Any SLR Camera experts out there?

[Mark Blanchard]

I've just bought a Canon 500D and am wondering what sort of zoom lense to get. I want to take photo's of cars on the track.

I've been looking at a Canon 55-250mm lense and also a Sigma 70 - 300mm. Any thoughts?

I've got the standard Canon 18-55 IS and a 50mm IS but they're not going to get me those great track shots.

Any suggestions / tips welcome .

[red vtec]

Mark,

I'll ask my brother for you, he is a pro photographer, and we use canon in our studio, 1D, 5D 350D etc etc

I know he has used sigma in the past for lenses, but the canon lens are so much better in sheer build quality. (I think the sigma fell apart)

I think the one he now uses is : Clicky

I'll see him Tuesday and ask for you.

Chris

Edited August 28, 2010 by red vtec

[DanR]

Not an expert but http://www.dpreview.com/ is a good site for research.

Something to keep in mind is weight. I bought a Nikon D5000 recently that failed within an hour of my first use of it. By the end I was cursing the size and dead weight I had been carrying for the day. Swapped it for an Olympus which has much smaller and lighter lenses. That is something you might want to consider when comparing lenses for yours.

Optically Sigma, Tamron etc can give excellent quality for the money but Canon does have professional standard lenses that should outlast them.

[Jonathan]

I'm no expert, just a man with a camera.

I used to do photography (amongst other things) for evidence in the poo-lice, un be-knowing to my boss I used to help out on some of the photo courses we ran

My main requirement for a lens is a good F number (a fast lens with have a LOW F number meaning it can let more light in which makes i more flexible) - which means you have more balance in the shutter speeds, down side is they are big / expensive but thats wat you bought the camera for non ? Try and steer away from mirror lenses they have good zoome / compact but high F values and only really work on clear bright days.

I use Nikons 18-70 and 70-300 but keep in mind some are film lenses and some are digital lenses and will affect the REAL zoom and field of view (my 300mm is a film lens and is effectivly a 60-280).

50's are nice, I do like my mates 12mm lens as well for stills, esp of cars

Most of my track shots a 300mm will be fine, if you look at this :

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jonhimself/collections/72157600180011308/

Most of these are with a 300mm or close. You can go overboard and wase loads of money - I always say the order of importance is > passion (education), eye, lens, camera.

Most of the track shots I take are about 160/s to get some motion blur / rotation of the wheels - mine are passable I would have said - you'll experience more failure success with trial and error.

My kit really is nothing special, I've seen people with even less ££ on the kit and get fantastic results (way better than mine - hence why I put so much emphasis on eye rather than kit)

IF you're doing stuff like lunar photography (which is my next project) then fair enough - spend a few hundred quid on a nice lens, but for objects 50 meters away, unless you're going to publish them for prize money then a decent mid range lens is all you want.....imo

Remember a better lens / camera does not make you a better photographer.

Edited August 28, 2010 by Jonathan

[Mark Blanchard]

Thanks Chris.

Jon, thanks for the info. I've noticed the F numbers / aperture speed, they seem to really creep up in price for a lower number. Does the Canon 55-250mm use mirror lenses?

I joined www.photography-on-the.net but there seems to be a bewildering amount information on there (I did a search for Lotus Esprit on there and Bib's posts came up!).

Edited August 28, 2010 by Mark Blanchard

[Jonathan]

There is Mark, more info, the more bullshit, the more people can sell things you dont need.

My ex takes some of the best shots I have ever seen with her tiny 'purse' camera and she could school most so called 'profesionals' out there, yet she's never heard of appature and shutter speed.

She does weddings now and people are all over her shots like a tramp on chips so it just goes to show you what can be done.

Being arty doesn't happen naturally with me so I am more of a 'record the moment' photographer - I like silly things and details / paterns so a lot of it is subjective to how you feel about photography and what you want to achieve.

For me, my setup is fine - the D70s I have is a bit long in the tooth now and the lenses need a service (more like replace by the time I send them to Nikon, I'll likely modify the lenses myself).

My shots are ok, some are good some are not but thats more down to me and my point and shoot attitude - remember a good photographer never sees the event - I like using Mk1 eyeball more often now at events.

This is a mirror lens:

You can tell :

1) Becuase they are physically shorter than their focal length (500mm should be about 500mm long LOL)

2) They have that horrible mirror in the middle.

I hate them personally - becuase they do not accuratly capture the light becuase that great big splodge in the middle blocks most of it - the image si not the same as a normal refraction lens.

Their advantages are compact size and weight, manouverability and low relative cost.

Telescopes use them a lot for obvious size reasons, so sometimes they are useful I guess - OK for BIG ranges but not a replacement for sub 500mm.....imo.

I would start off with the basics and work up, as I say a £3 grand lens does not make you a better photographer any day of the week. You dont need rubish like image stabalisers and so on, I'd MUCH rather have a nice set of filters (you wanna try and grab a polorising filter for cars, stops the reflection, makes winscreens look ace) perhaps a nice graduated and vignette filter (see top gear camera man) - a decent tripod / monopod and a bag.

[nigeninja]

Ive had my Canon EOS 550D for a couple of months now and took it to the Lotus meet at snetterton and got some real good pics with my canon 18-135 lens,but i have to say I was close to the track but 135 was plenty.

[Sparky]

Hi Mark. For me (although I'm a Nikon man) It'd be the Canon. Much better optics through the range. You will pay a lot more for the wider aperture, and for some that's important - if you're taking action shots it can make a lot of difference. Also 250 maps to around 370 due to the multiplier. I run a sweet 70-300 VR Nikkor and it's excellent for sports shots.

[Bibs]

http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk

^ Saves you fortunes

[MPx]

A poor amateur....for track action I use a Canon 400d with a Canon 75-300IS 4-5.6 which was from my old EOS5 35mm camera. That aparantly gives a format multiplier of something like 1.6 on digital so at full stretch the thing is almost a 500. In use its fine when you can get up to the fence but its not really any good from a grandstand or F1 corner when they keep you miles away. As mentioned above the other problem is that F4 5.6 is a bit naff unless you're operating in bright daylight. I had real problems at Wiscombe Park last time out cos there wasn't enough light in the woods to have a fast enough shutter speed to get a sharp picture. Then again it was only a £500 lens (and an old one at that) - if you want F2 it will be 5 figures !

[rogerch]

I used to have a something to 275 for motor racing, today you can't get as close to the track, (run off areas) so I would look at 300.

But also take into account the bigger the lens the heavier the lens, which makes panning high speed shots even more difficult, so maybe a compromise.

[Mark Blanchard]

Thanks for the comments and advice. I think I'm going to go for the Canon 55-250mm as the reviews seem to be good.

[Mark Blanchard]

Hi All,

An old thread I know but I've still been looking for a good lense for my camera. It's been a long search and have finally just bought this today: Clicky I got it quite a lot cheaper than that. It's not a superzoom but is supposed to be a good walk around lens. So Hopefully will be good for next year at Castle Combe and Donington. Who would have thought a lens would be more expensive than a camera body.

[comem47]

wow, that's way out of my league!!!

[rogerch]

If clothes maketh the man, then the lens maketh the camera (or so I'm told)

[Bibs]

Nice glass Mark, lovely bit of kit

I've a 28-135 Canon IS USM lens, although not an 'L'. I trust you shopped around and didn't pay the Canon recommended price

[Mark Blanchard]

That 's a good walk around lense you have. I looked here for my choice: Clicky

Got it a bit cheaper than book price. I need to learn how to use it now. I think they call it all the gear and no idea.

Edited December 14, 2010 by Mark B