Telephoto lens advice for new Canon 350D camera. (1 Viewer)

[senatore]

Having received great advice from BF members on which camera to buy and I recently bought the Canon 350D.That apparantly is the easy bit the hard bit being getting a good telephoto lens to go with it so you have a chance of taking decent bird pics.

My budget is limited but I think I have narrowed it down to:-

Sigma 135-400 (DG or non DG)

Sigma 170-500 (DG or non DG)

Any advice would be much appreciated on these lenses or any others in this bracket.The non DG versions seem much cheaper if you can get them still.The Sigma 50-500 looks good but I cannot stretch that far.

I have scanned the web for the best deals and a firm called Digitalrev are very competitive with some great prices but I think they ship from HongKong which scares me a little.Anyone used them?

Max.

 

[pete schofield]

Hi Max as for the 2 lenses you mention I would go for the 170-500 if your prime use is for Birds/Wildlife.

As for buying from Digitalrev I presume you have seen them on Ebay, you will have to factor in the extra costs of custom & excise duty also possibly VAT.

I have bought from abroad in the past and had to incur these costs on photographic equipment.

E.G. Tripod head cost £225 at source import duty £35.

Hope this is of some help.

Pete

 

[postcardcv]

I'd agree with Pete - I think that the 170-500 is the better choice for bird photography. You'll often find yourself wanting more reach, but rarely (if ever) feel that you wish you weren't so close.

It is a bit bigger than the 135-400, but both can be handheld fairly easily, though you'll get better results if you use support (tripod/monopod/beanbag). Personally I use non-DG lenses (for no particular reason), and have yet to be convinced that there is a big advantage to them.

 

[robski]

Hi Max

Yes make sure you have calculated the bottom line price when buying from outside the EU. Trying to evade custom & excise and VAT is an offence. In some cases it is infact cheaper to buy from a UK supply.

psilo has bought a 170-500 DG version and I must admit I have been impressed with the results.

Rob

 

[Keith Reeder]

I once saw the difference between 400mm and 500mm described as "taking another step forward".

It really depends on what it is you want to photograph, Max.

I'd agree that the 170-500mm is usable handheld, but if you intend to be shooting birds that are pretty close (waterfowl say, or birds at reserves and feeding stations), or general "walkabout" photography, then it can be argued that the shorter (read: easier to use handheld) lens is the better option.

If that doesn't apply, or it you intend to use a tripod, then there's no reason not to go for the longer lens.

In my own (admittedly limited, I accept) experience, the only times I've ever wished for more reach, 500mm (as opposed to my usual 400mm) wouldn't have made a blind bit of difference...

The 135-400mm is a somewhat faster lens too, which means comparatively faster shutter speeds in any given situation.

Sigma 135-400m - f4.5-5.6
Sigma 170-500mm - f5-6.3

They're both worth having though.

Some fairly indicative reviews:

http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/35mm-zoom/sigma/PRD_83590_3128crx.aspx
http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/35mm-zoom/sigma/PRD_83589_3128crx.aspx

I also have to say that I'm in full agreement with Rob about Psilo's work with the lens.

 

[Nigel G]

As for buying from Digitalrev I presume you have seen them on Ebay, you will have to factor in the extra costs of custom & excise duty also possibly VAT. Pete

In Digitalrev's case this isn't so as they gaurentee to refund any import taxes so there is no question of breaking the law or getting caught by extra bills. That said I haven't used them but given their feedback I think you are on pretty safe ground.

 

[senatore]

Thanks for the advice everyone.

Max.

 

[paul goode]

Thanks for the advice everyone.

Max.

Having gone from a 70-200 with a 2x TC to a 50-500 I have found the extra reach significant. It becomes an extra 160mm with the crop factor taken into account.
With regard to Hand holding a long lens I'd refer you back to Nigel Blake's comments in your previous thread. Certainly I wouldn't entertain hand holding the 50-500 except in an emergency (Belted Kingfisher!)

regards

Paul

 

[Keith Reeder]

Hi Paul,

don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the extra 100mm (or 160mm - never thought about it like that! ) wouldn't be significant.

In my own experience though, doing the stuff I do (which is all opportunistic handheld "walkabout" shooting) I can honestly say that I've never once felt I missed a shot for the the want of an extra 100mm.

An extra 400mm, yeah: but for me, a 500mm lens wouldn't provide any real benefits and - given that I want to stop down my lens for more DOF and sharper images - a faster lens is more important than a longer one in order to have the flexibility in stopping down without killing the shutter speed (though image stabilisation helps a bit there, providing the subject isn't bouncing around too much).

On a tripod things would be entirely different of course.

I can always use my 1.4x tcon if I'm desperate for more reach, but it'd have to be on a tripod and in truth, I haven't yet felt the need to go there.

 

[paul goode]

Hi Paul,

don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the extra 100mm (or 160mm - never thought about it like that! ) wouldn't be significant.

In my own experience though, doing the stuff I do (which is all opportunistic handheld "walkabout" shooting) I can honestly say that I've never once felt I missed a shot for the the want of an extra 100mm.

An extra 400mm, yeah: but for me, a 500mm lens wouldn't provide any real benefits and - given that I want to stop down my lens for more DOF and sharper images - a faster lens is more important than a longer one in order to have the flexibility in stopping down without killing the shutter speed (though image stabilisation helps a bit there, providing the subject isn't bouncing around too much).

On a tripod things would be entirely different of course.

I can always use my 1.4x tcon if I'm desperate for more reach, but it'd have to be on a tripod and in truth, I haven't yet felt the need to go there.

Hi Keith,

Just had a look in your gallery and you are getting great results with the 135-400.
To justify my comments slightly, I think life here in the midlands where Max and I live is probably different to your area.
Photography around here, particularly on bird reserves, is fairly controlled. Bird hides can't be moved closer to feeders, footpaths have to be kept to and so extra reach becomes important. On shorelines and the like fieldcraft can be employed to get closer to birds and I agree that 100mm difference is far less important than weight and 'handholdability'.
I know that there are ways around the problem but I am still trying to combine photography with birding and fit both into the 3 or so hours I have spare at the weekend to pursue my hobby and so setting up my own feeding station or gaining access to private land I dont find very practical.

Regards

Paul

 

[robski]

A Valid Point Paul - Most of my shots are close ups - but the waterfowl who insist on being in the centre of the lake and at Bough Beech reservoir Kent where you can only view from the road a longer reach is a must.

Rob

 

[postcardcv]

The Sigma 50-500 looks good but I cannot stretch that far.

Hi Max

I've only just read this line.

I'd recommend trying the 50-500 along with the other two lenses you're considering, if you do prefer this one you'd be better off waiting a while until you can get it. One thing that many of us have done is gone for a lens that is within our budget and then soon after looked to upgrade - it's much cheaper to get it right first time.

 

[senatore]

Having read all the advice in this thread I finally decided to go for the Sigma 135-400 lens.I was particularly impressed with Keith's post when his phrase of "oppurtunistic handheld walkabout shooting" struck a cord with me and summed up my aims exactly.I appreciated the "reach" comments on the 500 lenses but the need to carry around a trpod is not for me.I like to travel light.

Have I bought one yet? No!!!! I failed to track down a non DG version with Canon fit and the new DG version seems short on supply at least at a good price (under £400).I have put one on order and hope to get delivery in a week or two.Then the hard but enjoyable business starts of taking good shots!!!

Max.

 

[baillieswells]

Having received great advice from BF members on which camera to buy and I recently bought the Canon 350D.That apparantly is the easy bit the hard bit being getting a good telephoto lens to go with it so you have a chance of taking decent bird pics.

My budget is limited but I think I have narrowed it down to:-

Sigma 135-400 (DG or non DG)

Sigma 170-500 (DG or non DG)

Any advice would be much appreciated on these lenses or any others in this bracket.The non DG versions seem much cheaper if you can get them still.The Sigma 50-500 looks good but I cannot stretch that far.

I have scanned the web for the best deals and a firm called Digitalrev are very competitive with some great prices but I think they ship from HongKong which scares me a little.Anyone used them?

Max.

I am awaiting delivery of the Sigma 170-500mm DG lens for my Canon 350D. After a lot of thought I decided on this as opposed to the Tamron 200-500mm lens. I shall probably never know whether I am making the right choice. I chose the 170-500mm lens over the 50-500mm lens primarily on weight. The Bigma weighs approximately 500 gm more. If I want to take shots between 50 and 200mm, then I would prefer to use lighter lenses. Candid shots in that range would be difficult with a 'lump of concrete' on the front of the camera. Also a faster aperture is an advantage. I have the 50mm f1.8 prime lens (which hardly weighs anything. 425gm. Bigma 1840gm) left over from my film days and the 70-200mm f4 L lens which is hard to beat.

When I have got my 170-500mmDG lens and tested it, will report back to the forum.
According to Sigma's website the 170-500mm lens will not take either the x1.4 or x2 extender whereas the 50-500mm lens will.

(As a result of Sigma producing the DG version, presumambly the non DG will become obsolete and should fall in price. As the moment it can be difficult to determine which version a particular camera shop is advertising)

*

 

[Adey Baker]

According to Sigma's website the 170-500mm lens will not take either the x1.4 or x2 extender whereas the 50-500mm lens will.



*

The Sigma (and Canon) converters have protruding front elements that would foul the rear elements of many lenses inc the 170-500 so you need to check other makes - I think the Kenko and perhaps the Tamron models have recessed front elements. I believe the 'Bigma' has a zoom lock to cut-out the 50mm end to enable a converter to be used without damage (although there's not a lot of reason to use it at that end of the zoom range anyway!)

 

[QuantumTiger]

In Digitalrev's case this isn't so as they gaurentee to refund any import taxes so there is no question of breaking the law or getting caught by extra bills

Be very careful - as this is not always the case. Digital Rev have auctions on EBay where they do indeed offer to refund the tax, however, this only applies to the auctions where they specifically state this. If it doesn't state that, it is not covered. On their main website it says nothing about this policy (that I could see), so I would not bet on it being offered.

 

[eskander]

What it does say on their web site for the UK at least is:

"Prices shown are exclusive of import tax/duty. Import tax/duty may be added at checkout according to the shipping address"

Whis seems pretty clear to me

 

[senatore]

Having chosen the Sigma 135-400 DG lens after getting advice on this and other threads I am now frustrated as I cannot get one for love or money.I have tried loads of places but have had no luck.

I even contacted Sigma UK and they were unable to tell me when any would be available as "the increase in DSLR ownership has led to unprecedented demand for lenses".OH DEAR !!!!!!

Max.

 

[paul goode]

Having chosen the Sigma 135-400 DG lens after getting advice on this and other threads I am now frustrated as I cannot get one for love or money.I have tried loads of places but have had no luck.

I even contacted Sigma UK and they were unable to tell me when any would be available as "the increase in DSLR ownership has led to unprecedented demand for lenses".OH DEAR !!!!!!

Max.

Warehouse Express's web site shows them as being in stock.

 

[lord paul]

Paul
I have a 28mm - 300 mm on ebay ( closes tomorrow - 21st) Have been using it on my canon 300d.

Good luck
check out my site www.lordofsealand.co.uk