Lense advice for EOS 350D?

[RossiT]

Hi Guys

Just picked up my first digital SLR a Canon EOS 350D. I only have the standard 18-55mm lense but would like something a little bigger for motorsport and aviation photography. I've seen a few on ebay but not sure how does Sigma and Tamron compare to the Canon?

Also being very new to this, could someone explain what's better and why between 70-300mm & 55-250mm?

Thanks

[SamHH]

It depends which particular Sigma, Tamron and Canon lenses you're talking about, but by and large you get what you pay for: a £500 Sigma lens is going to be better than a £100 Canon one. As for the difference between 55-250mm and 70-300mm, those numbers refer to the focal lengths. A longer focal length gives a narrower angle-of-view. If you want a telephoto lens, then it's probably more useful to have the lens that can zoom to the longest focal length than it is to have one that can go to the shortest focal length.

[RossiT]

Ok thanks very much. So for aviation (inflight) pictures from a distance like an airshow line or standing at the side of the track for motorsport what is the better size?

[58warren]

Don't forget you have to multiply the focal length of the lens by 1.6x as the sensor on the 350d is smaller than a 35mm frame. Thus a 55-250 equates to a conventional 88-400mm lens.

I managed to get the 55-250mm Canon IS lens for £154.00 delivered from Simply Electronics. It's a fine all round lens for motorsport and aviation photography.

[SamHH]

RossiT said:

Ok thanks very much. So for aviation (inflight) pictures from a distance like an airshow line or standing at the side of the track for motorsport what is the better size?

The longer focal length.

[flat-planedCrank]

RossiT said:

Ok thanks very much. So for aviation (inflight) pictures from a distance like an airshow line or standing at the side of the track for motorsport what is the better size?

As has been mentioned, focal length (how much magnification you have) is probably the most important, but for motorsport then focusing speed is also an issue.

For airshows, i'd say 300mm would give you a decent amount of reach (but 400-500 isn't uncommon for the serious air show crowd.)

Took these (the longer shots) with the Canon 70-300mm last year at Leuchars air show - http://www.motionimages.co.uk/gallery/LeucharsAirs...

Those are all taken with a 30D - your 350D will have the same reach.


Cheers.

[RobDickinson]

As above you generaly get qhat you pay for within reason.

You pay more for better image quality, usualy this = sharper at maximum aperture and better flare and contrast etc.

Also more reach , image stabalisation and better focusing motors.

Wouldnt look past the 70-300IS if you can afford it, decent lens and IMO 300 is enough for airshows unless you can buy a 100-400L.

[markmullen]

The 55-250 is a little belter for the money, have a look at the flickr link in my profile, all the Waddington and Goodwood pics were taken with it plus 2/3rds of the Le Mans stuff (the remainder was the 100-400).

[RossiT]

Hi Guys

Thanks for the help, as Warehouse Express is down the road from me I've just been having a look.
Would this be ok to get started with? http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-sigma-70-300mm...

or

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/NEW-Canon-EF-S-55-250mm-f-4-...

Edited by RossiT on Sunday 1st August 23:30

[DevilYellowCV8]

Bought the Canon EF-S 55-250 for my 500d a few months back. Cracking lens for the money. Pretty light lens when mounted on the camera and it has Image Stablisation which can be a blessing if you don't want to be wandering around with a tripod. Produces some nice sharp images but can sometimes be a bit soft at the max focal tele length.

For the money, the Sigma seems a good deal esp for focal length but, you sacrifice the Image Stabilser. If it had IS, I bet it would cost a bit more than the Canon lens.

Try looking through the Flickr user groups for these lenses.

Edited by DevilYellowCV8 on Monday 2nd August 10:14