Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 13, 2007, 10:52 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 47
Default

Trying to decide whether or not to take advantage of the Canon rebates.

I'm looking at the 70-200 f/4 and the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS.

They are roughly the same price (550$). After reviewing the specs, it looks like they both weigh ~1.5 lbs. I thought the 70-200 was lighter. Can anyone confirm?

For the same dollar amount, and the need to take good motion/ light action sports shots (and some birds, bugs, and animals), which would you choose?

Lastly, it looks like the IS is on the longer lens for stability, is that a good enough feature that would warrant getting that one?

And, lastly, lastly, should I just save my money and get the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG?

I'm going to add to my collection by getting the 430EX as well.

I appreciate all comments. I value everyone's wisdom (from which I'm trying to acquire!).



thx...
kc571 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 13, 2007, 2:17 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
pagerboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 483
Default

For low light shots you might want to find a lens with f2.8 throughout the zoom range?
pagerboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2007, 3:50 PM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 47
Default

I agree, but my wallet does not concur. I know there's a good Sigma for about 900.

Hopefully, I'll get my kids to play outdoor sports.
kc571 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 14, 2007, 11:45 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Marc H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 130
Default

kc571 schreef:
Quote:
Trying to decide whether or not to take advantage of the Canon rebates.

I'm looking at the 70-200 f/4 and the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS.

They are roughly the same price (550$). After reviewing the specs, it looks like they both weigh ~1.5 lbs. I thought the 70-200 was lighter. Can anyone confirm?

For the same dollar amount, and the need to take good motion/ light action sports shots (and some birds, bugs, and animals), which would you choose?

Lastly, it looks like the IS is on the longer lens for stability, is that a good enough feature that would warrant getting that one?

And, lastly, lastly, should I just save my money and get the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG?

I'm going to add to my collection by getting the 430EX as well.

I appreciate all comments. I value everyone's wisdom (from which I'm trying to acquire!).



thx...

You've got a problem....

let me explain.

For action photography you need a fast focussing lens: 70-200 F4 would be the obvious choice here.
For birds you want more reach, even 300 mm is on the short side: 70-300 would be a good choice, a longer lens even bettter

For bugs, both lenses won't do. You better take a look at a dedicated macro lens.


For animals (zoo's?), both lenses would do fine, the 70-300 would be better for more reach, but the 70-200 has slightly nicer bokeh.

The sigma is a nice lens for its price, but doesn't compare to the other 2.



A frend of mine was in about the same position 2 years ago.

he started with the sigma, played with it for a year. Then the slow focus/picture quality at 300 mm started to bother him, so he bought the 70-200 F4. a few months later he bought a Canon 300mm F4 lens, with 1.4x extender, specially for bird photohraphy, the 70-200 was to short for that. And now he's looking for a dedicated macro lens..

Good luck with your choice
Marc H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 14, 2007, 4:26 PM   #5
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

If you are looking for quality then have a look at the Sigma 100-300 f4, here is the review http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...00_4/index.htmand the last statement speaks for itself.

The AF 100-300mm f/4 EX HSM is the most impressive Sigma lens tested to date. It is capable to deliver a near flawless performance with great resolution figures, low vignetting, low distortions, low CAs and as a nice whipped cream on top the build quality feels just right. It also mates pretty well with the Canon EF 1.4x II converter at costs of relatively high CAs and a somewhat lower but still high resolution. All-in-all ... highly recommended!

It is a little more expensive however you will have far better quality than the 70-300 and more range than the 70-200.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 15, 2007, 8:28 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Trique Daddi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 282
Default

If length is important and the reason for the 400mm lens ( which I'm sure it is),then you may want to consider a flash with more reach such as the 550 or580 EX models.

Happy Shooting!

trique Daddi
Trique Daddi is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:07 AM.