Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Long Lens Or Fast Lens?  
User currently offlineUsairways@clt From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 209 posts, RR: 3
Posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2157 times:

Hey everyone,

It's time for me to move up to a better lens.

Should I:
A) Move up to a faster lens (in the range of f/2.8)
B) Move up to a longer lens (in the range of 500mm)

No, you don't have to tell me that these lenses are very expensive!! I have been doing QUITE a bit of saving.

What would you rather have (or what is more important to you?)

Zach

10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineUSAir_757 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 996 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2070 times:

I'd go faster. That way you can take nice handheld shots in the late evening. Which camera system are you using?

C. Wassell



-Cullen Wassell @ MLI | Pentax K5 + DA18-55WR + Sigma 70-300 DL Macro Super
User currently offlineBrick From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 1589 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2063 times:

I would tend to go for the longer lens. You won't necessarily need the f2.8 all the time, but you certainly will need the 500mm. Just my $0.02 though. If you tend to do dawn/dusk shots then go for speed. Otherwise I'd go for length.

Mark Abbott
Minneapolis, MN



A noble spirit embiggens the smallest man...
User currently offlineAKE0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2535 posts, RR: 46
Reply 3, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2058 times:

Zach,

it all depends what kind of ground you want to cover and what you want to shoot.
You shoot @ CLT correct? Do you really need the 500mm or are 200mm enough? Me personally I did acutally go for the 500mm as with 200mm u can not do anything @BOS. What kind of 500mm do you have in mind?
If you really have the money ???? go with a 400mm F4 or 600mm F4 and then maybe a 2x teleconverter => nice range!!!

I would definitely go for range!!!!

Regards
Vasco G.


User currently offlineUsairways@clt From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 209 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2059 times:

USAir_757:

I'm currently using Canon A2E along with a Tamron 70-300 4.5-5.6. My camera I think is great, but the lens doesn't give me the sharp picture that I like - but on the other hand, I am always whining about how I missed the perfect shot because it was too far.
-------------------------------
Vasco:

300mm is suitable for some of the areas of shooting, but I just uncovered a goldmine of places where I would definitely need the extra length.
If you can hook me up with 7500 grand, by all means I'll go with your system.
I was thinking of a Sigma 400mm f/5.6 APO HSM Auto Focus lens *or*
Sigma Zoom Normal-Tele 50-500mm f/4-6.3 APO EX RF HSM Auto Focus Lens. Is this too slow?

Anything better and you are getting too expensive. Unless, you know of a lens I don't.

-----------
Zach


User currently offlineAKE0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2535 posts, RR: 46
Reply 5, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2051 times:

Zach,

I did not know what kind of budget you had ( you said "I have been doing QUITE a bit of saving" therefore I suggested the real expensive ones........)

Nevertheless the SIGMA 50-500mm is a reaslly good buy ! I saw a package on nice package on cameraworld

for USD 999,-

http://www.cameraworld.com/adtemplate.asp?invky=58463


As I said before I would go for range!!!

Regards
Vasco G.




User currently offlineTOP From Germany, joined May 2000, 264 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2028 times:

I have the canon 100-400mm IS USM lens and I'm very satisfied with it! f2,8 is nice but with a long range you can do much more than with a high speed. The Image Stabilisator reduces the vibration so that you don't get blurry pictures!

User currently offlineCkw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 745 posts, RR: 16
Reply 7, posted (13 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2011 times:

After years of buying increasingly longer lenses (I got up to a 600mm Sigma), I sat down last year and worked out how many times I actually needed to use the long lens, and then how many GOOD shots I actually got. The answer was depressingly small. After a lot of thinking about how, where and when I take pics, I traded my 600mm and 400mm in against a 300mm f2.8 and 1.4x and 2x convertors.

I've found the 300 much more veratile than the longer lenses, and, by buying top quality lenses and convertors (Canon make), I can still get the longer reach when I really need it with no real noticable drop in quality.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineHias From Germany, joined Sep 2000, 349 posts, RR: 12
Reply 8, posted (13 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2012 times:

I had the same problem and got a long lens first (Sigma 170-500mm/5,0-6,3), but now I am going for more quality (Nikon 2,8/80-200mm).

In your case I would do the same like I did.

Regards

Mathias
http://www.spotter.de.vu


User currently offlineLawrence feir From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 39 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (13 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2003 times:

Go with the fast lens if you can afford it.

I shoot Canon equipment and my all time favorite lens is the 70-200, 2.8
It still takes wonderful shots with the Canon L1.4 teleconverter. This is the lens I shoot most of my air to air as well as ground to ground shots. It's great in low light and it's really sharp!

Let us know what you go for.

Lawrence




User currently offlineJayDavis From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2000 posts, RR: 15
Reply 10, posted (13 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1987 times:

I would go with a fast, zoom lense like
Lawrence recommended. I too have a Canon
70-200 2.8, along with the 2x converter.
So with using the converter, you get
140-400 5.6. I would go always with a faster
lense over the length. Plus with a 500mm, I
do not think you'll get a zoom capability. I
have shot a 500mm fixed lense before at a football
game and I didn't like not be able to zoom in and
zoom out.

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/4876

Picture Perfect Airliners

Jay Davis


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...
Lens Advice: Is Or Not? posted Thu May 11 2006 01:41:50 by AC773
New Camera Or New Lens? posted Wed Apr 5 2006 07:07:35 by Seachaz
Changing My Canon L Lens...any Thoughts Or Help? posted Fri Jan 20 2006 18:53:49 by Danpio
Long Lens Backlit Rejects, What Would You Do? posted Tue Sep 13 2005 16:08:22 by Tappan
Sigma Lens 28-300mm Or Nikkor 70-300mm? posted Sun Jul 31 2005 19:54:43 by Airline7322
Looking For A New Lens..28-300.. Or What? posted Wed Jun 8 2005 23:01:37 by GRZ-AIR
Long Reach Lens posted Mon May 16 2005 19:45:43 by Oneshot
Advise Of Buying A New Lens (or 2) posted Tue May 3 2005 00:22:26 by Morvious
You Pick: A 300D And Lens Or A Trip To Australia.. posted Sun Jan 16 2005 03:03:30 by MartinairYYZ
Canon Lens: US Or Grey Market? posted Sun Jul 11 2004 04:51:35 by Bronko