Lens Help!

Discussion in 'The Fire Hydrant' started by Oko, Jul 13, 2013.

  1. Oko

    Oko Silence, peasants.

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Messages:
    2,138
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Guinea pigs, rabbits, rats, cats, dogs, oh my!
    Location:
    MA, USA
    Okay, so the good news in all this puppy mishap is that I'll have more time to save money, which means I can spring for another lens. I really want a long lens of some sort (not decided on fixed or zoom), I'm looking for something that lends to taking nice close-up shots at sheepdog trials! I'm probably going to try and rent one next month when I go, but I'd like to purchase one by the october finals. I am willing to purchase something pretty pricey (especially if I can find it used), but not crazy / I won't need great low light performance. I have a canon camera.

    Suggestions?

    Thanks :)
     
  2. Lizmo

    Lizmo Water Junkie

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2006
    Messages:
    17,300
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    2
    Location:
    AL
    No idea, but I'd suggest something with a low f/stop.

    However, are you going to the USBCHA Sheepdog Finals?
     
  3. Oko

    Oko Silence, peasants.

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Messages:
    2,138
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Guinea pigs, rabbits, rats, cats, dogs, oh my!
    Location:
    MA, USA
    Yes, that is the plan. :)
     
  4. Equinox

    Equinox Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,046
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Oregon
    I know kady05 on this forum uses Canon and has a 70-200mm f/4. Love her photos! I also think that Canon makes a 70-200mm f/2.8 (I know Nikon does) if you want to spend over $2k :p
     
  5. Oko

    Oko Silence, peasants.

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Messages:
    2,138
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Guinea pigs, rabbits, rats, cats, dogs, oh my!
    Location:
    MA, USA
    I think my Mum would disown me if I told her I planned to buy a lens for 2k, ahahaha. Will look into if 200mm would be far enough. Thanks!
     
  6. Lizmo

    Lizmo Water Junkie

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2006
    Messages:
    17,300
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    2
    Location:
    AL
    Ahh, major jealous!! :D :p
     
  7. AgilityPup

    AgilityPup Agility freak!

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2006
    Messages:
    5,242
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Dogs;3, Cats;1, Horses; 2
    Location:
    New Brunswick, Canada
    70-200 is awesome. Love that lens. f/4 is fine if you're doing mostly outdoors. f/2.8 would be awesome. It's my dream lens.

    That said, if you wanna stay out of the almost $1000 range, the 55-250mm is a pretty decent lens, too. I take outdoor agility shots with it that I like pretty well.

    [​IMG]
    Taken off Facebook.
     
  8. kady05

    kady05 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,285
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    5
    Location:
    Chesapeake, Virginia
    Home Page:
    Aw thank you!

    Yes I have the 70-200mm f/4 lens, so not the f/2.8, but if you *don't* need low light performance, then the f/4 should be just fine. I have been majorly slacking in the action shot department lately, but it's a great lens for them. I use it for portrait stuff as well.

    [​IMG]

    Here's a newer portrait shot of a client dog I took with it:

    [​IMG]

    FWIW, I was standing across from her, probably about.. 15' away (maybe more, I'm bad at judging distances) for this shot.

    You can go to my website and/or FB page for more examples.. I'd say about 85% of my shots have been taken with the 70-200.

    I think it should be plenty reach for what you want to do. Plus, if you feel like you need more you can always get an extender. Sure you can get one with more reach, but do you want to be lugging a heavy lens around all day? The f/4 version of the 70-200 is pretty lightweight, that was one reason why I picked it over the 2.8. Though of course now I want the 2.8, but the f/4 has served me well, I have zero complaints. It sells for around $550 used, you really can't beat the quality for that price, IMO.
     
  9. yv0nne

    yv0nne Vizsla mom

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2013
    Messages:
    1,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    1
    Location:
    Cape Breton
    Home Page:
    I just recently got rid of my 70- 200mm ..I didn't need the zoom. I will say it's a great lens though :)
     
  10. Oko

    Oko Silence, peasants.

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Messages:
    2,138
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Guinea pigs, rabbits, rats, cats, dogs, oh my!
    Location:
    MA, USA
    Thanks for the replies, everyone, lots of good thoughts.
    I realized I actually had a (albeit cheap and poorly cared for) zoom lens that went to 200mm, so took that out today in the yard. I think I'm definitely going to need at least 300mm for what I want. Could buy an extender, but 2x is pricey, and in that case I think I'd rather go with a lens that's longer.

    Anybody have experience with the 70-300mm (non-L)?
    I've read that much like the 50mm 1.8 it feels like junk, but it's actually pretty decent?
     
  11. kady05

    kady05 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,285
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    5
    Location:
    Chesapeake, Virginia
    Home Page:
    70-300 I wouldn't recommend, I've known a few people that had it and weren't impressed at all.
     
  12. AgilityPup

    AgilityPup Agility freak!

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2006
    Messages:
    5,242
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Dogs;3, Cats;1, Horses; 2
    Location:
    New Brunswick, Canada
    I had a 70-300 and I sold it and bought my 55-250. It was garbage.
     

Share This Page