I started with the 75-300 and it's a reasonable lens to get started with. It's small and light.
Remember to use a beanbag or tripod to get sharp pictures.

I'd also invest in a daylight or UV filter to protect the front element.

Thanks

-- Edited by The Peet family on Wednesday 6th of June 2012 09:07:48 AM

Adam

Let's say you could wait 6 months (I know for a 13 year old that's a long time) ....how much more money would you be able to save or get together if it's possible?

JOHN TYMON wrote:

---

The Peet family wrote:

---

Can you guess how much it would be? Thanks

---

Try asking the owner,I haven't a clue

---

Bearing in mind that was there a year ago, I think it might've been sold?

But both are good, the sigma's a good alternative but that Canon you suggested from Amazon's a better bet IMO! The canon is £1000 new, so I wouldn't hope one second hand to be too much less!

The Peet family wrote:

---

Can you guess how much it would be? Thanks

---

Try asking the owner,I haven't a clue

Can you guess how much it would be? Thanks

The Peet family wrote:

---

There are a couple on Manchester Birding for Sale:


Sigma Lens

Canon Lens

Anyone know if these are about my price and quality
Thanks
Adam

---

yep the Canon is an ideal lens :) probably expensive though

There are a couple on Manchester Birding for Sale:


Sigma Lens

Canon Lens

Anyone know if these are about my price and quality
Thanks
Adam

probably best to bear in mind Adam (aged 13) is talking about spending £120 in order to "get into" photography

if its for birds I would go for the 400 f5.6 prime canon lens,best lens around for the canon,but costs £1000+ problem with sigma lenses are ,you never know if you get a good one or a bad one , I had 2 copies of the stableised 150-500,one wouldnt focus at all and the other was erattic with getting a sharp shot and had to pay to have it calibrated.

If you've got the budget i'd get an Image Stabilised lens, I started on the Tamron 75-300mm which isn't IS and then I got the sigma 120-400mm which is. I've been in exactly the same position 2 years ago, but I think if I started again I wouldn't buy my old 300mm, i'd wait and get an IS lens. The sigma range are expensive but trust me its worth waiting, and i'd look second hand on ebay or just on websites like this one, i'd say its well worth biding your time, not necessarily buying new and looking for bargains! worth bearing in mind that whilst Canon lenses are better quality they're not that much better than sigma!

Good luck, its a bit of a minefield!

Joe

It would be a good start to get used to longer lenses. It's quite light too. I know it may be a bit more expensive but you should also look at the Canon 55-250 4-5.6 IS. This has image stabilisation and has always had very good reviews, it might be 50mm shorter but the image stabilisation will help a lot. I started off with a sigma 70-300 lens which I still have in my collection.

Good luck with your lens shopping

David

I would like to get this lens for my 20D - Canon EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III Lens

It is £119.99 on Amazon and according to the reviews it is a good lens

Would it be a good lens to get?

Thanks,
Adam (aged 13)