The dilemma is quality versus cost. I know one usually gets what you pay for. However, I have a Canon 55-250mm STM lens that is nothing short of superb within it's entire zoom range. Problem is, it won't be long enough for many distant wildlife shots. So can you recommend a tele lens that can deliver the goods (quality IQ) at 300mm or 400mm without breaking the bank? Right now "the bank" does not have an overabundance of cash for this purpose,
I know I could rent a lens, but would prefer to purchase, if I can. (Well under 1K). Used is OK with me.
What do you think? And THANKS.
Looking for a well cared for EOS-M3 body with a lightly used history. Not really interested in any lenses as I have the EOS-M and a couple lenses already and the Canon lens adapter for it. I would prefer to trade for both of my Tamron lenses: 17-50mm 2.8 (the better non-stabilized version) AND 70-300mm (most recent version)...both in LN condition. But would consider a cash deal if such a trade is not possible.
Thanks for looking. Please PM me with any serious interest.
Bob
Looking for a lightly used Canon EOS-M3, body only, OR NEX-6 camera and a lens or 2 in exchange for some lightly used (near new) Canon lenses used very little on my T2i. PM me for further details if interested. Thank you.
I'm considering the purchase of a used Sony NEX-6 and these 2 lenses:
Sony E PZ 16-50mm 3.5/5.6 OSS
Sony E 55-210mm 4.5/6.3 OSS
Just how good are these lenses? I believe the shorter zoom is one of "kit" lenses. Not sure about the tele zoom
Comments from actual users would be most valuable to me; as I've read many of the reviews, and am getting a mixed reactions.
Thanks
I might have an extra one. Do you have a model number for it?
I would have to cast my vote for the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8, but the non-stabilized version, and not the more recent stabilized version. I think you'll find reviews agree as well. I have Essential Tremors which causes my left hand to shake. Having not used this lens for a while, I recently found out that I have no trouble with maintaining sufficent steadiness with the Tamron lens.
I 2nd the suggestion to visit the National Bison Range. GREAT wildlife photo ops. Been there a few times and it hasn't disappointed us yet. Would never miss it if anywhere in the area. There's lots more there than Bison.
Aside from using a tripod or monopod, what might be some helpful hints for achieving the sharpest results possible from consumer tele zoom lenses at their extreme longer ends. For example, there are many 70mm-ish-300mm zoom lenses on the market. Ruling out the very best (such as Canon "L" glass), what camera settings might one make to help with sharp (as possible) IQ, while handheld?
Such a list might be good for all to review.
Bob
DaveC,
So in your case, and with your ET, heavier is better? Is holding the gear tight to your body different than what you did pre-ET? My lens cradling hand (left) is a lot shakier than my right.
As the OP, I appreciate all of the feedback on this situation. My main concern is when the lenses are most vulnerable.....at full zoom, especially with tele lenses. And from your comments, that's the toughest nut to crack. I have Essential Tremors, as does one of the previous contributors. I have found that the heavier gear is more of a problem when bringing my left arm, which cradles the lens, up to my eye and the view finder, when using my DSLR. Strangely, when I shoot with my EOS-M, where I have only a LCD to use for previewing, I seem steadier, something that completely surprised me.
With my lens stabilization, I can actually see when the lens is stabilized, then take the shot. I understand that with IBIS you never actually see the "lock" of the stabilization. Is that correct?
The ultimate purpose of this post in the first place was to help determine if it would be better for me to go with a smaller, lighter mirrorless system, or stay with the DSLR. Ultimately, image quality, and specifically sharpness, is my ultimate goal here.
dixcee,
I could sell the lenses separately, but would be a quicker transaction to just make a trade. Even trading the lenses and my adding a little cash would work for me. But you've got to want the lenses first.
I wouldn't need the adapter as I have one already and use it quite a bit with my M(1).
That said, your cash asking price is a bit too high for me.
Bob
So, if using a camera with IBIS and fasten to it a lens with IS (in the "on" position), will the resulting IS really be better(with both stabilizers activated) than with either one without the other?
AS I age, I'm finding that I'm getting a bit more unstable (shakier) when holding my cameras. I'm aware that the use of tripods and monopods would help, but there are times when neither is practical, and hand holding is the only way. So my questions are:
which of the 2 major camera stabilizations is more reliable......lens stabilization, or in-camera-body stabilization? And if IBIS is the better, is there any particular brand of camera that seems to be at the top of the list?
Thanks
Bob
Prices are very necessary.