Which telephoto zoom lens should I get?

magdelan

Fish?
I am searching for a telephoto zoom lens that will allow me to photograph things from a far (hence the telephoto lens :) )

I'm not looking for a cheap-o lens nor do I need a $5,000 lens. I realize that some clarity is lost with a lens that has a greater focal range which is why I'd like to keep the range reasonably small (something above 150mm and below 300mm). I would also like the aperature to be as large as is affordable. I currently have a Tameron 28-75mm f/2.8. I realize that this is a tall order to fill, but I figure I would ask the experts here. Maybe you know something that I don't.

Thanks in advance for the help!!!
 
70-200 f/4 is an amazing lens in that range. The non-IS (older) version is an absolute steal.
 
Do you use a Canon or Nikon camera? Specific model would help as well, as there are some lenses which only work on certain bodies, plus you can factor in crop factor with the crop sensor cameras to help you get a little extra bang for your buck.
 
I have the Canon T2i. I will look into the 70-200mm lens, however I feel that a lens with an IS may be very important to me.
 
I have lots of experience with the 100-400mm L that Canon sells, I really enjoy it. I've found it to be an amazing lens, I dont think I'd ever part with it.
 
70-200 F4 non IS. I picked mine up on craigslist for $480, perfect condition. People constantly get L glass, then realize photography is expensive and sell their equipment for way too cheap... Buying new is dumb.
 
I have the Canon T2i. I will look into the 70-200mm lens, however I feel that a lens with an IS may be very important to me.

You get an extra stop or two when having IS so it can be a big deal.


70-200 F4 non IS. I picked mine up on craigslist for $480, perfect condition. People constantly get L glass, then realize photography is expensive and sell their equipment for way too cheap... Buying new is dumb.

It is expensive, and depending on your goal the f4 non IS might be good enough, but I can tell you right now coming from his 28-75 f2.8 he will be hugely disappointed if he gets an f4 lens.
Buying new is perfect if you want to make sure it has never been dropped or wet. Mind you it makes a huge difference if you are just messing around or getting paid.
I would personally never buy used camera equipment, even though I will tell people to all the time.
 
I have a 70-200 F4 non IS (willing to part with this one), and the same with IS, and a 70-200 F2.8 with IS. They are all awesome lenses, but not cheep. As much as I like the F2.8 version I usually take the F4 just because of the weight issue. The quality is the same. Only if I am going to be in very low light situations or will just be shooting from a vehicle (thus not having to lug that and other lenses around) will I take the F2.8 version.

Can't go wrong with any of them.

As for the 100-400 ... I won't even go there. Recty will be all over me :).
 
As much as I like the F2.8 version I usually take the F4 just because of the weight issue. The quality is the same.

I'm not even sure where to start with this.
What kind of camera are you using first?

I can tell the quality difference from my 85mm f1.4 and my 80-200 f2.8 (shooting at 85mm) and those are both high end glass. Once I have replaced a consumer lens with a "pro" level, it is impossible to go back, for me at least. And losing IS on top of everything and you still not noticing a difference, I kinda wonder what you are shooting a little more.
 
I'm not even sure where to start with this.
What kind of camera are you using first?

I can tell the quality difference from my 85mm f1.4 and my 80-200 f2.8 (shooting at 85mm) and those are both high end glass. Once I have replaced a consumer lens with a "pro" level, it is impossible to go back, for me at least. And losing IS on top of everything and you still not noticing a difference, I kinda wonder what you are shooting a little more.

That's the problem with asking folks what lens to buy. Everyone shoots differently. I'm a landscape guy, my Gitzo is way more useful than IS is to me. The only IS lens I have is my 100-400L and IS is always turned off.

BTW - The 70-200 f/4L is sharper than the 2.8, in my experience. It's also a LOT smaller and lighter. When the bag already weighs 30lbs thats a concern.
 
That's the problem with asking folks what lens to buy. Everyone shoots differently. I'm a landscape guy, my Gitzo is way more useful than IS is to me. The only IS lens I have is my 100-400L and IS is always turned off.

BTW - The 70-200 f/4L is sharper than the 2.8, in my experience. It's also a LOT smaller and lighter. When the bag already weighs 30lbs thats a concern.

yes, and I am not a Canon guy so knowing what lens shoots like what is a little different too.

I shoot studio-ish. So set up and shoot, not much moving and my gear is always handy.
And I don't use my SLR for vacations or the like.
 
You get an extra stop or two when having IS so it can be a big deal.

It always annoys me when folks post that about IS or VR. It's absolutely false. f/4 is f/4. Turning on stabilization doesn't let more light it. It just means you're letting your ability to hold still determine the right aperture vs. what the scene calls for. I don't like relinquishing creative control which is why I use a tripod. If the right aperture for a scene is f/11, I use it. I rarely give a damn what my shutter speed ends up at. When I do care, it's my choice, not the cameras or whether I think it'll cause camera shake that decides.

To each their own.
 
It always annoys me when folks post that about IS or VR. It's absolutely false. f/4 is f/4. Turning on stabilization doesn't let more light it. It just means you're letting your ability to hold still determine the right aperture vs. what the scene calls for. I don't like relinquishing creative control which is why I use a tripod. If the right aperture for a scene is f/11, I use it. I rarely give a damn what my shutter speed ends up at. When I do care, it's my choice, not the cameras or whether I think it'll cause camera shake that decides.

To each their own.

I never said f stop. I said stops, be it shutter, ISO or f stop.
And that is why what I said is true.

A tripod is not always possible, good luck using a tripod on a boat, or in a moving vehicle, etc.
 
Sure, but we're back to my first point. Hardly anyone shoots like "you." Everyone has their own style.
 
A tripod is not always possible, good luck using a tripod on a boat, or in a moving vehicle, etc.

Do it all the time.

I have mini pods and window pods at all times. 99% of my shooting is done outdoors. One of my mini pods also functions as a chest pod. My remote shutter release is always attached to my camera. When shooting where and what I do, there isn't normally time to set a shot up. you have to be ready at the drop of a hat. You can't shoot stuff like this'

DSC_9924.jpg


DSC_1315.jpg


DSC_1882.jpg


in a studio. If you wanna get out of your comfort zone, hang around.
 
Do it all the time.

I have mini pods and window pods at all times. 99% of my shooting is done outdoors. One of my mini pods also functions as a chest pod. My remote shutter release is always attached to my camera. When shooting where and what I do, there isn't normally time to set a shot up. you have to be ready at the drop of a hat. You can't shoot stuff like this'

in a studio. If you wanna get out of your comfort zone, hang around.

I have to ask how you use a tripod in a boat, and not have a use for IS or VR to give you an edge with shutter speed?
 
Back
Top