Canon Lens needed (longer reach)

[Buzz]

Hi All. I recently sold my Canon 70-200 f4 (non IS) and am looking for something longer, but also to replace the f4 70-200. I shoot purely as a hobbyist, mostly wildlife but a fair bit of portraiture for family and friends too. Am considering different options and have about R30k to spend (bonus just came in).

I still like the 70-200 range for portraiture, but need something longer too for wildlife, would it be best to get a new 70-200 f2.8 IS mk2 with a 2x mk3 converter (read good things about this combo) or perhaps a used mk1 70-200 f2.8 IS (I know they are hard to come by though) and then a 100-400 or a 300 f4 or even a 400 f5.6? I do have a 1.4 mk2 converter which I'll be keeping.

What would be the best bet for versatility as well as image quality, whilst not exceeding my budget? Also, have I possibly not considered other viable alternatives? I would really appreciate everyone's input and I have 3 weeks to get my kit before my bush trip, so bear that in mind too please. Might impact the "used" option.

Thanks
Leon

[Peter Veitch]

With R30k and a 1.4 tc, I'd look out for a second hand 300 f2.8 IS.

Personally I have as intermediate long lenses, the 300 f4 IS and a 100-400L. Both are great and if you put the 1.4 tc onto the 300 f4, IQ is about the same as the 100-400 at 400.

[Thndr_strck]

Does it have to be a canon lens ?

[Buzz]

Thanks Peter, but then I have nothing in my mid-range zoom. Since selling my 70-200, I only have my 24-70 left and I think the jump from 70 to 300 would be too big for me, given my need for a mid-range zoom for portraits. I also don't know how often the 300 f2.8 comes up 2nd hand and I have only 3 weeks before I'm in the bush and I sure dont want to only have a 24-70 with me then. I like that you say the IQ of the 300 f4 with 1.4tc is the same as 100-400 @ 400, My goal is to get a nice range from 70 through to 400.

[Buzz]

Not sure to be honest. I've only ever had Canon lenses and never used anything else, so never really considered other options.

Does it have to be a canon lens ?

[Thndr_strck]

Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 too expensive ?
Sigma 50-500mm not good enough ? too heavy ?

[Buzz]

Sigma 120-300 seems quite expensive to me from what I quickly saw looking around. For one lens I mean. That said, I know nothing about Sigma lenses and their abilities, so that gives me something to consider, thanks.
The 50-500 I don't think I'd like. Never liked the idea of a "Super-zoom" (excuse my terminology) I mean from a low of 50 all the way through to 500, just seems to me would not have the IQ I expect from a lens. My 70-200 f4 was fantastic and I'd expect similar, if not better IQ.

Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 too expensive ?
Sigma 50-500mm not good enough ? too heavy ?

[camerasaurusrex]

I agree with Peter on the 300mm f2.8 if you can afford it. Nothing wrong with this lens for portraits as far as IQ and bokeh go, you just need a really long room. If you have a few bucks left over, consider a prime of 85mm to 100mm for portraits to replace the 70-200.

[MorSny]

The 70-300L is a good option to cosider. It is very sharp, not much bigger than the 70-200 you sold but with more reach.

[Buzz]

I agree with Peter on the 300mm f2.8 if you can afford it. Nothing wrong with this lens for portraits as far as IQ and bokeh go, you just need a really long room. If you have a few bucks left over, consider a prime of 85mm to 100mm for portraits to replace the 70-200.

a new 300 f2.8 is definitely out of my budget and i havent seen a used one on ODP in over a year, so i think chances would be slim of getting one, let alone it being under R30k. Appreciate the thoughts though.

[Buzz]

The 70-300L is a good option to cosider. It is very sharp, not much bigger than the 70-200 you sold but with more reach.

Didnt think of this option. not badly priced, as i could potentially do a 400 f5.6 along with it. How does it stack up against the mk2 70-200 as i've heard this lens is just "awesome"?

[Deon RacePics]

Hi All. I recently sold my Canon 70-200 f4 (non IS) and am looking for something longer,

Thanks
Leon

you're in luck .. way within budget
http://www.outdoorphoto.co.za/classi...on-mount&cat=4

[Jacques Matthysen]

I would get the 300mm f4 fantastic prime and iq for the price. I would also consider the 24-105mm f4 for portraits and walk-around lens or prime 85mm.

[Buzz]

Thanks Jacques. I do like the 300mm f4, tried one out at ODP last week and have heard fairly good things about it with a 1.4x extender too (which i already have). I don't think a 24-105 would be needed, as I already have the 24-70, so am really trying to decide on options from 70 up to 300/400.

I'm thinking more and more I should look at going with the 300 f4 and a used 70-200 f2.8. I think that would be a good combination and within my budget.

I would get the 300mm f4 fantastic prime and iq for the price. I would also consider the 24-105mm f4 for portraits and walk-around lens or prime 85mm.

[Buzz]

Thanks Deon, but as mentioned I've never really considered non-Canon lenses and I just don't think I will do so in future either. Some may say that I'm being narrow minded, but I amjust really happy with all the Canon glass I've used thus far and like to stick with what I know.

you're in luck .. way within budget
http://www.outdoorphoto.co.za/classi...on-mount&cat=4

[Deon RacePics]

Thanks Deon, but as mentioned I've never really considered non-Canon lenses ..

no issues with that either

[Jacques Matthysen]

Sorry, missed the mentioning of the 24-70mm. In that case a 70-200mm f2.8 + 300mm f4 is the way I would go. Even slap on the 1.4 on both 300mm (420mm), 70-200mm (98-280mm) and keep your 24-70mm.

[Buzz]

Thanks all for your thoughts. I think I will try the route suggested by Jacques. Now I just need to find a good used 70-200 f2.8 IS in the next 2 weeks before I go into the bush. If anyone knows of one going, please let me know, but I will be checking the classifieds every day. The 300mm I might just buy new.

Sorry, missed the mentioning of the 24-70mm. In that case a 70-200mm f2.8 + 300mm f4 is the way I would go. Even slap on the 1.4 on both 300mm (420mm), 70-200mm (98-280mm) and keep your 24-70mm.

[Deon RacePics]

Sorry, missed the mentioning of the 24-70mm. In that case a 70-200mm f2.8 + 300mm f4 is the way I would go. Even slap on the 1.4 on both 300mm (420mm), 70-200mm (98-280mm) and keep your 24-70mm.

swap the 300 for a 400/5.6. However it depends on use.
THe 300+1.4 cannot match a 400/5.6, but the new 70-200/2.8 with 1.4 will equal the 300/4

[Buzz]

I probably agree with you, but can't see me buying the mk2 70-200 f2.8 and a 300 or 400 for my budget, so it'll need to be a used one ad i dont think with a 1.4x that it'll match the 300. I also need to get new lenses fairly soon and I've phoned around and nobody has stock of 400/5.6 and there are even waiting lists. I have actually this morning just bought a 300mm f4 off the ODP classifieds. Hope it suits my needs. Now its just the 70-200 to find

swap the 300 for a 400/5.6. However it depends on use.
THe 300+1.4 cannot match a 400/5.6, but the new 70-200/2.8 with 1.4 will equal the 300/4