Telephoto lens

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

   Hi All,
Some may have seen me ask about this already but I'm looking for a new lens (thought I best start a new thread for a change rather han hijacking another). 
I have an EF-S 60mm macro which is fab when I can get close-up. I also have an EF-S 18-55mm which came with the camera and is OK sometimes but I haven't really found much use for it with taking piccies of herps.
What I am missing is a lens for when I can't get close-up and also specifically for action such as adder combat.
I'm having a look at what is available and came across this one - EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM
clicky
Anyone got one of these and does it fit the description of what I need? Any other lenses people can suggest? I can budget a little over the price of the lens above if I'm just short of something much better. 
Ta

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic
administrator Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Admin Group Joined: 01 Jan 2007 Status: Offline Points: 10	Post Options Post Reply Quote administrator Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Topic: Telephoto lens Posted: 09 Apr 2007 at 8:44am
	Hi All, Some may have seen me ask about this already but I'm looking for a new lens (thought I best start a new thread for a change rather han hijacking another). I have an EF-S 60mm macro which is fab when I can get close-up. I also have an EF-S 18-55mm which came with the camera and is OK sometimes but I haven't really found much use for it with taking piccies of herps. What I am missing is a lens for when I can't get close-up and also specifically for action such as adder combat. I'm having a look at what is available and came across this one - EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM clicky Anyone got one of these and does it fit the description of what I need? Any other lenses people can suggest? I can budget a little over the price of the lens above if I'm just short of something much better. Ta

Davew Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Senior Member Joined: 12 Jan 2004 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 105	Post Options Post Reply Quote Davew Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 09 Apr 2007 at 11:39am
	Hi - I'm a Canon guy and I've tried quite a few lenses and do always find primes to be much better quality. Trouble is there's quite a size difference between say a baby Common Lizard and a large Grass Snake so finding the right prime may be a problem. I'm currently using a 150mm macro (Sigma) which is great for what I need it for (snakes are generally slightly more distant for me as I have no sites with tins and it's perfect for close Lizards and other wildlife such as Butterflies, Dragonflies etc) but if you're tin lifting and come accross a large Snake you may need to back off which isn't practical. As a suggestion look at the Canon macro 100 or 105mm can't remember which.

Peter Vaughan Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Senior Member Joined: 21 Mar 2005 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 172	Post Options Post Reply Quote Peter Vaughan Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 09 Apr 2007 at 11:56am
	I've recently switched from a Minolta compact camera (Dimage Z5) to a Nikon D80 fitted with a 105mm Sigma Macro. One thing I've noticed is that I need a fast shutter speed to get an unblurred shot - I used to get away with 1/60s with the Minolta but seem to need to be at least four times faster - i.e. to have bright sunshine and/or a low f number to get a decent shot of a reptile at 1.5 to 2m away. I suppose its the simple rule that the bigger the magnification the more hand shake is magnified too - especially if the object of interest doesn't fill the shot and needs to be blown-up, e.g. when I'm trying to photograph the scale pattern on an Adder's head from a distance.
	Peter Vaughan

Davew Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Senior Member Joined: 12 Jan 2004 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 105	Post Options Post Reply Quote Davew Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 09 Apr 2007 at 12:05pm
	A useful rule of thumb is ensure the shutter speed is minimum twice the focal length to mostly rule out any blurring. If you're on aperture priority which seems to be the norm for wildlife you'll have to change the f stop. I generally use f6 ish which isn't always enough to ensure evythings in focus but any more takes the shutter speed right down. I use a monopod too which also helps.

Deano Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Senior Member Joined: 23 Aug 2005 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 133	Post Options Post Reply Quote Deano Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 09 Apr 2007 at 12:19pm
	Can I suggest the 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM. I am sure this will cost more than your original idea, but you would have a really super lens that although being light in weight isn't a lightweight performer plus it has an image stabiliser - very useful for hand held shots. http://photo.net/equipment/canon/70-300do/ Don't forget if your lens doesn't focus close enough you can always add a 12mm or 25mm extension tube. I have found that using Canon tubes with Canon lenses allows the autofocus to work as original. Others will no doubt claim to have used unbranded tubes with off brand lenses - and if it works for them, fine. How do you feel about second hand kit? I can ask around at the next LVNP meeting (19 April) and see if anyone has something like the 55-200 for sale.
	Deano Better to be lucky than good looking.

administrator Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Admin Group Joined: 01 Jan 2007 Status: Offline Points: 10	Post Options Post Reply Quote administrator Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 09 Apr 2007 at 4:26pm
	Ta for the link Deano, very helpful to see some results of the lens. I think I'll have to go new and lose it on the expense account to be honest Deano, but thanks for the offer. Thanks to all for the help, I see why people end up with a bag full of lenses looks like I would not go far wrong with adding a prime of 105mm macro to the bag as well from what you guys are saying? Then I would have a fairly all round collection of lenses.

DrDom Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Member Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 14	Post Options Post Reply Quote DrDom Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 11 Apr 2007 at 11:04am
	Good to meet you at Lightwater. Can I make a few more suggestions? Unfortunately they're all more expensive. Canon make some excellent lenses but don't have a good reputation for their budget zooms. The EF 55-200mm @ �125 is unlikely to be great. It all depends what image quality you're after and how much you're prepared to spend... The EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM @ �340 has had some quite good reviews but only focusses to 1.5m. You won't go wrong with a Tamron Macro (90 or 180), Sigma macro (105, 150 or 180) or Canon 100m macro. Alternatively you could consider the following: Sigma 50-150mm APO F2.8 EX DC close focus 1m �460 (reduced size sensor only) 770g Canon 70-200 L USM F4 close focus 1.2m �445 EF70-200mm L IS USM F4.0 close focus 1.2m �665 Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX DG Macro �675 All the prices are guides from a good online retailer and include VAT. You could consider buying secondhand from a dealer which will bet you a warranty and an invoice - I'm not sure you can claim back VAT though!
	Dominic Tantram - Guildford Surrey Amphibian & Reptile Group (SARG)