Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What Will Your Next Lens(es) Be?  
User currently offlineWhyWhyZed From Canada, joined Jan 2005, 914 posts, RR: 16
Posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4368 times:

Exactly what the title says. We're all constantly upgrading our equipment to increase quality and focal length, so I'm sure you saving up money for some specific gear.

I'm personally saving up for...
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM
and...
Sigma 150mm f2.8 APO Macro DG EX HSM

- Jason DePodesta

68 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDC10Tim From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 1406 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4364 times:

I'd like a Canon 100-400mm L IS, but I can't see it happening in the next 12 months  Sad

Tim.



Obviously missing something....
User currently offlineMartin21 From Netherlands, joined Aug 2001, 347 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4364 times:

I have Minolta gear. Would be very expensive to move to Canon. And I don't have the money. So I hope Sony would invest in dSLR and I will save for a nice 70-200 2.8 SSM !

Martin21



At 30.000 feet, the sun always shines !
User currently offlineINNflight From Switzerland, joined Apr 2004, 3766 posts, RR: 59
Reply 3, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4350 times:

No lens needed here soon.

More looking towards a 77mm circular polarizer. Less expensive anyway.  Wink



Jet Visuals
User currently offlineTin67 From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 268 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4349 times:

I have no reason ( or should I say money) to buy a lens in the near future, but the one on my must have list is a Canon EF300mm f/2.8 IS L to replace my f/4.0 version.

If Sigma have sorted out their 300 f/2.8 (I had one before) I may consider that again as it was optically superb, just let down my poor build and rubbish auto-focus.

Regards Martin


User currently offlineLinco22 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1380 posts, RR: 15
Reply 5, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4339 times:

mmm stuck between 3 at the minute. The Bigma, Canon 70-200 f4 L and the Canon 100-400 L IS. Budget pending.....  Smile

Colin


User currently offlineWillo From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 1352 posts, RR: 12
Reply 6, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4339 times:

I have had a Sigma 100-300EX on order since the beginning of January. I checked today and Sigma still can't tell my supplier when they will have stock in the UK Sad

User currently offlineAirplanepics From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2003, 2734 posts, RR: 40
Reply 7, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4334 times:

Later on this month I'll be purchasing a Sigma 50-500 and probably a Canon 17-40L.

/Simon.



Simon - London-Aviation.com
User currently offlineDullesguy From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 247 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4330 times:

When I get my job in the Tower or Center..who knows what the FAA will be doing! I'm gonna get the 100-400L. My school budget isn't allowing for any kind of upgrades right about now. I just love the idea of having that extra reach of 400mm



Stephen



"..the joy of the Lord is your strength" Nehemiah 8:10
User currently onlineJRadier From Netherlands, joined Sep 2004, 4695 posts, RR: 50
Reply 9, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4325 times:

No lenses planned in the near future (upgrading the body from the 300D to the 20DmkII (or whatever it will be called)), but the 17-55 f/2.8 (providing canon finally follows nikons example) and the 70-200 f/2.8 IS are on the wishlist


For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and ther
User currently offlineInterpaul From Germany, joined Jul 2004, 409 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4314 times:

I just ordered the Canon 400mm 5.6 prime because the 100-400 is a little soft at the long end. That lens is said to be very sharp even if you use a 1,4 TC. No IS though.  hissyfit   Wink

Cheers
Jan


User currently offlineSoBe From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 256 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 4285 times:

In '04 I bought the 70-200 f2.8 VR. Now I'm saving up for the 200-400 f4 VR. I'll be saving for a while. Should have bought it when I had the cash in my hand before getting married!!

User currently offlineDullesguy From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 247 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 4271 times:

Jan,
I don't want to start a whole big debate about this, but could you elaborate a tad on "little soft". Was it bearable when using full zoom at 400mm on action shots? I just wanna know b/c i'm set on getting this lense when I get the money..but if the softness is that big a issue i'll save even more for the 70-200. i just want that zoom!


Stephen



"..the joy of the Lord is your strength" Nehemiah 8:10
User currently offlineInterpaul From Germany, joined Jul 2004, 409 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 4262 times:

Don't get me wrong. It's an awesome piece of glass and its great versatility is beyond doubt. Very sharp, if you're using it in the 100-300mm range, that is.

But I found myself using it at 400mm most of the time and the results were OK but just not as sharp as I wanted them to be. But of course it's up to you what you expect of a lens.

However, it's still capable of producing very crisp pictures.

Self plug!  duck 


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jan Szidat



Cheers
Jan


User currently offlineIL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2237 posts, RR: 48
Reply 14, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 4246 times:

Of course it's not a prime, but the softness isn't too bad.
No need to open the plugged shot, it's about the small image underneath, a 100% crop on a 10D. You can still read the "CJ 375" (although slightly compressed by Photobucket). (1/320s f8 400mm)

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Eduard Brantjes




I'm not surprised to see many people in this topic wanting this lens.  
E

PS, I want a 24-105 f4 L IS this year...  Wink

[Edited 2006-02-02 19:56:04]

User currently offlineMarkJBeckwith From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 156 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4231 times:

Quoting WhyWhyZed (Thread starter):
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

Me too, in a couple or three months...

Mark.



One day, I might be good at this...
User currently offlineCrank From Canada, joined May 2001, 1559 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4228 times:

I'm gonna pick up a 100-400 at the end of february or beginning of march to replace my 75-300.

User currently offlineCosec59 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4226 times:

After some careful consideration following the advice on this forum, I will get the 24-105 f4 L IS in a couple of weeks

User currently offlineMorvious From Netherlands, joined Feb 2005, 707 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4200 times:

I am dying to get the 70-200 F2.8 tomorrow, but I can't descide if the 300€ extra is worth it for the canon version.


have a good day, Stefan van Hierden
User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 19, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4181 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

50mm 1.8, always wanted it and just might buy it this year just for the fun of owning it: no loans necessary for that lens Wink

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineInterpaul From Germany, joined Jul 2004, 409 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4172 times:

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 19):
just for the fun of owning it

Isn't that the main reason we all strive for more lenses?  laughing 

Jan


User currently offlineGVerbeeck From Belgium, joined Mar 2005, 245 posts, RR: 24
Reply 21, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4167 times:

Now I've recently picked up a 20D, I'm in need of a wide-angle zoom: I was debating between the 16-35 and the 17-40, but I'll probably wait 'till after the PMA (where Canon might announce something new). I'm also looking for a high-quality fast prime for indoor action shooting: I was looking at the 135 f2.0 but it might be a little long (and quite expensive), so I'll probably settle for a 85 f1.8 which is rumored to be a terrific lens, and which won't take too big a dent out of my wallet. Except of course if I would find a good second-hand 200 f1.8...  spin 

Actually, it depends a little on the number of photo sales that will materialize...

Giovanni


User currently offlineGVerbeeck From Belgium, joined Mar 2005, 245 posts, RR: 24
Reply 22, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4164 times:

Quoting IL76 (Reply 14):
Of course it's not a prime, but the softness isn't too bad.

Indeed, Ed, I also find the 100-400 to be a solid performer, even flat out at 400mm. Yet I often see people shooting wide-open at f/5.6 at 400mm with this lens, no wonder the shots might turn out a little blurry  Wink.

Gio


User currently offlineLGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4161 times:

Quoting Willo (Reply 6):
I have had a Sigma 100-300EX on order since the beginning of January. I checked today and Sigma still can't tell my supplier when they will have stock in the UK

Good choice Andrew, it is well worth the wait

Cheers

Ben


User currently offlineGary2880 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 4119 times:

tamron 90mm macro, sod all to do with aviation but you asked Big grin

25 Kereru : Just got a Nikon 80-400mm VR lens so no more lenses for a while. D200 body is the next big price item. A 77mm Polariser is on the short list for now a
26 AndrewUber : I finally upgraded to "L" recently, and purchased the 70-200 F4 L. It is amazing - what a HUGE difference from the 75-300 IS. I do miss the Image Stab
27 Mich : 70-200 2.8L next purchase soon. The 24-105mm f/4L IS USM may be first though for a good walk around the 24-70 just dont reach far enough in certain pl
28 Kereru : Yes, and that 18-200mm VR is on my wish list for that same reason. Will have to wait till the later part of this year. Cheers.
29 Post contains images PlymSpotter : Have just purchased the 170-500 Sigma, haven't tried it out yet on fast moving aircraft, but the first shots with it even at full zoom have been comin
30 7FTwinOtter : Most likely a Nikkor 50mm 1.4 pre ai lens for my F. or a Helios-103 for my contax II
31 WhyWhyZed : Same strategy and same feelings as me. - Jason DePodesta
32 Cruiser : This summer I am going to get the Canon 100-400 L IS. That, and I have been thinking about something on the shorter end. Hmmm, B&H might get a big ord
33 Post contains images Fergulmcc : Either the 300mm L'IS f2.8 or the 400mm L'IS f2.8 Fergul
34 Post contains images JRadier : pfff, lousy lenses (wish I had the money :P)
35 Post contains images Fergulmcc : Not really, stick a x2 TC with either of them and you will still have AF on a 20D, a lot chaeper than getting a 600mm f4! The 400 f2.8 is a cracking
36 Post contains images JRadier : read the (...) part
37 Post contains images Chris78cpr : For me it shall be either a 24-105F4LIS to give me a good mid range lens. Or i may just go for a D200 and a 18-200VR Chris
38 WhyWhyZed : I'm actually surprised that a lot of people are shooting for the 24-105 f/4. I've read a lot of reviews on it and ALOT of people complain about lens f
39 RomeoKC10FE : Sigma 50-500, "THE BIG MA"
40 Chris78cpr : I have read those reviews. I have also used the lens on my main cameras and i know that for what i want it produces absolutely stunning results! Dont
41 Post contains images Skidmarks : Next lens I hope to get will be Nikon's 18-200 VR along with the D200. This will replace my trusty 28-200. Andy
42 Post contains links Aviopic : Chris will you please take note of this topic Canon 24-105 L USM. Opinions? (by Cosec59 Jan 30 2006 in Aviation Photography) and tell me what my erro
43 Jwenting : I agree Chris, though there are of course always differences in quality between individual models and even samples. That said: Over on the Nikonians f
44 Jwenting : My next lens will likely be an 85mm f/1.8 AF-D Nikkor. After that I'm in the market for a new long tele, brand and type undecided (but likely either a
45 Aviopic : I might agree too if he backed up his statement. In my view it is quite a statement about the rest of the world which still might be right but heee t
46 Chris78cpr : Willem, I had a quick look at your posts in that thread and the first pic looks ok. At 200% in those lighting conditions you can expect to see some CA
47 Post contains images Traveler_7 : Most probably it will be kit lense
48 Post contains images Aviopic : Thanks Chris. After more then 30 years in photography I am arrogant enough to say "I know" Don't wanna say to much about it here 'cos we are off topic
49 Post contains images Chris78cpr : Ahhh good to here Willem. You sound very expeirianced then! I am only 20 but know a little and am always trying to learn more. I do think that fringin
50 Post contains images Skidmarks : Man, you hit the proverbial nail right on the head there! Andy
51 Chris78cpr : Lol, cheers Andy! It's so easy to see though when you actually talk to someone who hasnt got a clue. I remember shooting at Disney World in Orlando a
52 Post contains links JeffM : What really sounds funny is that you paid $4500 for a $3500 MkII, and then to top it off you use it to take photos of the Disney Parade.....LOL...tha
53 Chris78cpr : Jeff, Do me a favour, pull you bloody neck in. Firstly, i own a 1dmkii as my MAIN camera. I shoot other stuff as well as aviation. Yes i will shoot a
54 F9Widebody : Well, my next lens depends on what strategy I decide to pursue with photography. I'll either spend alot and opt for the 100-400, or I'll budget my mon
55 Post contains images Jwenting : Sigma has an 80-400 as well which is quite good
56 Sulman : Yes, using a camera to take pictures. Whatever next.
57 Chris78cpr : I know, any one would think i was being stupid using my camera to take a picture, and shock horror of something i enjoy!
58 Post contains images JeffM : Your right Chris, I thought that about you before I read that. LOL.. I could care less what you paid for your camera. Abuse? Yea, that's what the jok
59 Chris78cpr : Pull your bloody neck in was what i wrote instead of writing something that would get me a sizeable ban here. Frankly, reading your petty comments doe
60 Mirrodie : wow, great idea for a thread. I just got Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM along with my first dslr, the Canon 20 D But i have an 28-80 and 80-200
61 JeffM : Mirrodie, if you just got the 100-400L you won't be satisfied with the 50-500. And Chris, no need for the personal attack, the image I had of you run
62 Jwenting : Well, I've heard horror stories about the 100-400L, especially about rather poor edge sharpness and distortion on 35mm film and digital sensors. On A
63 Sulman : I want to get a replacement for the 18-55 EFS at some point. I'm using it alot more frequently for non-aviation stuff, and much as I like it (it's a 1
64 Viv : Nikkor 12-24mm DX will be my next lens.
65 JRadier : could you please explain why? with a study perhaps where a large number of people was questioned and most of them weren't satisfied with the 50-500 a
66 Post contains images JeffM : Sure Jurgen. It's based on my personal opinion, I've seen no "study" of people questioned about this...have you? I tried the inexpensive 50-500 numer
67 JRadier : those 2 words show that it is an opinion (nothing wrong with that), but don't say someone won't be happy with the 50-500 after the 100-400. It is, as
68 Post contains images Mirrodie : gentleman, please, its how you use the lens, not the size of it I like mine and just need a good walkabout lens now. thanks.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
What Will Your Next Lens(es) Be? posted Thu Feb 2 2006 16:20:05 by WhyWhyZed
What Do You Use To Clean Your Lens(es)? posted Wed Sep 22 2004 01:09:28 by Go3Team
What Is Your Primary Camera/lens Combo? posted Wed Jun 16 2004 18:08:31 by Chris78cpr
Your Next Step In Aviation Photography posted Thu Nov 16 2006 16:55:50 by LIPH
When Will I Get My Lens? posted Tue Jul 25 2006 15:53:14 by FrancoBlanco
What Sparked Your Enthusiasm? posted Thu Sep 15 2005 16:24:25 by Linco22
What Are Your Current Upload Stats? posted Thu Aug 11 2005 14:33:42 by WhyWhyZed
What Will It Take? posted Wed Oct 27 2004 05:30:22 by Flybynight
What Is The Biggest Lens You've Seen? posted Thu Oct 21 2004 17:05:27 by MADtoCAE
What Is Your Monitor Color Temperature? posted Thu Aug 26 2004 06:20:35 by DB777