Best telephoto for surf shots under $400?

[ChrisDM]

Hi all - I asked this question more specifically in another forum, but will leave my impressions blank here and ask an open-ended question:

With $400 or less to spend, what lens would you buy for taking pics of surfers?

[ChrisDM]

Me again... OK, I have just "discovered" the Canon 70-200 f4L, so I'll consider spending up to $550 for this purchase.

Also, I have a thing against 'pods, so I am looking for a lens I can use handheld for surfing shots (in good light).

So what should I get? Thanks all...

[Hards80]

check out the Sigma APO MACRO SUPER II 70-300mm F4-5.6.. excellent lens for the money...and should offer you plenty of length on the tele end..

http://www.sigma-photo.com/lenses/le...40&navigator=3

[[email protected]]

ChrisDM,

The question I have for you is, what focal length do you need to photo surfers?

My understanding is surfers are "way out there".

Do you need 200mm, 300mm or 500mm?

-- Terry

[ChrisDM]

My Minolta A200 was 200mm at the long end and I got some decent shots after I did some signifigant cropping, but I would certainly want longer than this. I have never experienced any other tele lens, so I don't know the difference between 200, 300, 400 etc.

Basically I will decide between the Canon 75-300IS f4.5/5.6 and the 70-200 f4L. these will go on a Rebel XT so I'll get the crop factor. What I'm wondering is: Which will be more useful capturing these surf shots handheld: The faster f4 of the 70-200 f4L, or the IS of the 75-300IS f4.5/5.6?

And if I get the 200L, will I miss the extra range of the 300IS?

Thanks again for he advice...




[email protected] wrote:

ChrisDM,

The question I have for you is, what focal length do you need to photo surfers?

My understanding is surfers are "way out there".

Do you need 200mm, 300mm or 500mm?

-- Terry

[miatapaul]

From the surf shots I have taken, very limtied to a vacation in HI, I would think you are going to want more than 200mm. I would stay away from the 75-300 IS and would suggest looking at thrid party lenses. If you go with the 70 to 200 perhaps a tele converter would be a good thing to ad, as long as you have plenty o light. Perhaps you might start with the 70-200 L 4 and see if it is enough lens. It will hold it's value if you do not want to go the tele converter route. That is my plan anyway.

[Hards80]

i would check into sigma's faster 70-200 2.8 apo for about the same price as canon's 70-200 f4.0.. then if you get the 1.4 tc, you will have a 98-280 f4.0!!!!

[ChrisDM]

Hards80 wrote:

i would check into sigma's faster 70-200 2.8 apo for about the same price as canon's 70-200 f4.0.. then if you get the 1.4 tc, you will have a 98-280 f4.0!!!!

I appreciate the suggestion, but that's an $850 setup. I'm going to try a less expensive lens first, then when I inevitably want more, I can convince my wife how much happier a 98-280 F4.0 setup will make me, and then she will be convinced that she will never understand me, and eventually give in...

[ttmatsu]

He said $500 or less and the 70-200 f2.8 is $750 plus another $150 for the tc. That $500 basically limits him to the "consumer" grade zooms and I think everyone agrees that 200 is too short without severe cropping so the optically wonderful 70-200 f4 L is out. A lot depends on how close to the pier or waterline at the beach the surfers are. I would go with the Tokina 80-400 because it gives you the longest reach of any consumer zoom while staying under $400. Almost all the lower priced zooms will be "soft" on the long end so you'll need to sharpen them. Also, with the 3rd party lenses, the focusing will be slower than with a Sigma HSM or Canon USM lens.

As long as you stick to bright days, you should be able to stop it down and still get a high enough shutter speed.

[Hards80]

i said "about".. ok i used a loose definition of the term.. but i couldnt resist mentioning the lens..

for the price check out the tokina 80-400 mentioned and do take a look at sigma's 70-300 APO, they are both quite nice bits of kit for the price..