300 /500 Combination
Author
Discussion

seandudding

Original Poster:

495 posts

280 months

Monday 3rd March 2008
quotequote all
I posted tis on POTN but thought I would post here also:

I will soon be moving to Australia and will be taking shots of surfing, wildlife, birds and other sports. I am trying to decide what combo of lenses to buy:-

1) The most expensive would be to buy the 300 F2.8 and 500 F4 from Canon
2) Or buy the Canon 300 and the Sigma 500
3) Or the Canon 300 and just use the TC's I already have
4) Or just buy the lens in the middle the 400 F2.8


I currently have :-

Canon 40D | 70 - 200 F2.8L IS | 300 F4L IS | 24 - 105 F4L IS | 50 F1.4 | 100 F2.8| 135 F2.8 SF | 1.4 & 2.0 TC
Sigma 10 - 22 | EF 500 Super | EM140 DG

What do do you think is the best option. Photoraphy is only a hobby, but I do like my shots to be very good, and live in Oz should give me more use fo them. Also does anyone know of a stire where I am likely to be able to see a 300 and a 500 so I can feel he weight and see the size. I know about the 400 and I hired one once, and to be fair it is very heavy.

Cheers Sean

RobDickinson

31,343 posts

284 months

Monday 3rd March 2008
quotequote all
I'm see how your current setup works.

But IMO for surfing (and birds) you'll need 400-500mm. 400f5.6L seems to be a good birding lens.

I've shot surfing with a 70-200f4 and a 75-300 POS, 200 even for a close break unless its a point you can get right on is too short. IMO a 500 or 600 prime is ideal but heavy and expensive.

I'm thinking of a sigma 120-300f2.8 and a TC as an allrounder.

seandudding

Original Poster:

495 posts

280 months

Monday 3rd March 2008
quotequote all
Rob Thanks

I ese to own the sigma, and didn;t really rate it, maybe I had a bad copy. I also would like IS. If sigma released the lense with IS I would give it another go.

Cheers Sean

RobDickinson

31,343 posts

284 months

Monday 3rd March 2008
quotequote all
You realy gona handhold 400+ tho?

I'm also considering the 100-400L, not the quickest or the sharpest at the long end but normaly theres enough light for f4/f5.6 for surfing.

seandudding

Original Poster:

495 posts

280 months

Monday 3rd March 2008
quotequote all
Thats a fair point, but you still get some shake on a tripod.

I just like big white lenses I guess.

bramley

1,692 posts

238 months

Tuesday 4th March 2008
quotequote all
Am I right in thinking you're about to spend lots of money on even more kit before you've actually found out if your current kit would do the job? That's quite a collection of lenses you've got - I don't think any of us can really comment on what you 'need'.

If you want to do surfing pics I'd say spend your money on a waterproof housing and get in amongst the action. I've seen some shots taken looking down the tube of a wave with a surfer in it and to me they look far more interesting than anything taken on the shore. Loads of people must stand on the shore and take pics, could be a good opportunity for you to capture something they're not?

seandudding

Original Poster:

495 posts

280 months

Tuesday 4th March 2008
quotequote all
After spending 3 months in Oz taking pics, I know I need more reach, hence my questions. The reach isn't just for the surfing stuff, wildlife especially birds I am lacking a lot.

bramley

1,692 posts

238 months

Wednesday 5th March 2008
quotequote all
Fair enough. You do know you can get help for addictions don't you - not just gambling, alcohol but also the addiction to buying more camera equipment? biggrin just kidding wink

seandudding

Original Poster:

495 posts

280 months

Wednesday 5th March 2008
quotequote all
It's a much cheaper hobby than doing track days in a GT3RS :-)

F308 MAN

1,029 posts

267 months

Wednesday 5th March 2008
quotequote all
seandudding said:
4) Or just buy the lens in the middle the 400 F2.8
truly fantastic lens.
and with a 1.4 tc, you have 570mm(?) at your disposal.

beer d