Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 USM IS

mikergj

mikergj

Suspended / Banned
Messages
123
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,

I am a complete novice and I am happy learning my way round my first dslr with the kit lens.

I love the out doors, climbing mountains or just a walk in the woods. Being a ex soldier I have spent many hours even days sat in hides and always loved the wild life you would see, especially when they dont know your there or dont feel threatened by your presence. Unfortunately in them days the idea of the hide was not to take pics of wild life. But this is my main reason for buying this camera.

So my question, would the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 USM IS lens be a good first lens to start with for this kind of photography. As I said I am a complete novice and dont have a clue.

Thanks all.:wave:
 
Hi

As another ex squaddie on the forum id say thats a good start, its quite a well regarded lens. Depending on how much you want to spend there is also the 55-250 IS and is a very good lens especially for the price. Although you lose at the long end which isnt ideal for wildlife.

You will end up wanting a 400/500mm lens in the end though but they are serious money and if your good at sneaking up on wildlife then you will get some fab shots with that lens.
 
Thanks Euan, at least I know I am on the right track.
 
I would look for something longer 2nd hand as the 70-300 is quite short and you will be wanting a longer kens very soon and lose money in the process of selling the 70-300 to get it.

You can find older lenses at a good price if you look around and are patient: Sigma 400mm, Sigma 170-500, Tamron 200-500 and so on
 
I got a 70-300 IS as my first long lens, paired with the 400d. I have had good shots and some not some good shots with it.
I now have the 100-400L IS, and this is a much better lens IMO.

But, days when I don't want to get the 100-400L out (is somewhat conspicuous), I use the 70-300 still, and can get good shots with it.
Here's a shot I got recently: http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=266864
 
Another ex 70-300 owner here on the 500D, it is an absolutely cracking lens and was very happy with the results. I also try to shoot wildlife and soon swapped mine in for the 100-400 L, not because I wasn't happy with the lens itself but becasue I wanted the extra length the 400 provided.

Euan's comments are spot on, the lens you've chosen is an excellent lens but for wildlife it can be a tad short on occasion depending on what your shooting.
 
Thanks for the reply's, Great pic by the way coldpenguin
 
Quality pic peter, I have seen one on here, just cant afford it this week.
 
I'll echo all above,
I just got my 70-300 IS USM earlier this year but haven't used it intensly yet.

Although as said I do find it a bit on the short side ( always a 300mm for birds, and wanting more tbh) I really wanted the 100-400L IS as i've heard and seen so much about it but £1000+ was just too far for me as a hobby.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top