calling Mr fizzwheel or anyone with DSLR knowledge

[jamesterror]

Thanks kwak, will have a look and a haggle

[jambo]

Kwak,
If you're looking for a new lens it really does help if you answer MattCo's question about what you're hoping to use this for. I'd never use something as long as a 70-300 as a walkabout / general purpose lens, but somewhere like Brands Hatch it could be very handy.

MattCo, I've used some glass that's well outside my price bracket before and to be sure it's quality kit. If I could I'd happily go out and blow £6k on lenses and flash gear tomorrow, but the fact of the matter is that for most people the added bulk, weight, and most importantly, cost, just isn't entirely justifiable.

I have a good friend who recently sprung for a Canon 24-105 f4L IS, and 70-200 f2.8L IS to replace his existing glass. He couldn't be happier with the quality, and is adamant he's happy he bought them. I hope to follow him at some point but my budget allowed me to buy the 17-85 f4-5.6 IS that he was getting rid of. This was better than I was using at the time.

If this were a "what bike gear should I buy" thread it's easy to reel off the £1700 worth of bike gear I wear, but I've been doing this for 10 years, and built my kit up from nothing. I couldn't have afforded what I wear all at once, and not when I started. Same with camera kit. If you buy top-brand fast glass you won't be disappointed with the quality, but you might find that in reality you just don't use those focal lengths as often as you thought you would. For the casual photographer spending £1000 on their first lens is probably more than they're going to be prepared to do. When I started working on bikes I couldn't afford snap-on tools but I can't possibly argue that the quality of them was higher than what I could afford.

FWIW at the moment I'm mostly spending my money on speedlites

Jambo

Originally Posted by jambo

Kwak,
If you're looking for a new lens it really does help if you answer MattCo's question about what you're hoping to use this for.

Mixed uses really, i do alot of BSB and amateur bike meets and would like to take good clear pic's of the bikes, the NEC next month it needs to be used there too, i also like to take very close up photos with the macro function, so abit of everything really.

[fizzwheel]

Originally Posted by jambo

I'd never use something as long as a 70-300 as a walkabout / general purpose lens

Agreed I'd never use mine for that its just not practical to carry it about all the time.

Originally Posted by TC3

Nothing wrong with owning good quality glass if you can afford it. For someone starting out though it is a good move to get a sub 200 quid lens to get a feel as to what focal lengths they will use most. then maybe further down the line they may want to get better gear all depending on what they want from the gear. On hands experience is the best way to learn limitations of cheaper lenses.

I disagree. Here's the point. Skip the cheap gear and buy once. It is a lot less expensive than buying one or two cheaper lenses only to buy a third time as often happens going through this process.

[jambo]

Originally Posted by MattCo

I disagree. Here's the point. Skip the cheap gear and buy once. It is a lot less expensive than buying one or two cheaper lenses only to buy a third time as often happens going through this process.

I agree with this with the caveat that do do this you must know that you're going to get the use out of that glass, and that you will buy it eventually. I hope one day I can afford that sort of kit, but for now I can't. So like many my choices are abstinence of any photography of a certain kind until I've got the money, or to buy a stop-gap measure and enjoy it now. I don't make money from my photography, I'll happily admit that most of my original kit will be or has been upgraded, but I was up and about and shooting for a year on very little money. And as I worked out what bits of photography I most liked I knew where I wanted to spend the cash.

It's been about a year since I've shot at anything over around 85mm focal length, my first expensive bit of glass (it's all relative) was the 10-20mm Sigma. I love that wide angle glass, and it's not perfect, but its plenty good enough for me. My 50mm f1.8 portrait lens has slow AF, and isn't terribly sharp wide open (it gets much better from f2.8 ) but it allows me to take photos inside at usable shutter speeds without flash. I love that about it. My 80-200mm is f4-5.6 without IS. It's not pin-sharp and in lower light you just can't use it. But all of the above glass was mine for a TOTAL of less than £400. And I love my photography.
Now on the shopping list is the (much nicer) 50mm f1.4 and a load of speedlites. I've discovered that I have little interest in long focal length photography, and prefer the drama of wide-angle, and nice portraiture. So I for one, am happy with my choices. None of my starting glass was brilliant, but it's been upgraded when I've had money and only where I know I'll benefit from it.

But Kwak, if you know you're going to do lots of sports photography, and you're going to spend a lot of time with a long lens on the camera and want really pin-sharp results, do consider MattCo's advice. If this is something you're passionate about sooner or later you'll end up spending the money on the good glass.

Consider something like Sigma's 70-200 f2.8 EX as a possible halfway house, it's not got IS/VR, but your camera has that built in the body. And it's not astronomically expensive. It can be extended with a 1.4x converter to make it reach further with a reasonable drop off in quality and transmitted light. At £644 from Warehouse express, it's not exactly cheap though.

Jambo

Originally Posted by jambo

Kwak,
If you're looking for a new lens it really does help if you answer MattCo's question about what you're hoping to use this for. I'd never use something as long as a 70-300 as a walkabout / general purpose lens, but somewhere like Brands Hatch it could be very handy.

MattCo, I've used some glass that's well outside my price bracket before and to be sure it's quality kit. If I could I'd happily go out and blow £6k on lenses and flash gear tomorrow, but the fact of the matter is that for most people the added bulk, weight, and most importantly, cost, just isn't entirely justifiable.

Yup, 70-300 range is not exactly a walk around lens. Weight is not an issue with the consumer models but the range of focal lengths. is a problem

The kit that I described is surprisingly light and compact. It all fits in a bum bag. Perhaps I shouldn't have used that example because some people seem to have a hard time getting past the bottom line. I won't bother any further.

I'm toying with the idea of buying a 70-300 but funds and the amount of use I'll get from it might prevent its purchase. I tend to find the 17-85mm is a good walk around on a crop body (40d) but if anything, I'd like something a bit wider and a 50mm prime.

Jambo, I too will be the proud owner of a Speedite 430ExII shortly, was going to go for the 580 but then thought it wasnt necessary. Looking to use it with the 50mm prime to achieve some good indoor portraits.

Originally Posted by jambo

Consider something like Sigma's 70-200 f2.8 EX as a possible halfway house, it's not got IS/VR, but your camera has that built in the body. And it's not astronomically expensive. It can be extended with a 1.4x converter to make it reach further with a reasonable drop off in quality and transmitted light. At £644 from Warehouse express, it's not exactly cheap though.

IS/VR? Since when was that a pre-requisite to a good lens. If anything it compromises the optics. Whatever happened to good technique?

Originally Posted by kwak zzr

Mixed uses really, i do alot of BSB and amateur bike meets and would like to take good clear pic's of the bikes, the NEC next month it needs to be used there too, i also like to take very close up photos with the macro function, so abit of everything really.

Kwak, Sigma 70-200/2.8 would do the job nicely.

These lenses while having a macro function are not macro lenses in the sense of a purpose built lens. They'll get you close, like good detail in small bits on bikes, but not really close, like count the hairs on a flies head.