Help in selected 300mm lens for my XTi

[BagOfWalnuts]

I'd be using it mostly for photographing nature, so I've got a couple options here for a 300mm lens for my XTi. If it matters I'm usually shooting off a tripod, though if I'm in a brambly thicket or something I'll be shooting from hand.

Option 1: 75-300mm f4-5.6 USM 234.99

Option 2: EF 300mm f/4L IS USM 1399.00

I'd MUCH prefer the straight 300mm lens, I have a 55-250 now and 95% of the time I'm zoomed all the way in, so with the 75-300 almost all of that range is useless to me. Plus the more expensive of the duo is just a nicer all around lens. My issue is that I don't want to spend 1400 bucks on this....are there lenses from other manufacturers that would work with my camera that offer something in the 300mm F4 range, with or without the IS for less money? I honestly have no idea where to look, since I usually just get lenses from Canon.

Thanks, I appreciate any help I get

 

[Stan]

For 75-300 is a crap lens; even for $250. Look for a used 300mm; such as here for $1k --> http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1093673&highlight=300mm

 

[NutBucket]

Yeah, was gonna say I've had the 75-300 since the late 90s (hasn't really changed) and was never terribly impressed. It was a gift though so I really can't complain too much.

 

[Gooberlx2]

My Dad ended up getting this (Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 SP Di VC USD) for his 60D and used it in Alaska. I was very impressed with the IQ, and stunned at how well the IS worked when I had a chance to try it out.

 

[twistedlogic]

My Dad ended up getting this (Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 SP Di VC USD)

+1 for the 70-300 Tamron, I've read they are great optics.

There is a Sigma 300mm F4 Macro for much cheaper and a Canon 300 F4 non-IS, but I'm sure both lenses would need to be bought used.

 

[BagOfWalnuts]

My Dad ended up getting this (Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 SP Di VC USD) for his 60D and used it in Alaska. I was very impressed with the IQ, and stunned at how well the IS worked when I had a chance to try it out.

This may be a noob question, but what does the Di stand for?

 

[BagOfWalnuts]

Also, why is the sigma 300mm F4 macro so much cheaper?

 

[Gooberlx2]

This may be a noob question, but what does the Di stand for?

Had to look it up. According to this it has to do with optimizing the lens for dSLRs.

 

[foghorn67]

I would get a used 300L f4. They are plentiful, both in IS and non-IS form.

 

[corkyg]

According to Tamron, DI stands for "Digitally Integrated."

The lens I use for field work because of its small size is the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM. I have used this lens since 2006. Back then it was about $950. I use it with a circular polarizer, and the good news is, only 58mm.

Canon's DO stands for Difractive Optics, their name for a Fresnel lens. It did the job well, especially when I was in the Amazon region. Small size and light weight with a EOS 5D worked well.

But, the Tamron DI is a better buy these days.

 

[timswim78]

OP, you may want to consider the Canon 70-300mm. It falls in the middle of your price range and has IS and very nice optics.

 

[BagOfWalnuts]

OP, you may want to consider the Canon 70-300mm. It falls in the middle of your price range and has IS and very nice optics.

I had heard the 70-300 was mediocre; comparatively at least.

 

[iGas]

Sigma 100-300mm f4 EX IF HSM APO

Sigma 100-300mm f/4 EX DG IF HSM APO Fast Aperture Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras by Sigma -- $599.00

 

[RobDickinson]

If you shoot at 300 99% of the time buy a used 300/4 prime.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

Might want to look at a 70-200mm and get the 1.4x teleconverter. You end up with a 280mm on the long end. If you start with an f/2.8 70-200, you get f/4; a 70-200 f/4, you get f/5.6. You can get a used Sigma 70-200/2.8 for $600 or so, and a teleconverter for $200-$300.

 

[foghorn67]

Might want to look at a 70-200mm and get the 1.4x teleconverter. You end up with a 280mm on the long end. If you start with an f/2.8 70-200, you get f/4; a 70-200 f/4, you get f/5.6. You can get a used Sigma 70-200/2.8 for $600 or so, and a teleconverter for $200-$300.

I never had a Sigma 70-200 2.8 in any version that reacted to well to teleconverters. As always, YMMV.

 

[arrfep]

I would highly recommend the Sigma 100-300 f4. I bought a used copy last summer from Adorama for like $700, in mint condition. It was very sharp, even wide open, focused very fast, and wasn't terribly bulky. It might feel a bit unbalanced on a Rebel body, but then probably any 300mm lens will. If you're not dead set on having IS, you can't touch the quality of this lens for the price.

 

[iGas]

According to PhotoZone the Sigma 100-300mm f/4 IQ match the Canon 300mm f/4 L at center and slightly below at corner sharpness at 300mm.

Sigma 100-300mm f/4 EX DG IF: Post your favorites taken with this lens. -- Pentax Forums

.
.
.

 

[yhelothar]

Awesome sharpness. But as mentioned in the forum, and judging from the pics, it suffers from poor color rendering due to not as good coatings on the sigma lens. I had a 28-70 F/2.8 Sigma EX lens that suffered from this too. Great sharpness, but just dull on the colors.

 

[arrfep]

Awesome sharpness. But as mentioned in the forum, and judging from the pics, it suffers from poor color rendering due to not as good coatings on the sigma lens. I had a 28-70 F/2.8 Sigma EX lens that suffered from this too. Great sharpness, but just dull on the colors.

For a $700 savings, OP can buy a new computer and LR3 to make the color pop.

 

[angry hampster]

For a $700 savings, OP can buy a new computer and LR3 to make the color pop.

Looks to be about a $200 difference on the used market. 100-300 goes for about $650 and the 300 f/4L goes for $850.

 

[iGas]

Sigma 100-300mm f/4
$599~780 used
$1,069~1379 new

Canon 300mm f/4 IS
$1,075~1269 used
$1,360~1449 new

$295~670 used different
-$19~380 new different

IMHO, the Sigma is the better deal, and Darktable Photo Workflow (Linux/free) is an alternative to Lightroom.