a Lens choice best covering two specific needs
What lens choice would bridge the gap...
offering a take anywhere, zoom (possibly a prime?) low light lens, for two interests:
#1 indoor, low light, movement such as
#2 capturing SHY wildlife such as
50% crop
I am currently using the (Sigma 70-300mm 1:4-5.6) which I have quickly learned (yet again), you get what you pay for!
...say in the $500 to $1100 range (perhaps adding a 1.4 extender?)
offering a take anywhere, zoom (possibly a prime?) low light lens, for two interests:
#1 indoor, low light, movement such as
#2 capturing SHY wildlife such as
50% cropI am currently using the (Sigma 70-300mm 1:4-5.6) which I have quickly learned (yet again), you get what you pay for!
...say in the $500 to $1100 range (perhaps adding a 1.4 extender?)
0
Comments
I see a few people have looked at this without touching. Realistically, I don't think it can be done for under $1700. For the indoor shot you need a 135/2 or maybe a 70-200/2.8. For the outdoor shot a 400/5.6. The shot that you posted, you would need at least 4x more focal length, that not being realistic, you need to get within a 100 yards of those animals to have something good. I have heard really good things about Sigma's 120-300/2.8 from sports shooters for football. That lens is $2200.
The problem with the 1st shot is shutter speed, at 1/500 it probably would of stopped a lot of the action. If you have a 20D or 1DmkII (or whatever else has a Digic II) you can shoot at ISO 800 and 1600 and have very good results. Having a high ISO lets you run a higher shutter speed at the apertures you have.
I hope this helps.
Phoenix, AZ
Canon Bodies
Canon and Zeiss Lenses
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Man, that's a pretty tall order :uhoh
Before I read your budget constraint I immediately thought of the Canon EF 200 f/1.8 with a 1.4TC
But seriously....
Even an f/2.8 probably isn't fast enough for your dog show pic, and anyting faster isn't long enough for your wildlife shot
I didn't see any mention of what equipment you are using, so my suggestion will be based on the Canon platform. I would think that Nikon or *other* brand would offer similar spec'd lenses though.
OK....
Inside dog show-need a fast lens to maintain higher shutter speeds, need reasonable reach to isolate your subjects. Depending on how far you are from the 'action' I think you may want to consider either:
85 f/1.8 (around $370)
100 f/2.0 (around $390)
135 f/2.0L (around $900)
200 f/2.8L (around $660)
You can only use a teleconverter on the 135mm and the 200mm (if they are Canons), which will run you about $170 for a Sigma 1.4X or $280 for the Canon 1.4X. The 1.4X will only cost you one stop of light, and doesn't degrade image quality as much as the 2X.
Now, even the 200mm with a 1.4 on a 'crop' (1.3 or 1.6 depending on body...) won't really get you out far enough for wildlife that are "shy" as you describe. Be fine for a zoo shot or maybe a preserve but, to get up close to a true wild animal you're looking at the 400mm, 500mm, 600mm, range imo.
Depending on all of the factors above, the best setup I can recommend (my opinion only here...) requires two lenses and is a bit over your budget. But I'll throw it out there anyway....
85mm f/1.8 ($350)
400mm f/5.6L (1100)
Tamron 1.4X TC ($110)
This total package (excluding S&H and taxes
Another 'package' that gets closer to your budget would be:
Canon 100mm f/2.0, 85mm f/1.8 or 50mm f/1.4 (pick two...
Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS ($565)
Some options-
50mm f/1.8 $70
Sigma 100-300 f/4 ($800)
Canon 300mm f/4L IS ($1150)
Canon 70-200 f/2.8L NON IS ($1140)
Sigma 70-200 EX DG ($790)
My concern with going with the common recommendation of an f/2.8 28-70 and 70-200 zoom is that many times they just aren't fast enough for the conditions encountered when shooting indoor events. If you *know* that you be ok shooting at f/2.8, then by all means go with that option. I am of the (humble) opinion though, that shooting anything that moves indoor is best served by a good quality FAST prime.
good luck and good light,
Mongrel
Your profile says "Rebel," but I am not sure whether this is a Digital Rebel or a 35mm full frame film Rebel.
The body makes a difference due to the 1.6x mag factor of the digital APS sensor bodies like the 300D or the 20D or the 350XT.
If you are shooting with a Digital Rebel or a 20D style camera, I would suggest the 135 f2.0 L for your needs. It is the equivalent of a 200mm lens on a full frame camera and focuses fast and is sharp as a tack, and at about $900 fairly inexpensive for an L prime.
Outdoors you could use a 2x TC with it for an effective focal length of 400mm x 1.6 or 640mm at f4. Now that really reaches out and is still fast enough. Or you could use the 1.4 TC.
I use the 2x TC on a 300 f2.8 frequently. If used with good primes, the Canon 2x works very nice, and I suspect will do the same on the 135 f2.0 L
This is the kind of performance you can expect from the 135 L on a 20D. It is a favorite lens of Humongus as well:):
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
I'd only add that I caution you to avoid Sigma TC's with the 135L or 200L. I tried my 'new in box' Sigma 1.4TC with both and got absolutely horrible results. Not sure if it's a conflict of lens coatings or what, but my shots were covered in 'purple haze'.
Others may have better experience so ymmv...
I second Pathfinder's recommendation though, and I can attest to the image quality of the 135L. It's on my "never to be sold" list
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Now you've DONE IT
You've gone and played the "300 f/2.8L IS CARD!!!"
Man, I hate that lens :cry , every shot I see with it breaks my heart!
Seriously, fantastic shot
That lens is 'on my list', but with my current situation, it will be a long ways off unfortunately.
Take care,
Mongrel
I posted 3 short hours ago and WHAMMO!...dependable advice from the experts.
Thank you everyone, very much!
I new I would be really looking at two lenses, just for fun, thought that I would start the question out as a one lens option, just to see what came back!
Two lenses it is! and I've now got lots to choose from. I still need to do some head scratching on whether I could save a few bucks and go with a big reach prime that should save a few bucks, but given I have Never used one, I have no idea if I would hate it, or love it?
Between this thread and http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=26662
I will be able to narrow it down nicely.
My wife Marie, also has been using the Rebel, so we chose to start slowly (CHEAPLY) - with training wheels so to speak, hence the kit lens and a Sigma,
so that Marie could wean herself from continually touching the glass :nono ...slowly but surely, Marie is getting better with the fingers.
...so we will slowly but surely, upgrade in the lens department as her fingers become less sticky
Actually, Marie has a Canon Elph on the way this week, so perhaps I just may end up spending a few more $ for the right tools, as Marie got a ton of fun out her last Elph and she will stay busy with it, if her last Elph experience is any indication.!
Anyway, I plan to pick up a 20D when it drops below $1000, I would expect it will be sometime soon!
Bob, the 400 5.6 looks interesting at that price..Thanks
Mongrel, from your detailed suggestions..thank you!.. for low light I am thinking perhaps your 100 f/2.0 or 200 f/2.8L recommendations
Andy gives a thumbs up to the 85 1.8 which I am sure is a fabulous lens (he should know, Aye!)
I feel I will want a tad more reach than the 85 1.8 would offer, though I will check to see if it is compatible with a teleconverter and in that case, shall definately be placed on the short list, the price is certainly right.
mmm, Mongrel also gives the 85 a thumbs up...at that price for specialized use (with a F/1.8 window) it might well be the way to go, especially if it accomodates a teleconverter.
For wildlife, in the water and out in the woods...I am leaning to at least a 300mm with 1.4 or 2 teleconverter OR a not out of this world priced 400mm + converter.
Obviously the faster the lens the steeperr the $...so I will have to figure out, just how early or late in the day that I will be able to use a somewhat slower 300mm or 400mm at say F4 versus say a F2.8 or therabouts.
HOW, huge a difference is the IS feature vs the non IS, when reaching out without tripod?
Pathfinder, we are currently using the Digital Rebel and as mentioned above will ultimately be moving into the 20D or equivalent, as I really want to get my hands on a much faster burst mode. The 135 f2.0 L that you mention at $900, is more than I am willing to go, given the occasions per year, that we will need a fast lens.
I see two votes for the 135 F2 L, I will start searching Ebay and Amazon for a possible deal! It would certainly cover the distance I would need and the F2 would be thouroughly enjoyed
Pathfinder, okay that's it... SOLD...based on your gorgeous Egret?
Your photo looks pretty darn fine to my eyes!
I'll take a pass on the lens in question for the time being ;-), but
I'll be taking that reach with the 2* teleconverter for sure, thankyou!
Thanks again all!