Which lens?

F

.Froot.

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
9,261
Reaction score
0
I have a Canon 450D for which I want to buy a lens for wildlife photography (mainly). I currently have two options available to me:
Canon EF 70 - 300 mm f 4.0 - 5.6 IS USM STABILISER (R7000)
or
Canon EF 70 - 200 mm f 4.0 L USM (Official SA dealer) (R7700) and then later adding the Canon EXTENDER EF 1.4 X II (R3700) (which brings it to 290mm f4.0).

Now my question is, which one would be a better buy? I took a look at reviews for both these lenses and the 200mm (white lens) is preferred above the 300mm (black lens), even with its IS. Can anyone help me on this?
 
froot said:
I have a Canon 450D for which I want to buy a lens for wildlife photography (mainly). I currently have two options available to me:
Canon EF 70 - 300 mm f 4.0 - 5.6 IS USM STABILISER (R7000)
or
Canon EF 70 - 200 mm f 4.0 L USM (Official SA dealer) (R7700) and then later adding the Canon EXTENDER EF 1.4 X II (R3700) (which brings it to 290mm f4.0).

Now my question is, which one would be a better buy? I took a look at reviews for both these lenses and the 200mm (white lens) is preferred above the 300mm (black lens), even with its IS. Can anyone help me on this?
Click to expand...

Don't ask us. :D
We don't know jack.
It comes down to what your need.
Both are great lenses!
 
Well let's put it this way... I've had some awesome shots of leopards and cheetah at the Kruger Park... one problem though... they only filled 1/8th of the frame...

Which is why I'm asking if the two setups above would give a similar result (seeing that 300mm ~~ 280mm), or if the extender would have a negative effect on the image and so on...
 
The 70-300 is my next lens btw. Then the 50mm f1.8, then the 100mm f2.8 macro, then I'm gonna look to get some L series lenses. Probably 24-105mm and 100mm-400mm.
 
mercurial said:
The 70-300 is my next lens btw. Then the 50mm f1.8, then the 100mm f2.8 macro, then I'm gonna look to get some L series lenses. Probably 24-105mm and 100mm-400mm.
Click to expand...

Congrats on your 11000th...

I like the 100-400 quite a lot, but I don't have 16k to spend...
The 70-200 I mentioned up there is an L series, which is why it supports the extender. In your opinion, what would be the best option? I really am just focusing on wildlife photography, medium range shots (under 400mm range) and further on regular close-ups. The compromise being the extra R4500 in getting the L-series and the extender (and then the extra 300g weight).
 
500mm? :)



I do love that 70-200mm f/4 though. :o
 
bwana said:
500mm? :)



I do love that 70-200mm f/4 though. :o
Click to expand...

This was from a relatively short distance, right? Which lense did you use here?
About that 500mm... I would rather go for 800mm Cannon (excuse the pun), but there both price and the 5-odd kilos are a downside for me... /me not paying R100k for a lense :D
 
froot said:
This was from a relatively short distance, right? Which lense did you use here?
About that 500mm... I would rather go for 800mm Cannon (excuse the pun), but there both price and the 5-odd kilos are a downside for me... /me not paying R100k for a lense :D
Click to expand...
That was taken with the same Sigma 150-500 at 500mm - not sure how far I was away from it - I tend to avoid things with tusks. :D
 
Last edited:
bwana said:
That was taken with the same Sigma 150-500 at 500mm - not sure how far I was away from it - I tend to avoid things with tusks. :D
Click to expand...

I've seen that Sigma, it's actually got a most decent price... how good is the compatibility with the Canons? You have a 400D or something, right? Assuming it's quite similar to the 450D?
 
froot said:
I've seen that Sigma, it's actually got a most decent price... how good is the compatibility with the Canons? You have a 400D or something, right? Assuming it's quite similar to the 450D?
Click to expand...
It's got the same EF mount and everything ;)
 
Okay cool, will take a look at that one. I see you get the lens such as yours but without the OS for R4000 less... what's the difference? People do complain about that one's AF time though...
 
bwana said:
They do?

Which one?
Click to expand...

Oh wait, the OS is the Optical Stabilisation... huge difference in price :eek: ... but I suppose it's quite important on a long lens.


The reviews are quite critical of the 170-500mm without the OS, regarding the AF.
Can't find the frggin' linkie now.
 
Thanks, will do... I bought the camera at Foto World in the Kolonnade, could also go there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X