Need advice on Aftermarket lenses
Apr 1, 2014 10:40:44 #
Check out my zenfolio site for Taken with Tamron 150-600mm lens. You can't beat this lens for reach, IQ and value.
Apr 1, 2014 11:19:47 #
dsmeltz wrote:
Obviously not an accountant. 70% of $1,500 is still more than 70% of 1,000. Assuming a 30% marginal rate. You get to deduct an inexpensive lens as well as an expensive one. There is still a $300.00 advantage to the aftertax profit in using an equally good but less exepensive lens.
Exactly my point and you still have the $500 not spent!
Apr 1, 2014 11:26:09 #
Apr 1, 2014 11:29:57 #
One good thing about this site is that I have learned that I am shooting with an inferior lens, the Nikon 28-300mm. I have also learned that I have to buy the $2,500 Nikon 70-200mm if I want to get the best images. There goes my habit of eating three meals a day. :D
Apr 1, 2014 11:30:23 #
You can own all the big white lenses you want but it comes down to earning a good reputation and if you don't have that then you will not get the big bucks. You don't get that with fancy equipment.
Apr 1, 2014 11:34:58 #
Apr 1, 2014 11:41:33 #
amfoto1
Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
photoned wrote:
....I prefer Action photography(mostly racing, any kind) and Nature. So a fast lens would be nice.
Thank you again for the advice and input. It is, again, greatly appreciated...
....I prefer Action photography(mostly racing, any kind) and Nature. So a fast lens would be nice.
Thank you again for the advice and input. It is, again, greatly appreciated...
I was gonna ask, because it's hard to give very good advice without knowing what you wanted to shoot with the new lens and on what camera. Now you've given us some clues.
Assuming you are using one of the Crop There are several pretty good telephoto possiblities for sports/action/wildlife, without completely breaking the bank...
Sigma 120-400mm OS HSM... around $1000
Tamron 150-600mm VC USD... under $1100
Sigma 150-500mm OS HSM... about $1100
Canon 400/5.6L (no IS) USM... $1350
Canon 100-400L IS USM.... $1700
Canon 300/4L IS USM + 1.4X... lens: $1450, TC: $150-500.
Sigma 120-300/2.8 OS HSM + 1.4X or 2X... lens: $3600, TC: $150-500.
Another real workhorse for sports/action and general purpose is the 70-200mm. It's sometimes not long enough lens on its own, but for closer shots can be nearly indispensible. Still, it's easily my "Most Used" lens. Once again there are lots of choices...
Canon 70-200/4L USM (non-IS)... about $700 (w/o tripod ring)
Tamron 70-200/2.8 (not VC or USD)... about $750
Sigma 70-200/2.8 OC HSM... $1200
Canon 70-200/4L IS USM... $1350 (w/o tripod ring)
Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC USD... $1400
Canon 70-200/2.8 USM (non-IS)... $1550
Canon 70-200/2.8 IS USM (1st version, used)... $1500-1600
Canon 70-200/2.8 IS USM Mark II... $2500
I also know sports photogs who work with...
Canon 70-300L IS USM... $1600.
Canon 70-300 DO IS USM (very compact)... $1400.
There are some other, now discontinued lenses you might find used, that would work.
Except as noted, all the above are new prices from Amazon, and you might be able to do better elsewhere. You also might consider used or refurbished. If you buy used from a reputible dealer, lens will likely have at least a short warranty. Refurbished lenses sometimes have the same warranty as new. Look for refurbs at the Canon online store, Adorama and B&H Photo. Look for used with warranty from Adorama, B&H, KEH.com, and some other dealers.
All but one of the above lenses have fast ultrasonic focus drive, which is very helpful for sports/action/wildlife shooting. One of the Tamron 70-200s doesn't have their USD, so might not be fast enough focusing in some situations. (I haven't used it, so can't say for certain.)
Many of the above also have stabilization - Canon IS, Tamron VC, and Sigma OS. Some folks will tell you that stabilization isn't needed for sports, since you will "always" be using higher shutter speeds to freeze the action. I have been using stabilized lenses since 2001 and swear by them... especially longer telephotos. I have gotten shots thanks to IS, that I wouldn't have gotten or would have really struggled to get without it. And I don't always using high shutter speeds for sports (it gets boring, freezing the action all the time, in every shot).
Like you, I mostly shoot with a pair of 7Ds. The lenses I use on them the most for sports/action/wildlife are...
Canon 300/2.8L IS USM with Canon EF 1.4X II & EF 2X II
Canon 300/4L IS USM with Canon EF 1.4X II (handholdable)
Canon 70-200/4L IS USM
Canon 70-200/2.8L IS USM (1st version)
I bought the 300/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 new about 13 years ago (still shooting film then). The 300mm is going in for service (focus hunting issues... probably because it got a hard bump while we were bouncing around in the back of a 4x4 on a very rough trail, coming back from a shoot). I've never had even a hint of trouble with the 70-200/2.8. I use it a lot and it's probably taken close to a quarter million shots in the years I've owned it. Probably due for a "tune up". Eventually I will get the newer "Mark II", but I'm not in any rush.
I bought the 300/4L to have a lighter, handholdable, mobile alternative. The 300/2.8 can be handheld briefly, but ends up on a tripod for anything more than a few minutes shooting. Got the 300/4L used a few years ago for $900 (pretty much like new, off Craigslist from a private seller). I use it frequently with the Canon 1.4x II.
I picked up the 70-200/4 last year to have as a backup/loaner... paid about $900 for is used (also in excellent shape) with the OEM tripod ring (that normally sells new for around $150, tho there are cheaper clones).
If you got one of the longer zooms, you might be able to forego the 70-200.... But if you got one of the primes, you'd likely want a 70-200 to complement it.
The Sigma 120-300mm above lists the price for the current version. It's been introduced just within the past 6 months, or so. It might be possible to find the previous version, which also had OS and HSM, new for a few dollars less... Or used from someone who is upgrading or a trade-in. It's the priciest on this list, but is a very versatile lens that's usable with 1.4X or 2X teleconverters.
In most cases, I would not recommend a 2X on anything other than an f2.8 lens, but a 1.4X is usable on many of the f4 or faster lenses listed above.
Any lens or lens +TC combo that's less than f5.6 won't focus on your 7D. (There's a trick of taping up a couple the electronic contacts on the TC to make it try to work, just don't expect it to be fast.)
Personally I find image quality takes too much of a hit to use a 2X on most zoom lenses. The Sigma 120-300 is a rare exception. And the latest Canon 70-200/2.8 II and 2x III seem to work pretty well.
Of the above zooms, the Canon 100-400 is unique... It's the only "push-pull" design among the bunch. Some like this (especially for fast action shooting). Others don't.
Apr 1, 2014 12:07:24 #
joer wrote:
All brands including the OEMs make good and less good lenses. DXOmark and others show comparisons on optical characteristics. Its good to compare but keep in mind there is more to it than just optics.
Lens defects, focusing speed or issues and general quality control are not normally covered in most reviews so be cautious and do your research.
Lens defects, focusing speed or issues and general quality control are not normally covered in most reviews so be cautious and do your research.
A fair example of the above is that on the Tamron 10-24mm lens for Nikon DX, the lens gives a near fisheye effect at 10 mm. Now this can be reduced with Lightroom or other post procession, however, The Nikon 10-24mm lens does not exhibit this same issue. Both are good lenses but the Nikon is considerably more. Also there are other small issues but these are things that a photographer needs to consider. Is the time I don't have to spend in post processing worth the difference. What about upgradability? Will the lens be compatible with newer cameras as they come out? All F mount lenses on Nikon will work on All Nikon Cameras with a couple of exceptions. Lenses with silent wave motors will work in all Nikon DX and Full frame cameras, Lenses requiring a focus motor in the camera will only work on specific DX cameras (Not on D3000, D3100,D3200, D5000, D5100,D5200 and some other older DX cameras) And also Some of the newer lenses do not have an aperture control on the lens. So be aware of what you are buying, New or Used. This can especially be confusing on NON OEM lenses. so do your homework or ask someone who knows.... not necessarily the seller. When I was working with Nikon, I had several people who would call in as say " Well, B&H said or Adorama said.... and it really came down to the retailer forgot to ask the right questions and the buyer didn't know to ask either.
Apr 1, 2014 12:08:54 #
Jeez I thought it was all about the image you can post or print!
SharpShooter wrote:
Ned, welcome to the Hog. br The L's actually start... (show quote)
Apr 1, 2014 12:20:12 #
OEM lenses are almost always your best bet. IQ, ease of repair, re-sale value are going to be better with them......usually. But sometimes you cannot get what you want from Canon or Nikon. I recently purchased a Sigma
18-35 f1.8 because Nikon doesn't make anything like it. Wow! Was I ever surprised. It is as sharp as any Nikon I have, even the nano coated ones. I also have a Sigma 8-16 ultra wide that is comparable to my Nikon 10-24. But sometimes you can get losers. Best advice is to read the reviews by your fellow photo buffs before dropping down your cash.
18-35 f1.8 because Nikon doesn't make anything like it. Wow! Was I ever surprised. It is as sharp as any Nikon I have, even the nano coated ones. I also have a Sigma 8-16 ultra wide that is comparable to my Nikon 10-24. But sometimes you can get losers. Best advice is to read the reviews by your fellow photo buffs before dropping down your cash.
Apr 1, 2014 12:25:04 #
There is always sample variation, even with the OEM's.... No manufacturer can test every lens coming off their lines & thus there will always be lemons, no matter who makes them.
Apr 1, 2014 12:28:56 #
MT Shooter wrote:
You REALLY should quit posting this kind of crap and attempting to mislead people on this forum. Both Tamron (6 year) and Sigma (4 year) have MUCH better warranties than Canons 1 year warranty! Oh, and buying USED gives you NO WARRANTY AT ALL.
:thumbup: :thumbup:
Apr 1, 2014 13:13:34 #
wj cody
Loc: springfield illinois
studavis wrote:
I too like the L lenses but, I have been comparing Tamron of late I found that they are much less cost and are great the new 150-600 mm is one of a kind and all the ratting are top notch. The 70-200 mm is in some ways ratted better than the Canon and about $1,000.00 cheaper. (I have both of the above and love them) I was a 100% Canon person but now have moved toward Tamron.
the Tamron is an interesting story. Angeneaux, the French maker of primarily cinema lenses, also made lenses for 35mm film cameras. very, very pricy and very, very weird configurations, but very, very nice lenses and results.
long story short, Tamron bought Angeneaux and has since, over these many years, used their glass formulations in their own lenses. it does not surprise me the conservative 70-200mm should be so good.
Apr 1, 2014 13:31:37 #
jerryc41 wrote:
Read multiple reviews and comparisons. You'd be surprised how good third party lenses can be - for a lot less money.
Although a $1,500 lens might give you better pictures, will you really be able to see the difference in ordinary use?
Although a $1,500 lens might give you better pictures, will you really be able to see the difference in ordinary use?
:thumbup: There you go with common sense again.
Apr 1, 2014 13:35:38 #
RAK wrote:
Jeez I thought it was all about the image you can post or print!
Rak,
The lens has more to do with IQ than the camera 99% of the time. You can take a $6700.00 1D X and put an 18-55 kit lens on it and it might be a little better than taken with a 7D camera but not by much. Like wise you can put a 70-200 f2.8 of any brand on a 7D and get a really nice image, maybe not what the 1D X would produce with the same lens but it would take an expert to tell the difference. A lot of this depend't on your skill level with the camera an PP.
I for one have to watch my $'s and have found the new Tamron 70-200 f2.8 vg, Tamron 70-300 mm vc, Tamron 150-600 mm VC and Sigma 17-70 mm f2.8-4.0 VC (C) version to be so extremely close to the (best) as some people might say it isn't funny and would say that 99.9% of "experts" could not tell me wheather I used a Canon. Tamron or Sigma to create an image without the exif.
It all boiles down to, it's your money and sometimes you do get more that you pay for. I'll probably get blasted by some fanboys for this but it is what it is.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.