Best Lens Choice For 450d

[PieEater]

Hi,

I recently bought a 450d packaged with the 18-55 kit lens and the 55-250 IS lens.

I mostly photograph wildlife, birds and aircraft so the longer lens is usually the one attached to the camera, though at some point I would like to experiment with landscapes, still lifes & macro's (insects / animals / flowers).

The main problem I have with the 55-250 IS is that whilst it is capable of some great shots the auto-focus is fairly slow for tracking fast moving birds in flight (I regularly go to bird of prey displays) and even with fairly static subjects it's at most 80% reliable in the best of conditions. I would also appreciate some additional focal length as often with wildlife 250mm is not nearly enough. I haven't really made enough use of the 18-55 to form an opinion of it yet.

My budget is always going to be limited, but rather than regret buying a cheaper alternatives I'd rather wait until I could afford something I'd be happy with.

My first purchase will obviously need to replace the 55-250 and make up for it's shortcommings. I have read the recent PhotoPlus review and it seems like the Sigma 120-400 lens is a good price/performance bet over the Canon 100-400, however I don't know how much better the image quality and auto-focus would be over what I have. Also I'm lacking a fast lens so I was wandering though it would be a more expensive option whether the Sigma 70-200 2.8 and a Sigma 2x teleconverter would be a better bet in the long run, how would this combination compare with the 120-400 lens in terms of quality and focusing?

I'd also appreciate any suggestions as to another lens that I could look at that might let me combine Macro, landscape and still life, or is this too much to expect from a single lens?

Thanks in advance.

[H4V0C]

Hi,

i'm fairly new to Photography,and im in simular situation, I bought the 500D but i only could afford the basic package,so i just have the basic 18-55mm lens.I have found websites out there that will let me hire lenses for a day or so,yeah,its expensive,but a small price to pay if you wanna get the best Lens out of your money.

i hope this helps

John

[OldBoy]

You won't get a lens to cover Macro, landscape and wildlife in one go. If you want a longer reach try to locate a Sigma 50-500mm F4-6.3 also called a bigma but you need bright conditions to use it at longest length. Don't think the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 is well regarded by users and is not in the same frame as Canon's 70-200mm F2.8. I use the Nikon 70-200mm F2.8 VR with both 1.4 and a 2x converters, handheld in most conditions without problems. I've also used the Sigma 50-500mm F4-6.3 with a Sigma 1.4 converter, but manual focus only, with good results at 700mm but you do need bright conditions. You could also consider the Canon EF 70-200mm f4L USM at under £500 and use a converter/extender with it to get the extra reach.

[flake]

As Oldboy says you're not going to get a lens which covers everything you want, and if you want to shoot wildlife then I'm afraid birds can require the most expensive of all the lenses produced. The 50 - 500mm will get you the reach at an affordable price, but has a slow f/6.3 aperture at the long end, which does mean you need decent light.

I disagree that the Sigma 70 - 200mm f/2.8 isn't highly regarded by users Photozone says: As such it is a viable alternative to the Nikkor AF 80-200mm f/2.8 ED (or the Canon EF 70-200m f/2.8 USM L) and on Fredmiranda it scored a healthy 9.1, however there is a caveat the scores are for the older version of the lens, and since the 'macro' incarnation it's not quite as good, the new scores a much more lowly 7.8 so if you do decide this lens is for you make sure you buy the right one.

The cheapest way to get to 600mm and still maintain auto focus is to buy a Sigma 120 - 300mm f/2.8 and a 1.4 & a 2x teleconverter, but it's still going to cost around £2500

With landscape I like to use 70mm and stitch several shots together so a 70 - 200mm lens would allow this if you are prepared for a work around in software, you will of course also need a tripod.

For Macro it is possible to buy Macro filters which screw on the end of the lens and can give reasonable results, the Sigma 70 -200mm has a 77mm thread - more expensive, but that is the standard size of most of Canons L grade lenses so they will always be of use as & when your photography develops.

[mudbug]

A 70-200 2.8 with a 1.4 or a 2x converter, the latter giving the worst of IQ, on a crop body gives you good reach without going prime. Also, the 70-200 works well in some landscape work. You can also purchase extention tubes to attach to the 70-200 to get close to macro possiblities. I quess what I am trying to say, is that a good quality70-200, adding a few options, makes for a good lens in your arsenal. However, that being said, there is no sub for a lens designed for a certain application. Prime for distance, macro for close up and wide for landscape. Decide what is more important to you now and go with that lens, learn that discipline, save your money, buy the next lens and go.

[ether]

Originally Posted by mudbug

A 70-200 2.8 with a 1.4 or a 2x converter, the latter giving the worst of IQ, on a crop body gives you good reach without going prime. Also, the 70-200 works well in some landscape work. You can also purchase extention tubes to attach to the 70-200 to get close to macro possiblities. I quess what I am trying to say, is that a good quality70-200, adding a few options, makes for a good lens in your arsenal. However, that being said, there is no sub for a lens designed for a certain application. Prime for distance, macro for close up and wide for landscape. Decide what is more important to you now and go with that lens, learn that discipline, save your money, buy the next lens and go.

this is the way I chose to go with the Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS and the 2X converter

I also use a 70-200 f2.8 (none stabilized ) with tubes for macro in the studio

I know its odd having both lenses but I bought the none IS cheap on Ebay first

but mudbug is right you cant really beat having a full range of prime lenses


Ed

[chris-p]

Originally Posted by ether

but mudbug is right you cant really beat having a full range of prime lenses

My bank manager wouldn't agree with that statement

[ether]

Originally Posted by chris-p

My bank manager wouldn't agree with that statement

know what you mean

what constitutes a full range anyway?

34 50 75 135 200 mm ?

would you include a fisheye and a 400mm

[chris-p]

For my system it would be 14, 35, 50, 80, 105, 135, 200, 300, 400 etc....!

[chris-p]

Wouldn't bother with a fisheye TBH