usairways@clt
Posts: 202
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2000 1:09 am

Long Lens Or Fast Lens?

Sat Jan 06, 2001 10:09 am

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
 
USAir_757
Posts: 949
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2000 12:30 am

RE: Long Lens Or Fast Lens?

Sat Jan 06, 2001 10:11 am

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
 
Brick
Posts: 1486
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 1999 11:08 am

RE: Long Lens Or Fast Lens?

Sat Jan 06, 2001 10:37 am

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...
 
ake0404ar
Posts: 2379
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 10:55 am

RE: Long Lens Or Fast Lens?

Sat Jan 06, 2001 10:52 am

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.
 
usairways@clt
Posts: 202
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2000 1:09 am

RE: Long Lens Or Fast Lens?

Sat Jan 06, 2001 11:24 am

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
 
ake0404ar
Posts: 2379
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 10:55 am

RE: Long Lens Or Fast Lens?

Sat Jan 06, 2001 10:00 pm

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.


 
TOP
Posts: 250
Joined: Wed May 10, 2000 5:22 am

RE: Long Lens Or Fast Lens?

Mon Jan 08, 2001 5:04 am

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!
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: Long Lens Or Fast Lens?

Mon Jan 08, 2001 6:15 pm

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 avatar
hias
Posts: 337
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2000 4:17 pm

RE: Long Lens Or Fast Lens?

Mon Jan 08, 2001 6:51 pm

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
 
Lawrence Feir
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2000 6:23 am

RE: Long Lens Or Fast Lens?

Tue Jan 09, 2001 2:50 pm

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


 
JayDavis
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:09 pm

RE: Long Lens Or Fast Lens?

Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:30 pm

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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests