MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
So a friend is looking for something that has a decent zoom length, up to 300 ideally possibly more, f2.8 ideally and less than £1k. I get that this is a tall order, Sigma lenses are an option and the 2.8 70-200 is a favourite although it's short. So am I missing something is there a converter that could be used to add range and not drop the f stops by much?
Or is this indeed a moon on a stick request and she'll just have to front up and form out for something decent?
For pictures of F1 and horse racing by the way, hence the need for long and fast.
Cheers
What sized sensor? If it's not full frame you'll get 1.6x conversion factor anyway.
Faster than f2.8 for less than £1k, even second hand, is definitely wishful thinking I'm afraid.
Fast long zooms are horribly expensive. You can of course get teleconverters, but they reduce the available light a lot.
I have a canon fit Sigma 70 - 200 f2.8 that I could sell for £360 and a Sigma 1.4x convertor for £80. On full frame this would give 100- 280 f4
or on a 1.6 crop sensor an effective of 110-320 f2.8 or with convertor 150-450 f4. can do some photos after the weekend if interested.
You can get adaptors (i'd try for a second hand one) that increase the focal length, but these take additional time to fit and remove.
Is she shooting full frame? Assuming so, then the only real option is the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM, with a second hand extension tube. The lens can be had within the uk for under 1K. That said, if she pops down to a pro retailer and tries out the costly IS version, she won't want anything else, that thing is pin sharp.
Stick with canon glass btw, full on focus compatibility, weather sealing etc.. is worth it. IS is great for hand held, no tripod needed.
Beyond that, look at a better body, with cleaner, higher iso and try the F4 IS at far less cost.
If she's shooting cropped, then A, she'll end up full (nr full) frame in the future if she sticks with it and B, she'll have the extra magnification via the crop factor, so this model is still a good choice.
End of the day, don't skimp on the glass, there's a reason why it's so expensive.
100-400L? not f2.8 but knock the ISO up a stop and get a copy of noise ninja or similar
Sigma 120-300 F2.8. Secondhand. Will even have change out of £1k to buy a Sigma 1.4 tele converter.
She best get off down the gym first though.
Cheers for the replies all, I thought it was unlikely to be easy, some decent suggestions though. And thanks for the offer dropoff, but no need to go take sample pics, I'll not be crossing paths with her again before October and I think she will likely buy new.
Should have said, yes it is a crop sensor too.
I've just picked up a Sigma 120-300 f2.8 as above for less than that, but I did buy mine on a forum not from a dealer. It's beautiful. Might have to sell it when i get back from Scotland as I'm not sure I can justify tying up so much money, but I wanted it for the wildlife watching trips we're hoping to do
[url= http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7138/7616459022_b601be044f.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/n_b_t/7616459022/ ]Young Great Tit[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/n_b_t/ ]Notoriously Bad Typist[/url], on Flickr
BigSteveSigma 120-300 F2.8. Secondhand. Will even have change out of £1k to buy a Sigma 1.4 tele converter.
Lots of lens for not a lot of pennies.
I've had some good results with a friends when shooting static / slow moving subjects but the servo AF sucked big time for sports stuff.
Dunno if the OS version is better but then that's more expensive.
I went through three Sigma 70-200 f2.8's before biting the bullet and getting the Canon version. IQ was all over the place with the Sigmas, which isn't exactly unusual.