Dropped my longest lens...time for a one...what to buy?

[The Duke]

Hi All -

In the Ice last week, I fell and wrecked my Canon 55-250 f4/5.6 lens. I was planning on upgrading, but just not so soon.

So, here is the question.

I am a relatively new photographer. Not great at it, but I love the hobby / art. I doubt I will ever go professional. So...like most Canon shooters, I drool over the 70-200 lens. Is that foolish to even consider. I enjoy shooting out doors, and I have some little ones that will likely get into sports or some indoor event in a few years.

Would anyone recommend a Tamron 70-300 IS USM F4/5.6 with Image Stabilization and the Ultra Sonic motor?

This might be a question that only a newbie would ask, but outside of the Obvious differences or options of Motor, Image Stabilization and the minimum F/stop (and perhaps the canon brand) - would a amateur really notice that much of a difference with the canon lens? Can some of the more technical members assist?

Thanks in advance.

[Tom]

I would do everything I could to get a 70-200 2.8. If it stretches your budget too much, get the 70-200 4, which is a very sharp lens. If you get it used, it will hold its value or even appreciate, then upgrade to the 2.8 when you can afford it.

I would not consider anything like the Tamron 70-300.

Buy once, cry once.

You will definitely notice the difference in a Canon 70-200 and a Tamron 70-300. The IQ [image quality] will be no where near the same ball park.

An F/4 or F/5.6 maximum aperture lens won't cut it indoors. For gym stuff, a great cheap [relatively] lens is the 85mm 1.8 - should be around 400 new, often 325 used. Fantastic lens, focuses quickly and very sharp.

Hope that helps.

[cfortner]

I'd consider the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8.

[The Duke]

Thanks Thomas. For Christmas I received a Canon Nifty Fifty F2.8, and then I was able to purchase a Sigma f2.8 for $100, so I think I am covered on the wider angle low light..atleast for a while.

The Sigma seems pretty good, but I had heard mixed comments on Tamron. Would you consider the 75-300?

The budget is not really the hurdle, but more of a value focus with trying to spend what I need.

[Tom]

Would you consider the 75-300?

Nothing at all in that range unless you want to spring for a Canon L version. Even then, I am not wild about any lens that is an F/5.6.

What Sigma lens are you referring to? F/2.8 is just the aperture.

[The Duke]

Well, that would be helpful if I including all of that information, huh? The Sigma that I have is a 17-50

[sdenman]

Gregg I am not real technical however I will give you my two cents worth. If you are just getting started and you do not plan on becoming a professional I would still buy as much lens as I could afford. The reason being they are going to last forever and as you get more into photography you are going to come to want the best. Tamron makes some good lens but where you are going to see a big difference is on focusing speed. I would look at a used 70 - 200 f4. Please remember that is my 2 cents worth and it what you paid for it. Good Luck

[Canon Man]

Originally Posted by Thomas Campbell

I would do everything I could to get a 70-200 2.8. If it stretches your budget too much, get the 70-200 4, which is a very sharp lens. If you get it used, it will hold its value or even appreciate, then upgrade to the 2.8 when you can afford it.

I would not consider anything like the Tamron 70-300.

Buy once, cry once.

You will definitely notice the difference in a Canon 70-200 and a Tamron 70-300. The IQ [image quality] will be no where near the same ball park.

ditto

[lhdvies]

Originally Posted by Thomas Campbell

I would do everything I could to get a 70-200 2.8. If it stretches your budget too much, get the 70-200 4, which is a very sharp lens. If you get it used, it will hold its value or even appreciate, then upgrade to the 2.8 when you can afford it.

I would not consider anything like the Tamron 70-300.

Buy once, cry once.

You will definitely notice the difference in a Canon 70-200 and a Tamron 70-300. The IQ [image quality] will be no where near the same ball park.

An F/4 or F/5.6 maximum aperture lens won't cut it indoors. For gym stuff, a great cheap [relatively] lens is the 85mm 1.8 - should be around 400 new, often 325 used. Fantastic lens, focuses quickly and very sharp.

Hope that helps.

Ditto here also-especially the "buy once cry once" part. I'm fortunate to have both the 2.8 & 4 and the 4 is ultra sharp. I find no reason to carry the extra weight of the 2.8 unless I actually need the 2.8 because of shooting conditions. For value, it will be hard to find a better value than Canon's 85/1.8. Good luck & good shooting!

[rfortson]

Tamron's new 70-300 is part of their "SP" line which is reserved for their higher grade lenses. I don't have experience with it, but it is supposed to be much better than their older 70-300 lenses. Might be worth a second look.

[Phisch]

Maybe consider buying used? Or even taking a look at them. If anything the little difference between selling and used prices will tell you the nicer lenses are worth it :)

Thomas, I've heard the value holds but not appreciates. That's a nice bit of news :)

[Richard DeYoung]

I have used a 70-200-4 for 3 years and it is a good lens. Very sharp and quite in expensive considering everything. No image stablization and really did not miss it. Currently have a 100-400 with IS and don't use the IS. Have a tripod or monopod
handy and you wil enjoy very sharp photos.

[Tom]

Thomas, I've heard the value holds but not appreciates. That's a nice bit of news :)

It depends.

Lenses have definitely gone up on cost. I bought a used 300mm 2.8L IS for 2800 (new was 4300) in August. Then Canon released a Mark II version. The prices were released for the Mark II version were released this week $6600. A used version of the 300mm 2.8L IS will probably be selling much higher than what I bought it for, with the new ones at $6600.

There have been a number of lenses that I have bought and held, then been able to sell for more than I had bought them for. Not really making money, but it is nice to hold it through a couple price increases and be able to sell it for more than you paid.

[crazeazn]

canon 70-200 f/4

or

canon 70-300

that should be your options

[rhoffart]

70-200 2.8 ... don't even think about it, just do it. You'll love it more then the body.