Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Yet Another Lens Thread  
User currently offlineCaliSam From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 55 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4153 times:

I think my new 50D needs a new lens pretty bad. My current one is a Tamron SP AF200-500MM F/5-6.3. It's a slow lens and while I can capture pretty good shots, it's very rare. It also suffers from some "ghosting", especially at 500mm. When shooting white planes in broad daylight, they seem to glow, especially on logos (ANA airlines is a perfect example)

So my budget is $1500 max for this new lens. I've been eyeing the Canon 100-400 IS, however I've been reading about problems with softness.. and also a thread somewhere below about people experiencing a drop in quality after only a couple of years.

Also.. I dont really want anything under 400mm max zoom. Planespotting is a tough thing to do here in the San Francisco bay area.

Any recommendations?

18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineWakeTurbulence From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1294 posts, RR: 16
Reply 1, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 4146 times:

Get the 100-400. The people complaining are a drop in the bucket compared to the people that own the lens and don't complain. If you don't like the copy you get due to softness trade it in for another. I got mine and it has worked fine since day one. Just a side note, if you had a larger budget rumor has it that the 100-400 MkII will be coming out soon and it should be constant f/4. It will most likely be more expensive. How much more no one knows yet.
-Matt



Jetwash Images - Feel the Heat!!!
User currently offlineUnattendedBag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2326 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 4146 times:



Quoting CaliSam (Thread starter):
So my budget is $1500 max for this new lens. I've been eyeing the Canon 100-400 IS,

the 100-400 is the best you are going to get for that price range and for that amount of mm.



Slower traffic, keep right
User currently offlineCaliSam From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 55 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 4131 times:

I guess it can't hurt as long as I get it from a reputable online store with a good return policy. Any recommendations? Amazon?

User currently offlineDazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2910 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 4101 times:

CaliSam,

The Canon 100-400 is probably the best there is if they're the sort of focal lengths you want. For me, the 100-400 is too long at the short end so I opted for the Sigma 50-500. I've used that on my 350D for 2.5 years, but now use it on a 50D and it's a great combination. I've had to send the lens back to Sigma twice with a focussing problem. The second time was repaired under guarantee, got it back this week so going to try it on friday and they've hopefully solved the problem.

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineSluger020889 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 456 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 4044 times:



Quoting UnattendedBag (Reply 2):
the 100-400 is the best you are going to get for that price range and for that amount of mm.

Depending on your style of shooting, the 400 5.6 is a better buy IMO, and a bit cheaper actually. But primes aren't for everybody, a lot of people around here shutter at the thought of not being able to get a side on shot. To each his own I guess.

Joey



I would love to fly a cargo plane full of rubber dog shit out of Hong Kong!
User currently offlineChrisair From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 2104 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week ago) and read 4016 times:



Quoting CaliSam (Reply 3):
I guess it can't hurt as long as I get it from a reputable online store with a good return policy. Any recommendations? Amazon?

Get it from Keeble and Shuchat in Palo Alto. You might pay slightly more (and sales tax) but returns would be hassle free since they're local.

If you must buy online, go from Adorama or B&H. Amazon is good...for books and movies. Not camera gear.


User currently offlineVishaljo From India, joined Aug 2006, 470 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (5 years 7 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3976 times:



Quoting Sluger020889 (Reply 5):
a lot of people around here shutter at the thought of not being able to get a side on shot. To each his own I guess.

You stole the words right outta my mouth Joey !  bigthumbsup 


User currently offlineDazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2910 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (5 years 7 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3938 times:



Quoting Sluger020889 (Reply 5):
Depending on your style of shooting, the 400 5.6 is a better buy IMO

But that's also very limiting for the majority of people who like to take photos at various angles and may be way too long depend on how close to aircraft you are. For example my my 50-500 is rarely used over 300, but the other 200mm is there is needed. And yes, for other things other than side-ons!

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineSluger020889 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 456 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (5 years 7 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3904 times:



Quoting Dazbo5 (Reply 8):
But that's also very limiting for the majority of people who like to take photos at various angles and may be way too long depend on how close to aircraft you are.

What other angles are there? Besides a head on, a front 3/4, a back 3/4 and a side on?

I've been to countless airports since I've gotten my 300, and at most airports I've used it with a 1.4x, making it 420 and I've only really been limited once. Also if you're main lens is a prime, you also come with something shorter as a back up plan. I know plenty of people who's main piece of glass is a long prime and they always come away with some amazing quality shots.

But again, as I said before, some people just can't fathom the thought of not getting side one. I used to be like that, and then I picked up a prime one day, I don't miss those side ons  Wink



I would love to fly a cargo plane full of rubber dog shit out of Hong Kong!
User currently offlineDazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2910 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (5 years 7 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 3895 times:



Quoting Sluger020889 (Reply 9):
What other angles are there? Besides a head on, a front 3/4, a back 3/4 and a side on?

All I was saying is a 400mm on it's own is limiting. We aren't all made of money and can afford multiple lenses and bodies. If I used a 400mm at my local airport, I'd have to stand 1/4 way down the runway to get a 3/4 angle shot!! A prime may give you ultimate quality at that focal length, but the negative is they are very limiting unless you have another body / lens. Not everyone can afford that so a telephoto lens is the better option. If you have the budget, then fine. Where I go, I can be shooting anything from a PA28 to a 747 within minutes of each other! That's where the flexibility of a 100-400 comes in, or in my case, a 50-500. Different locations and budgets require different equipment.

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineMikey From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 193 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (5 years 7 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3887 times:

My recommendation is going the used route as i got a very sharp copy of the 100-400 IS for less than the $1460 for a new one. It depends on the date code of what year the lens was made in.

I recomend www.fredmiranda.com for getting used equipment as I bought a used one around 135,000 shutter clicks Canon 1D Mk2 for $925 Shipped.

Mike



Ex LAX, LGB, SNA aviation photographer
User currently offlineSluger020889 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 456 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (5 years 7 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3865 times:



Quoting Dazbo5 (Reply 10):
Not everyone can afford that so a telephoto lens is the better option

The lens I mentioned, the 400 5.6, is 320 USD less than the 100-400 and only 111 USD more than your 50-500. Not really a huge sum of money when the overall price tag is 4 digits.

Quoting Dazbo5 (Reply 10):
We aren't all made of money and can afford multiple lenses and bodies.

I wasn't inferring that I was. I scrimped and saved every penny I could to get my first body back in 05, and when I upgraded in 07 I held on to that first body, thinking it may come in handy down the road, and it has. The longer you do this, the more equipment you acquire.

In the end, it is your own personal style.

Joey



I would love to fly a cargo plane full of rubber dog shit out of Hong Kong!
User currently offlineJRowson From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 352 posts, RR: 12
Reply 13, posted (5 years 7 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3855 times:

As much as i don't get on with the 100-400, it's probably the only realistic solution at this time if you need a telephoto up to 400mm. I ditched mine in favour of a 70-200 + 1.4x which for me at MAN is ideal as 300mm covers 95% of the shots I want there. However, when I shot at SFO recently for an afternoon whilst in transit, 300mm was not enough and I was severely restricted to only shooting the larger arrivals across the bay. Some of the smaller specials I wanted ended up being a mere dot in the frame. Not having more than 300mm at airshows severly p*sses me off too.

I'm waiting for the new 100-400 to see what it's like, and of course the price. I hear that it's not going to be cheap, so I might end up going back to find a good copy of the 100-400 dust sucking, IS failing, AF failing, soft lens that I once had (yes, mine had all those problems).

I discounted the 50-500 simply as frankly the colours it produces can't match L. When you've shot L, it's very difficult to give it up. Plus trying to get a decent shot at 500mm isn't the easiest of tasks unless you've got some really decent weather, plus I know 2 different people who have had one and they've simply fallen apart, ie the lens fell off the lens mount leaving the lens mount attached to the camera...that gives me less confidence than I have in the 100-400.



James Rowson. Canonite and lover of all things L. JAR Photography.
User currently offlineCaliSam From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 55 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (5 years 7 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 3827 times:

Thanks for all the advice.

I can tell you for sure that I would be disappointed with anything under 400mm, especially coming from my 500mm Tamron.


User currently offlineNavymmw From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 257 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (5 years 7 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3780 times:

Hello, I wanted to ad to this thread that I'am aslo looking for a new lens.

However I own the Canon XTi/400D, my current lens is the kit 18-55mm and as of now im looking for an upgrade. My budget is under $400 but if there are any lenses that cost a little bit more that are worth the extra money im willing to save longer.
Im looking into these lenses -

Canon 55-250mm IS - I fear this lense would not be good for avaition photography due to the poor f/ stop, am I right? Or would this be decent for me, a new user to DSLR photography.

Sigma 18mm - 50mm f/2.8 EX DC Macro - This would allow me to replace my kit lens while giving my the ability to take shots in lower light, etc... How is the quality in this lens?

Canon 50mm F/1.8 - I have heard great things about this lens, it is both cheap and takes amazing pictures, however I don't see where I could ever use this range, would it be usale for shots from the cabin?

Are there any others that you would recomend for aviation shots? Im looking for a decent one that can take decent shots from the cabin, etc... But yet I would also like to find a decent telephoto but due to my inablitity to afford a $1000 lense I would not be able to achieve the good quality at high focal ranges. So I guess im asking if there are any decent telephoto lenses for a cheap price or if I shoud just go with a lense in the range as the ones I posted.

Edit: I also wanted to ad, if I do buy a lens that is simular range to the kit lens, where could I sell my kit lens and how much do you think I would be able to get for it? Im thinking ebay but im not sure if there are any better places.

[Edited 2009-01-31 18:13:47]

User currently offlineJRowson From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 352 posts, RR: 12
Reply 16, posted (5 years 7 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3743 times:



Quoting Navymmw (Reply 15):
Are there any others that you would recomend for aviation shots? Im looking for a decent one that can take decent shots from the cabin, etc

Canon 10-22 - I love mine to bits. Perfect for cabin/flightdeck shots and certain SXM shots.

Also I use Canon's 24-105 F4L IS. A great mid range telephoto. Not cheap but superb.



James Rowson. Canonite and lover of all things L. JAR Photography.
User currently offlineVishaljo From India, joined Aug 2006, 470 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (5 years 7 months 4 days ago) and read 3726 times:



Quoting Navymmw (Reply 15):
Canon 55-250mm IS - I fear this lense would not be good for avaition photography due to the poor f/ stop, am I right?

NO.

Quoting Navymmw (Reply 15):
Or would this be decent for me, a new user to DSLR photography.

YES.
Its a relatively new lens, i guess not many people would have it yet & as a result you may not have heard much about it but getting to the point here are two shots of mine via the 400D + 55-250 IS

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Vishal Jolapara - Indian Aviation Photographers
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Vishal Jolapara - Indian Aviation Photographers


For a mid-range, i have the 28-105 USM II & its a fabulous lens also.


User currently offlineNavymmw From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 257 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (5 years 7 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3703 times:

I think I decided that what im going to do is just save up for now and get the 70-200mm for about 550 on adorama, then buy the sigma 18-50mm F/2.8 later in the year, I could sell my kit lens then too.

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...
Yet Another Rejection Question Thread! posted Sun Jan 7 2007 19:29:52 by N440ER
Yet Another "is This Salvagable?" Thread... posted Sat Jul 29 2006 03:15:18 by SNATH
Yet Another "will This Make It" Thread posted Sat Jun 3 2006 23:40:22 by ATCme
Yet Another Boring "what Are My Chances" Thread... posted Thu Feb 21 2002 09:48:06 by Ikarus
Yet Another Photo Theif posted Mon Feb 25 2008 03:13:48 by Flynavy
Another Lens Question posted Sat Nov 10 2007 20:17:03 by FLYB6JETS
Another Camera Thread: Canon 350D Vs. Nikon D40x posted Sat Oct 6 2007 07:02:01 by DeltaAVL
Yet Another Noob Asking For Help... posted Tue Jan 23 2007 19:19:12 by FrancoBlanco
Yet Another Bad Center posted Tue Feb 7 2006 16:09:15 by VasanthD
Another Lens Question For The 20D posted Sat Oct 15 2005 03:02:05 by DavidYYC