Canon 70-300 IS Purchased! (was Sorry, In Need of Lens Advice)

68lbs

68lbs

Suspended / Banned
Messages
5,450
Name
April 2008
Edit My Images
No
Ok, I wasn't really planning on buying a new lens for some time, but I've just realised Sunderland Airshow is just a few weeks and as it's our 'annual family airshow day out' and I'd like to try and get more than just a prick on a blue background.

My current lenses are listed below, and my plan was to get something like a 70-200 f2.8 next, with the option of adding a 2x converter for more length. Or 100-400, again in that manky grey/beige colour. But I can't justify that sort of money at the moment.

So, what kind of length would I need for an airshow (planes in the sky, not on the ground), and is it worthwhile buying a 'cheap' telephoto for the time being? If yes, then what? Or would I be better off buying the Canon 2x converter and putting that on with my 100mm f2.8 Macro? I am right in thinking that would give 200mm f/5.6 yeah?

If it's any help making recommendations, I went and explored a local wetlands reserve last night too and fancy parking my arse down there some time as just wandering round I saw (and scared off) quite a few interesting (to me) birds.

I am quite happy to accept 'web quality' for the time being. So cropping, or scaling down to regain IQ would be 'acceptable' for this purchase.

Oh, and I don't really want to hire a lens.

Thanks in advance :)
 
The Sigma 120-400 OS HSM seems to be a good buy and I have seen some nice shots on Pbase with it...

It is not that expensive either, I think it is in the region of £550.00.
 
Canon 2x won't fit Canon 100mm macro I believe.

Really think you need to be 200mm+ for airshows and 300mm+ for wildlife.
 
grumpybadger said:
Canon 2x won't fit Canon 100mm macro I believe.
Click to expand...

Oooo, I didn't realise they only fit certain lenses. That's not much use then!

Ok, I know you get what you pay for, but are lenses like this Canon EF 75-300mm f4/5.6 USM MK3 really just a waste of time and money? I really wasn't planning on buying a new lens now, so unless I get something cheap to give me at least some length, I'll be pointing the 100mm skywards and hoping for the best :D

PSIFox - they are some great images!
 
Ok, the 70-300 IS looks like the sort of thing... is it this one at f/4-5.6?

Does anyone on here reading this own one? recommend one?

Thanks
 
Just found a Canon 55-250 IS that people have rated too? Seems a bargain at less than £200, and I'm wondering if that might be a better buy considering this is likely to be a temporary purchase to be sold on probably in 6-12 months time. It's almost twice the price for an extra 50mm.
 
Revised title, to hopefully get some thoughts on above two lenses :)
 
I have the 55-250 IS and would say, for the money, its a cracking lens. Lightweight but not flimsy and excellent IQ. If you're reducing for web, even better.

You can pick it up online for about £170 (OneStop Digital) or about £240 in Jessops.

Negatives are that at 250mm you are down to f5.6 which, for what I use it for, can be a little slow. On a bright day though its spot on.

Whether it'll be enough reach for an airshow though, I honestly have no idea.
 
I have the 55-250 IS lens, it's great. I wanted to get a similar sort of reach to the lens on the Z2 (38-380mm in 35mm equiv). I used the Z2 for some shots at the Eastbourne Airshow last year, and I think they came out ok, see this thread for those images. This shot was taken with the 55-250 at 250mm a couple of days ago. This last shot it not the greatest, and could probably do with some more processing, but also taken on the 250mm lens testing it out when I first got it.

IMG_0323.jpg


Whilst 250mm might not be ideal for Airshow shots I'm going to use it until I can convince the CFO that I need to spend a lot more money on a longer lens :D this might take quite some time. HTH
 
Personally I own the 70-300mm IS and find it rather soft at the upper range.

Perhaps I got a bad one, perhaps its normal I'm not sure, But I'm currently looking to replace mine for a sharper/longer lens, most likely the Canon 100-400mm L IS.

just my opinion on one of these lenses, never used the other so can't comment
 
Well, following comments on here re the two IS lenses I just popped into my local retailer to get their view. I'm now the proud owner of a Canon 70-300 IS. I think I might have got a good price too... £299 brand new!

:woot:
 
Congrats. Enjoy the airshow.

Before that thought remeber to practice your panning.

Also for prop planes or helos you want to be using a shutterof 1/125 or less to blur the blades.

For jets a fast shutter is fine unless you have a background other than sky in which case play with lower speeds to get a blur you like.
 
68lbs said:
Well, following comments on here re the two IS lenses I just popped into my local retailer to get their view. I'm now the proud owner of a Canon 70-300 IS. I think I might have got a good price too... £299 brand new!

:woot:
Click to expand...
Could you say which retailer together with contact details please? thanks
 
as i noted in another thread, a friend and myself tested the 70-300is against the newish 55-250is and were surprised that the 55-250 was overall a better lens we found his 70-300 was very soft at the edges whereas the 55-250 was sharp (albeit not quite as sharp in the middle) across the whole frame. hope this helps
 
A nudge and a wink. ;)

Actually, it came in a white box rather than a pretty Canon box. Was originally part of a 40D kit that also included a 17-85mm. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top