PDA

View Full Version : Good 100-400mm lens



cheese
04-21-2005, 12:11 PM
I was wondering what a good lens that would be around 100-400mm would cost. I've seen that Nikon offers a 80-400 and canon offers a 100-400, but both are over 1k. Could you get anything decent for around 500 or am I going to need to start saving up?

D70FAN
04-21-2005, 04:01 PM
I was wondering what a good lens that would be around 100-400mm would cost. I've seen that Nikon offers a 80-400 and canon offers a 100-400, but both are over 1k. Could you get anything decent for around 500 or am I going to need to start saving up?

Well... Thinking outside of the box a little...

Sigma 80-400mm F4-5.6EX OS (image stabilized lens) is just under $1K. ;)

as is the Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 EX APO RF HSM (but no image stabilizer).

The Tamron SP AF 200-500mm F5-6.3 Di LD (IF) is in at about $870.

Unfortunately $500 will only get you to 300mm, so save up your money.

cheese
04-21-2005, 04:18 PM
but what about that 1000mm lens for 100 bucks on ebay? ;)

D70FAN
04-21-2005, 04:23 PM
but what about that 1000mm lens for 100 bucks on ebay? ;)

If you read the fine print "glass is extra". :eek:

Rex914
04-21-2005, 04:58 PM
Uh, how does that work? :confused:

cheese
04-22-2005, 05:05 PM
How is the sigma 135-400mm lens? That seemed to be around 400 dollars. Would it be any good?

D70FAN
04-22-2005, 06:17 PM
How is the sigma 135-400mm lens? That seemed to be around 400 dollars. Would it be any good?

It rates an "average" on the photozone list.

Ratings are:

excellent, very good, good, average, sub average, poor

So for $400 it may be worth a try considering that the next step is the Sigma 50-500 at $989.

cheese
04-23-2005, 07:23 AM
Could you compare the sigma 50-500mm, the canon 100-400mm, the sigma 135-400mm, and the sigma 80-400mm?

D70FAN
04-23-2005, 07:50 AM
Could you compare the sigma 50-500mm, the canon 100-400mm, the sigma 135-400mm, and the sigma 80-400mm?

Scores are out of a possible 5.00. Rference prices from Norman Camera.


50-500 EX RF - Score = 3.20 - Average - Price = $989
100-400USM L IS - Score = 3.94 - Very Good - Price = $1409
135-400 APO Asph. RF - Score = 2.86 - Average - Price = $539
80-400 EX OS - Score = 3.32 - Good - Price = $997

The Canon L IS and the Sigma EX OS are image stabilized.

The Canon L IS was at the top of the list in this catagory (tele-zooms 400/500mm). Next was the Sigma 300-800 EX for $4999.

Again, if you can find the 135-400 for ~$400, and can return it if you don't like it, then it might be worth a try.

palmbook
04-23-2005, 04:07 PM
Tokina 80-400 is of good quality also, but it has a little CA.

Tamron 200-400 might be considered as well :)

cheese
04-23-2005, 04:14 PM
Tokina 80-400 is of good quality also, but it has a little CA.

Tamron 200-400 might be considered as well :)

What would those lenses be rated at, George?

D70FAN
04-23-2005, 05:32 PM
What would those lenses be rated at, George?

The Tokina 80-400 AT-X is rated at 2.39 which is sub-average.

The Tamron 200-400 s rated at 2.10 which is poor, and coincidentally at the bottom of this catagory.

I'll be glad when Photzone gets the lens site back up in May. Then I can just point people there. ;) Actually I'm happy to fill in until then.

palmbook
04-24-2005, 02:30 PM
The Tokina 80-400 AT-X is rated at 2.39 which is sub-average.

The Tamron 200-400 s rated at 2.10 which is poor, and coincidentally at the bottom of this catagory.

I'll be glad when Photzone gets the lens site back up in May. Then I can just point people there. ;) Actually I'm happy to fill in until then.
Hmmm, i never knew that before :p

Well, I recommend these lenses because they are of somewhat good quality and not-so-high price. Especially, Tokina 80-400 stunned me with the 100%-cropped moon picture. It is so detailed that Nikon 80-400 can't even compete with :)

You can see some reviews here
http://www.photographyreview.com/pscLenses/35mm,Zoom/Tokina/PRD_83631_3128crx.aspx
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/reviews/tokina80400.htm
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=239&sort=1&cat=40

BTW, I have nothing more to say. Good luck with lens buying ;)

Bald Eagle
04-24-2005, 05:54 PM
I too, have looked for better telephoto lenses, for the time being i have settled on a 2x teleconverter. Just a thought. My next step is to look into Digiscoping as a viable alternative.

D70FAN
04-24-2005, 07:06 PM
Hmmm, i never knew that before :p

Well, I recommend these lenses because they are of somewhat good quality and not-so-high price. Especially, Tokina 80-400 stunned me with the 100%-cropped moon picture. It is so detailed that Nikon 80-400 can't even compete with :)

You can see some reviews here
http://www.photographyreview.com/pscLenses/35mm,Zoom/Tokina/PRD_83631_3128crx.aspx
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/reviews/tokina80400.htm
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=239&sort=1&cat=40

BTW, I have nothing more to say. Good luck with lens buying ;)

Hey, I don't know either. Just taking the Photozone ratings verbatim. If nothing else it gives you an idea of ranking.

Except for the lenses I own, I really can't comment on any, but there is no other way to figure out the good from the not so good. I am not recommending any of these lenses, but just reporting for reference...