Best 300mm lens?

[GME]

Great, cheers for that. Yes, I don't really want to be spending too much at the moment as I don't know exactly what route my photography will take. I definitely want a bit of focal length as I do want to get some bird shots and of the various football teams I am involved with. Thanks for the latter replies too. The cash is not so much the fact that I don't have it completely, but as you say beckiscott it is that I do have other priorities (a demanding 2 year old for a start and ambitions of going on holiday shortly for second!). I'll give the Tamron a miss though by the sounds of it
Thanks Pete, I may well go for the 90-300 if you think it's capable of some reasonable results. I am seriously considering the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG Macro though, as I've seen a couple of ok reviews and it for sale for under £100 from some e-bay traders. I know I'm going to be getting some limited results and you get what you pay for but as a place to start it seems about right for me at the mo.
Cheers again all

Gareth

[eeyore]

the sigma is an okay lens too tho it lacks the ultra sonic motor (which sigma refer to as a hyper sonic motor or hsm) meaning that it can be a bit noisy when it focusses. but other than that its okay

i wouldnt put too much store by its macro capability tho - none of these jack of all zooms really deliver on that front giving about 1:4 repro at best - you'd be better off with a 50mm on a set of tubes on that front (or a dedicated macro lens if you have the wedge)

[ferco]

I have the Canon 300mm f/4 IS L lens and can only speak well of it- it's excellent IQ
Although it's expensive; I bought mine second hand for £550 which is like half price lol so probably the best option; buy second hand

[WhiskyBottle]

300mm is not enough for birds, unless you're working close with a hide. Try to borrow on to make sure it will do what you want before spending.
I have a Sigma 70-300apo macro, don't like the way it flexes in the middle so never use it.
I'd go for a 300/4, and find an older secondhand one to keep the price down. UK camera shops usually give a good warrenty on their s/h stock. Try Mifsuds.com in Devon.
Something for the future - a 300/4 will take a teleconvertor much better than a 70-300. This will get you to a range that's starting to get usefull for birds.

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by WhiskyBottle

300mm is not enough for birds, unless you're working close with a hide. Try to borrow on to make sure it will do what you want before spending.
I have a Sigma 70-300apo macro, don't like the way it flexes in the middle so never use it.
I'd go for a 300/4, and find an older secondhand one to keep the price down. UK camera shops usually give a good warrenty on their s/h stock. Try Mifsuds.com in Devon.
Something for the future - a 300/4 will take a teleconvertor much better than a 70-300. This will get you to a range that's starting to get usefull for birds.

or you could go for something like the sigma 135-400 f5.6 i dont supose the s/h price is that different.

[Interpreter]

I have a Canon 35D and a 350D. I use the Sigma lens previously mentioned and it gives good results. It is not as well made as the Canon lenses and has some play in the barrel. However, it is an inexpensive lens.
I also have the Canon 100-400L IS USM which is superb, but heavy. I have the 24-105L IS USM, which is dreadful and the 16-35L which is fantastic. I use the 50mm 1.8 as a spare with a EOS 300 film camera.
If you buy second hand, you must buy through a dealer. If you buy privately, you are stuck with whatever you buy. No guarantee. You don't know how much wear the lens has had or how it has been used. You may not even see the lens before you buy it. Then there is the matter of compatibility. Is an older lens suitable for your camera? Does it lose AE or auto-focus?
I would go for the cheapest option and save for better glass to be purchased later. You could, of course, get a 50mm lens and some bird seed and see if you can tempt the subjects to come closer.
The main pro for the zoom lens is that it replaces a number of other lenses and you do not have to keep changing lenses and introducing dust onto the sensor. The main con is that it must be a compromise.

[GME]

Thanks for the recent replies again folks.
I know 300mm is not 'ideal' for birds but should get me closer than my standard 50mm at present. I have a few feeders around the garden and can get pretty close to the birds I want to photograph (especially from within my daughter's Wendy House, er I mean garden hide - the birds are used to it and it keeps you dry!) My daughters not happy about it though. Anyway, I think I will go with the cheaper all-purpose zoom for now and depending on where my photography heads save for a better, faster lens and teleconverter or even a 400mm or 500mm lenses in the future.

Thanks for the input

[Interpreter]

I know where you could borrow a Sigma 70-300 F4-5.6 APO DG Macro for the price of the postage.

[nightshade]

I do apologise in advance but these Sigmas looked very reasonable
7dayshop.com - Online Store

[GME]

Thanks for your kind offer again, Interpreter. However, I think I'm just going to bite the bullet and go for the Sigma anyway. I was at Mere Sands Wood yesterday and a guy I met had this lens on his Nikon and he liked it too. It seemed fine for what I am willing to spend and am looking for at the moment. I have seen a few sample pics on other sites of the Canons and Sigmas and I don't think there is much between any of these lenses at this sort of length and price so I'm just going to have to find the best price and choose one! Brings me to my next thankyou (thanks nightshade for the link, I've usd that company before for memory cards and they were reliable and cheap, although the Sigma they list is the non-APO version I think). I'll get one shortly and upload some images - although any should be better than using my mobile phone like all my current Gallery submissions!!

Regards
Gareth