BetterPhoto Q&A
Category: New Answers

Lens for Canon

The best buy I have seen online is the Sigma 80-400mm f4.5.6 EX Lens with Optical stabilizer for Canon SLR camera - the description states it was designed for Canon Digital SLRs. The price was given at $999.99, which is the least expensive one that I have found that comes anywhere near my needs. It sounds as though the photos will be clear and I believe I can live with the weight and the fact that it is a bit noisy. I also prefer the black color to the many white ones I have seen advertised. (The seller is reputable.)

The alternates are $2000 and WAY UP. Would this lens give me the quality I desire in photo contests or would you have alternate choices that are not too expensive? I am hoping to make my purchase before the horse shows come in a couple of weeks!

Thanks for your consideration.

Ellie Kaul

To love this question, log in above
January 11, 2006

WHile I don't have either the 70-300 nor the 80-400 Sigmas, I do have a number of other Sigma lenses and by and large they are quite good. The 80-400 is their version of Nikon's similar lens with VR (Vibration Reduction), which I also once owned. The VR can work quite well, but remember that it counters any blurring that might occur due to your movement - it does nothing to stop blur if the subject is moving to fast to be 'frozen' by the shutter speed.

I have little doubt that the Sigma 80-400 is a fine lens and can produce excellent shots - but as always excellent shots are 90% photographer skill, 10% lens.

To love this comment, log in above
January 11, 2006

Thanks for your reply - I know very little about cameras, but I know that sometimes I can come up with some good photos - local contests and POTDs - which is a miracle seeing as I am still a novice. I do have a problem understanding the present selections in some contests, however.

My desire is to be a wildlife phographer (even at my old age) and I know that eventually I will need to upgrade my equipment. Yes, I occasionally use a tripod, but I can get a reasonably good overhead photo of a bird flying (if not too distant) without one. I do a lot of macros (insects, flowers, etc.) and my present Canon does very well.

A lady at one of the camera shops agreed that the 70-300mm Sigma had received a poor comment. My comment is that this lens is not sharp and clear and sometimes loses colors in distant shots. I can't believe it is JUST my poor handling, but I suppose it is possible! Also, I need to take some courses when my life allows the time, etc.

I know the Grand Prix coming up will need a good long lens and tripod!

Thank you again, Bob -

Ellie Kaul

To love this comment, log in above
January 11, 2006

Of course, bear in mind that there is always compromise - at 400MM the slowest shutter speed you will want to use is 1/500th second, if you want to freeze motion. I know the Stabilizer will reduce blur induced by YOU moving the camera (even your pulse can cause the camera to move a touch) but it does nothing about the subject's movement. This is why the folks that go intot he swamps to take bird shots use the enormous cannons - 400 or 500 f4 or bigger (and expensiver!).

You may want to at least consider a monopod if you feel a tripod is too cumbersome, too.

And never think in terms of "this old age" - heck, the more you do stuff the younger you'll stay. At least that's my theory....

To love this comment, log in above
January 11, 2006

After perusing all the copies I printed of the various available 400mm lens online, I have chosen the Sigma 80-400 lens. That is only if the AF mount is compatible with my EF Canon. And I am not at all certain I know what this means! :-)

I plan to order it tomorrow. Thanks for your encouraging remarks.

Ellie

To love this comment, log in above
January 11, 2006

http://www.popphoto.com/article.php?section_id=2&article_id=275

To love this comment, log in above
January 11, 2006