind, in the 200-300mm range, but have it flexible enough that I don't have to swap it out every other shot. My budget for this, I'm guessing, is about $500-800, and I'm comfortable with used. For me, this is a pretty significant investment, so I'd appreciate some input from more experienced users, but please don't tell me about how amazing some $2,000 one is....
Second, for macro, specifically for shots of my tank etc. I love the DOF I can get with portraits with my 50mm, but shots of single corals leave me under-whelmed. I'm not clear on the difference between this fixed distance lens and a true macro lens. If I simply need to improve my skill with the one I have, please tell me. Otherwise, a recommendation for a macro lens would be next on my wish list.

Cheers,

 

[rynoe]

The Canon EF 100-400 USM lens would be great for what you need. New they are expensive but you can usually pic them up used in the $800-1200 range.

 

[mpderksen]

2 lens needed. Advice?

A quick search, and yes, many used for $1,000. While I'm sure it's incredible, perhaps a bit overkill for my needs? I do want zoom, not telephoto, so if putting off the macro a bit makes sense to get quality, I'm game.
It is unrealistic to drop the price point and still get something I'll be happy with?

 

[rynoe]

Perhaps a bit overkill but depends on future plans especially if you cruise/ travel often. The reason I bought it was for exactly that. Pretty much the only lens I use when I go on trips now. There are several options that will work for you so it's hard to choose.

 

[mpderksen]

Perhaps a bit overkill but depends on future plans especially if you cruise/ travel often. The reason I bought it was for exactly that. Pretty much the only lens I use when I go on trips now. There are several options that will work for you so it's hard to choose.

Fair enough. How about some feedback on the macro lens option?

 

[noy]

I was going to recommend my canon EF 100-300 USM - when I realize they don't seem to make it anymore (wow, remember when cameras weren't digital). This seems to be replaced by the 75-300 EF 4.5/5.6. If the optics are about the same - then its an great general purpose telephoto zoom lens - very versatile and you can still take great photos with it. I'm sure the optics and build quality isn't the same as the 100-400 but its still a solid camera. Goes for about 200. (I bought the 100-300 for sale for about $300 - about 20 years ago - wow how things have changed).

As for macro - I think there are only 2 realistic options - the 100mm/F2.8 and the "L" version of that.

 

[mpderksen]

Well, I opted for an ES 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. Reviews were great, and I found a used one with a 30-day guarantee for $300 total. After the Alaska trip I'll circle back for the macro. Those are more expensive than I had expected. That should pretty much complete my bag.

 

[richieii]

I would love to go to Alaska. I picked up a canon 10-18mm last year, that would be a great landscape lens. As for wild life I would buy used or rent a 100-400mm.
Just my 2 cents.

 

[mpderksen]

I would love to go to Alaska. I picked up a canon 10-18mm last year, that would be a great landscape lens. As for wild life I would buy used or rent a 100-400mm.

Just my 2 cents.

Never thought of a dedicated landscape lens. Not that sophisticated I guess. Lol. The zoom is $650 new, so $300 used was just fine with me. At least I'll have time to experiment with it before the trip. My tripod is certainly too bulky for travel, so I'll also pick up a mono-pod. But I opted for non-L version specifically so I could afford IS for mostly handheld use. Also a polarizing filter will be a must too.
I'll take my time looking for the macro.

 

[IPT]

Living in Alaska I find one of my most used lenses is my 24-105. it's a bit short on the tele side covers the wide and mid range quite nicely (on a full frame sensor).



If I'm going light I will take that, a 300mm fixed lens a 1.4 tele converter. Honestly I just bought a 500mm! I know it'll be too long a lot of the time but sometimes the animals are just so far off. That or things like birds or marmots are just small and hard to fill the frame with.



I think you'll be happy with the 300 most of the time. At times you'll wish you had more but for the price you can't beat it. The 100-400 is a decent lens but apparently there are some good and not so good copies with regard to sharpness. I've never been a fan of that lens but I think that might be I'm just old school and prefer a fixed lens.

Have a great trip. Alaska is unforgettable.

 

[IPT]

a few more.

 

[IPT]

okay, one more..maybe two .