Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Possible lens upgrade

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Possible lens upgrade

    Hey guys, lately I have been searching for a new lens for my camera. I currently use a Canon Rebel T6 with a 75-300mm lens and a 18-35mm lens. I feel that an upgrade for my lens would increase the quality of my photos by a lot. If anybody has suggestions on what lens I should invest in, please feel free to reply to this thread. I can also post a couple of my photos if anybody would like me to.

  • #2
    Canon 100-400 , without doubt.

    Comment


    • #3
      That entirely depends on your subjects and your most often used focal length.
      My photo editing guide - updated and improved Feb. 2010
      My Nikon D100,D200,D300, D800, D7200 basic spotting settings guide
      ACIG - the best resource for military aviation information

      Comment


      • #4
        It's hard to say as you didn't mention how much you want to spend... Canon 100-400L mkII would be perfect, additionally 24-105L might be nice upgrade as well

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by seahawk View Post
          That entirely depends on your subjects and your most often used focal length.
          That is true... At the beggining I had the Canon 28-135 and the Canon 70-300, and I had to change lens very often depending the situation... so I save money and sold those two lens and I buyed the Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM, and I'm very happy with it, because I it use 95% of the time, so I don't have to change lens and risk to have some dirt coming inside the sensor. For the other 5% I have the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS +1.4 Extender II for longe range photos and the Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 EX DC HSM for cockpit and interior photos.

          So at the end, as TomEPKK and seahawk mention, the budget and the focal length that you normally use, will define which lens will be best for you.

          I hope this help.

          Kind Regards,

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Erenerol View Post
            Canon 100-400 , without doubt.
            Himm. Are u using that lens? ,😄

            Comment


            • #7
              Any thoughts on something like the Sigma 150-600mm for photographers on a budget? Worth it or not?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by jvdl View Post
                Any thoughts on something like the Sigma 150-600mm for photographers on a budget? Worth it or not?
                I can't speak for the 150-600, but I did get the Sigma 100-400 a few weeks ago and used it at the Fargo Airsho. I'd say they're definitely worth a shot if you're on a budget. I got mine for about 700 while the Canon runs almost 2000. One day it'll come to fruition and I'll be able to drop that on the lens!

                Comment


                • #9
                  I'm probably going to save up for the Sigma 100-400mm.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by pilotgolfer View Post
                    I can't speak for the 150-600, but I did get the Sigma 100-400 a few weeks ago and used it at the Fargo Airsho. I'd say they're definitely worth a shot if you're on a budget. I got mine for about 700 while the Canon runs almost 2000. One day it'll come to fruition and I'll be able to drop that on the lens!
                    Yeah, I know the Canon is the gold standard, but its price is a bit steep for me. It's almost 3 times the price of the Sigma, as you've said.

                    I considered the 150-600mm for the little bit of extra range, but I've heard complaints about it being soft at the higher end of the focal range. If the 100-400mm is sharp at all ranges then maybe I should consider that as well.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Hello, you might even think about buying a Canon 100 - 400 from the previous series (i.e. IS I USM), new if you have a chance to find it or used if you trust. To make spotting is very good.
                      Sorry my bad english

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by jvdl View Post
                        I considered the 150-600mm for the little bit of extra range, but I've heard complaints about it being soft at the higher end of the focal range.
                        At 600mm I would be much more concerned about:
                        1. blur due to camera shake (presumably 600mm is for shooting far away subjects)
                        2. AF performance due to the f/6.3 max aperture at those focal lengths. The standard AF points of your typical Canon DSLR are designed to work with f/5.6 or better (high precision point f/2.8 or better). This also goes to some of the non-OEM 100-400s which also top out at f/6.3 at the longer end*

                        * To be clear: I am not suggesting AF won't work - it will, thanks to some tomfoolery courtesy of the lens makers. I am just skeptical of the resulting performance.

                        As for L lenses, I would really recommend anyone considering one to think long and hard about the need for a lens costing thousands of dollars. What kind of corner-of-the-envelope conditions are you planning to be shooting in? Is there a requirement for the lens to be as long lasting and durable as L glass is? Will the lens be used to produce paid work to help cover its costs? What other, less costly, changes to your photography have been attempted? Ideally one would borrow or rent a piece of L glass first to do a real life field comparison to a get a realistic assessment of any potential improvement in photo quality.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X