0.00
#... |
|---|
|
Hello everybody, here I'm looking for a new lens , I have two Canon Eos cameras , one modded and one original, I have the kit lenses , like the 18-55 ? and 75-300 lens. Both work fine until you want to use it in certain situations. For instance , last year on my Africa trip. the 75/300mm zoom lens was too slow, for animal photos , I also have a 50mm f1,4 which is fine . What im exactly looking for now is a longer focal length. Preferred I'd like a zoom , which is fast enough for catching light for astrofotografy and also be fine for daytime, i thought about something like 200-300 for daytime , and 135-200 for nighttime , because that's not easy to get , i thought about a zoom to combine both. Is there anything that could be recommended ? In a price range not over 500 € maybe ? Thank you guys for your help. CS Dennis |
11.09
#... |
|---|
|
Hello Dennis, I think with this budget it will be difficult to satisfy both requirements. Daytime zoom lenses require reliable auto focusing, image stabilization, and if you add fast optics in the equation, the price goes high. Camera lens astrophotography does not require IS or autofocus. Setting optical quality aside, a major requirement is mechanical quality. If you have suffered zoom creep or focus creep with your kit lenses, then you know what I mean. My advice is to think what is your priority, and if it is astrophotography, then a fully manual prime lens may be a solution for you. I am also on a tight/nonexistent(!) budget. I also do "normal" photography, but I don't do sports or wildlife photography. Thus I don't care at all for my Samyang 135mm being fully manual. I bought it specifically for the astrophotography task, without breaking the bank, and I am satisfied so far. But I am only one data point  |
|
0.00
#... |
|---|
|
Thank you , Launische Diva , (sounds very German ) okay , so what I suffered with at daytime and my zoom lens (at full zoom 300mm) , it was too slow to capture animals without putting my camera on a tripod, in my case it wasn't possible. Now I am looking for a better lens , that's good for daytime , good zoom for my next trip to Galapagos islands and also good enough for astro use. I'm not sure if there is one to find. If the range is too big, I can imagine something between 100-200mm as well, if the lens is fast enough. The reason is that i can zoom in after processing and the object would still be sharp. CS Dennis |
|
11.09
#... |
|---|
Hi again Dennis, yes my nickname sounds German but I am not. When I was looking for a nickname I stumbled upon the history of the football club Eintracht Frankfurt. From Wikipedia:The nickname Launische Diva ( "Moody Diva" ) was heard most often in the early 1990s when the club would comfortably defeat top teams only to surprisingly lose to lesser clubs. That describes exactly my situation  Not in football (where I am a lousy player irregardless of the opponent) but in other aspects of my life Anyway, back to our subject now. I see that you are interested more in daytime and stabilization is crucial for you. I hope to be wrong, but I can't see something much better than your 75-300 lens without putting your hand twice as deep as 500 €. There is a Canon EF 70-300 mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM out there, you may take a look at. You also may compare lenses at the-digital.picture.com. I have picked your kit lens for you at the left (check if it is indeed your lens) and the newer Canon at the right. Experiment with that comparison tool by comparing what you already have to other lenses like the Canon 70-200 f/4 L which I think it is a decent lens (there are newer alternatives though). Hover your mouse above the test card image and be careful to compare everything by selecting the same (or comparable) camera. HTH and Clear Skies! |
|
0.00
#... |
|---|
|
The problem is , I want to buy a lens for my upcoming holiday, that should be a good zoom. And because of that I don't really can afford to pay for a second one for astro , that's why I want to combine both somehow reasonably. I can check your website and try to compare , I know that some walimex , sigma aren't so expensive , but I'm not sure about the quality , that's why I'm asking for some experiences and suggestions , |
0.00
#... |
|---|
|
Try canon 70-200 f4 L. Very nice at daytime (pro version) and very good at night even at full open. Look at my astrobin . |
|
0.00
#... |
|---|
|
Thank you , I'll have a look any see if its in my budget |
|
0.00
#... |
|---|
| By pro version you talk about the IS version right ? |
|
0.00
#... |
|---|
|
No, IS version is stabilized and useless for astro. I task about the 70-200f4 L series from canon. Canon L series lenses are all pro versions ans very nice at daytimes. The model i tell you is the less expensive and near from your budget. In that price, it will be very difficult to find better unless you buy second hand. Avoid the f2.8. It's very expensive, very powerfull but heavy! Too much for standard daylight use |
|
0.00
#... |
|---|
|
So if I'd like to use it for day and night the IS version should be preferred ? For astro only it would be sufficient to get the L version. Yes and I'm also looking for used ones , so if anyone wants to get rid of equipment And thank you, yes I guess the f4 is good for me then, i want to handle it and not always want to use a tripod , |
|
0.00
#... |
|---|
|
IS version is usefull indoor or under cloudy days with low light. Mine is not stabilised and works very well outdoor. That kind of lens is not often use indoor. Stabilised version is almost twice expensive with a small gain. Stabilisation is not often usefull. Depends what kind of use you will have with it at daytime. |
|
0.00
#... |
|---|
|
Okay good then I'll look for that one and see if something comes up for a price that I want to afford my use isn't so special , only try to get sharp pictures , for instance out of a slow moving car , with maximum focal length , of moving animals, Especially on my vacation, There it should be fast and capture every detail. And then the night time use for wider field astrofotografy , meaning without a telescope . Nothing too fancy thank you for all your answers. |
