Which lenses to buy?

[rainmaker]

Well, I've got my Canon 300d coming tomorrow/day after, and I could do with some lens advice.

I want to get a macro-esque lens, e.g. a 50mm, large aperture little number, and I also want a zoom lens - min of 300mm.

My budget is miniscule (maximum £200 the lot, I think, though that may stretch further if I can persuade me parents to donate to an Xmas case!), so I'll be shopping around (maybe even in the states with the state of the dollar vs the pound!). I presume I'm going to be lookng at the Sigma/Tamron 300mm lens (70-300mm?) - the Tamron certainly seems nicer, from interweb sites.

Any clues on a macro lens?

Any advice appreciated!

Chris

[rainmaker]

US sites, for those interested, especially at a conversion of 2:1 ish...!!! : Canon EF 75-300mm F/4-5.6 USM III Lens, With Canon 1-Year USA Warranty |BuyDig.com

[Brocker]

Hi Rainmaker,
If your budget is relatively small, then you will struggle to get a dedicated macro lens of any great shakes for the money you state. You will be leased t know however that your 70-300mm should have a macro facility on it which will enable you to get in real close. My first lens was a Sigma 70-300mm lens and it had a macro setting on it which enabled me to take a shot of a knat on my wifes arm (she was not happy with me asking her to hold still for a coule of minutes whilst this midge was having its dinner). This shot won an award at a local camera club for its detail, so it obviously did a great job. I still use that lens for macros and have gone up to a Canon 100-400mm IS USM lens which is outstanding but not cheap. Hope this helps.......

[mystictonka]

I have used both the tamron & sigma 70-300 lenses & found that the tamron produced slightly sharper images at 300

[Muggsy]

how about this one

EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM at £349

and how much better would this one be than the standard EF75-300 ?

please.
Muggsy

[rainmaker]

EF?

IS??

USM???

!!! TLA's - who needs 'em?!

[Brocker]

I agree on both counts. The Tamron lens does give a slightly sharper image at 300mm but I am not sure of its macro capabilities. I have not used this lens but Digital Camera magazine scores the Tamron higher than the Sigma. As for the Canon lens, that is more superior build and the optics are far better...

[galanthus]

Originally Posted by Muggsy

how about this one

EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM at £349

and how much better would this one be than the standard EF75-300 ?

please.
Muggsy

I originally had the canon 75-300 and then decided to sell it and get the canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM; the differerence is remarkable, I really love it and it's my main walk about lens.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by galanthus

I originally had the canon 75-300 and then decided to sell it and get the canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM; the differerence is remarkable, I really love it and it's my main walk about lens.

What're the differences? Purely optics/build quality, or extra gadgetry too?

The difference between the 2 is a lot in price (from a US sit - $550 for the EF IS USM).

[Muggsy]

Originally Posted by galanthus

I originally had the canon 75-300 and then decided to sell it and get the canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM; the differerence is remarkable, I really love it and it's my main walk about lens.

nice one cheers, its the image stabiliser, thats tempting me. I'd like the 100-400 but at £965, well the washing machines playing up and I could buy a new one plus the lense for that money.