Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Lens Confusion  (Read 9612 times)
ARD
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 296



WWW
« Reply #20 on: November 24, 2005, 05:51:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Think I'll go for the 70-200 f2.8

However, for more reach, has anyone had experience of this Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 EX APO RF

I've read some good reviews on it, or is there a better alternative?
Logged
jani
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1604



WWW
« Reply #21 on: November 25, 2005, 03:57:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Think I'll go for the 70-200 f2.8

However, for more reach, has anyone had experience of this Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 EX APO RF

I've read some good reviews on it, or is there a better alternative?
Although I haven't tried this Sigma lens myself, I think I can guarantee that the EF 70-200 f/2.8L is optically far superior, also with the EF 1.4x Extender II, and possibly even with the EF 2x Extender II. 50-500 is too long a reach for a lens to be really good.

Your alternative is to get something covering the remaining 200-500mm. This could e.g. be the EF 300mm f/4L or f/2.8L, with or without IS, with or without the 1.4x Extender II.
Logged

Jan
ARD
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 296



WWW
« Reply #22 on: November 25, 2005, 12:42:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Although I haven't tried this Sigma lens myself, I think I can guarantee that the EF 70-200 f/2.8L is optically far superior, also with the EF 1.4x Extender II, and possibly even with the EF 2x Extender II. 50-500 is too long a reach for a lens to be really good.

Your alternative is to get something covering the remaining 200-500mm. This could e.g. be the EF 300mm f/4L or f/2.8L, with or without IS, with or without the 1.4x Extender II.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=52133\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Does the following sound a good option

70-200 f2.8 L
EF400mm f5.6 L

and either a 1.4 or 2 teleconverter
Logged
jani
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1604



WWW
« Reply #23 on: November 26, 2005, 02:34:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Does the following sound a good option

70-200 f2.8 L
EF400mm f5.6 L

and either a 1.4 or 2 teleconverter
As far as I know, both of these lenses are very good. I have the former lens in the IS version, and I'm very satisfied.

The 400mm f/5.6L is something I only know from reputation, which seems to be good overall. But keep this in mind:

It's not a fast lens, and with the TCs, it will definitely be slow. That may or may not be a problem for you, since it doesn't come with IS.

Unfortunately, your alternatives -- the f/4 DO IS and the f/2.8L IS -- are several times the price.

If you can live with the bellows of the 100-400mm, consider that one. Or consider the EF 300mm f/4L IS (the f/2.8L IS is optically superior, but also more than three times the price).

And, as others have suggested to other people looking to buy expensive lenses: try to rent each of your alternatives for a few days, check them out and figure out which ones float your boat. Only you'll know what you'll like.
Logged

Jan
Yakim Peled
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 174


« Reply #24 on: November 27, 2005, 01:20:01 AM »
ReplyReply

>> Does the following sound a good option

70-200 f2.8 L
EF400mm f5.6 L

and either a 1.4 or 2 teleconverter


Stick with the 1.4X and this is a super-set.
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html
Logged

Happy shooting,
Yakim.
ARD
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 296



WWW
« Reply #25 on: November 27, 2005, 06:32:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the replies, the link is excellent. I have read reviews and think I am going to go for the EF 300mm f/4L IS plus a 1.4x converter.

With this on my EOS 1DMkII it should give me good reach when needed.

Once again thanks to everyone who replied, its good to be able to ask people who know
Logged
eatstickyrice
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 109


WWW
« Reply #26 on: November 28, 2005, 07:27:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Michael has an article up called "Forgotten 400". You can find it: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/...otten-400.shtml

I don't have the 400 5.6, but have been considering it for a while now. I do however have the 70-200 2.8 L IS and am delightfully pleased with it in combination with my 1D Mark II. Yes, it is heavy for the first few hours, but after that your hand strengthens and you get used to it. I've been using it to shoot candids of people. Would buy it over again if lost it today! My favorite lens at present... Of-course based on the subject matter I need to shoot.

Rick
Logged

Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad